Endoscopists systematically undersample patients with long-segment Barrett's esophagus: an analysis of biopsy sampling practices from a quality improvement registry

A Simple, Interpretable Machine Learning Model Based on Clinical Factors Accurately Predicts Incident Dysplasia or Malignancy in Barrett's Esophagus

PURPOSE

Identifying patients likely to develop dysplasia or malignancy is critical for effective surveillance in patients with Barrett's Esophagus (BE). However, current predictive models are limited. We evaluated the performance of machine learning (ML) models in predicting incident dysplasia or malignancy in a cohort of veteran patients with BE.

METHODS

We analyzed data from 598 patients newly diagnosed with non-dysplastic BE (NDBE), BE indefinite for dysplasia (BE-IND), and BE with non-persistent low-grade dysplasia (LGD) at the Michael DeBakey Veterans Affairs Medical Center from November 1990 to January 2019 with follow-up through January 2024. Progressors were patients who developed persistent LGD, HGD, or EAC within 5 years of index endoscopy. Six models were evaluated, encompassing regression and ensemble-based ML methods.

RESULTS

Of 598 qualifying patients, 61 (10.2%) progressed. Longer segments and indefinite/non-persistent LGD pathology were associated with higher risk of progression in unadjusted analyses. BE segment length remained significant on multivariate analysis (OR 1.26; 95% CI 1.17-1.36 per 1 cm increase). A decision tree (DT) model, using only segment length, achieved the highest discrimination (AUROC = 0.79) and excellent sensitivity (93.3%). The DT model also identified segment length thresholds for risk stratification: < 0.95 cm (minimal risk), 0.95-2.44 cm (low), 2.44-9.45 cm (moderate),  > 9.45 cm (high).

CONCLUSIONS

A simple, interpretable DT model with segment length as the sole predictor outperformed regression and complex ML-based models in predicting BE progressors. Findings align with European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) guidelines suggesting tailored surveillance based on segment length and provide actionable thresholds. These results offer a practical ML tool for BE surveillance.

Evaluating the discrepancies between evidence-based and community standard practices in the endoscopic examination of Barrett's esophagus: a nationwide survey in Japan

BACKGROUND

Barrett's esophagus (BE) is a known precursor of esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC). EAC is comparatively rare in Japan compared to Western countries, where BE management guidelines have been well established based on robust evidence. This study evaluated for gaps between evidence-based medicine (EBM) and real-world clinical practice for BE management in Japan and examined endoscopist adherence to Japanese and Western guidelines.

METHODS

A nationwide survey consisting of 19 questions was conducted among Japanese endoscopists to assess their diagnostic and surveillance practices for BE. Descriptive statistics and multivariate logistic regression analysis were employed to interpret key data.

RESULTS

Responses from 804 endoscopists revealed significant differences between Western guidelines and Japanese practices. Local adherence to standardized inspection times was 7.6%, and 30.7% of endoscopists used the Prague classification. Biopsies for BE diagnosis and random biopsies following the Seattle protocol were rarely performed. For long-segment BE, 51.4% of respondents reported using magnifying endoscopy. Regarding ultra-short-segment BE (USSBE), opinions were divided on whether it should be diagnosed as BE and if patients should be informed of its diagnosis. Approximately 40% of respondents advocated annual surveillance for USSBE, with a general tendency to recommend closer follow-up regardless of BE length as compared with Western guidelines.

CONCLUSIONS

This survey highlighted several incongruities between EBM and real-world practices for BE, as well as differences between Western and Japanese approaches. Bridging these gaps will require generating more Japan-specific evidence, refining guidelines, and then promoting their dissemination to harmonize best BE practices with international standards and Japanese clinical settings.

High Rates of Dysplasia in a Population-based Analysis of "Incidental" Barrett's Esophagus

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Current screening and surveillance in Barrett's esophagus (BE) identifies only a minority of esophageal adenocarcinomas. Novel testing modalities may allow broadening of indications for BE screening. Whether such efforts are warranted depends on the characteristics of additional BE cases discovered, and their risk of progression. This study used national benchmarking data to characterize "incidental" BE.

METHODS

Upper endoscopies with BE in GI Quality Improvement Consortium (GIQuIC) Registry from January 2015 to July 2022 were categorized by indication: BE screening, surveillance, or non-BE-related ("incidental"). Demographics, disease-specific characteristics, and dysplasia detection rate (DDR: low and high-grade dysplasia) were compared, as well as adherence to quality indicators.

RESULTS

Of 88,370 cases (67.3% male; 74.0% white) with histologically confirmed intestinal metaplasia, 88.1% were nondysplastic (NDBE). Most cases were performed for BE surveillance (65.0%). Incidental BE (16.4%) occurred almost as frequently as BE found in screening exams (18.6%). The mean BE segment length was longer in incidental BE (2.9 cm) than BE screening (2.6 cm) or surveillance (2.8 cm; P < .001). DDR was actually highest in incidental BE (3.8%), compared with surveillance or screening exams (2.5% and 3.3%; P < .0001). Adherence to appropriate surveillance was similar in incidental and screening (54.5% and 51.9%), with higher adherence in the surveillance group (73.6%; P < .0001).

CONCLUSION

BE is found incidentally at rates approaching those seen in dedicated screening exams. Incidental BE is not only common but has similar or worse high-risk features as BE in traditional screening and surveillance populations, given segment length and dysplasia yield. Refinement of BE screening programs could yield cases of similar risk of progression as traditional programs.

Current status and perspectives of esophageal cancer: a comprehensive review

Esophageal cancer (EC) continues to be a significant global health concern, with two main subtypes: esophageal squamous cell carcinoma and esophageal adenocarcinoma. Prevention and changes in etiology, improvements in early detection, and refinements in the treatment have led to remarkable progress in the outcomes of EC patients in the past two decades. This seminar provides an in-depth analysis of advances in the epidemiology, disease biology, screening, diagnosis, and treatment landscape of esophageal cancer, focusing on the ongoing debate surrounding multimodality therapy. Despite significant advancements, EC remains a deadly disease, underscoring the need for continued research into early detection methods, understanding the molecular mechanisms, and developing effective treatments.

Spatiotemporal Study of a Risk-Stratification Epigenetic-Based Biomarker Assay in Patients With Barrett Esophagus

INTRODUCTION

Barrett esophagus (BE) is the strongest known risk factor for developing esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC), the second-most lethal cancer in the United States. Esopredict is a novel validated methylation-based biomarker assay that provides precise quantification of neoplastic progression risk in BE patients. Inherit challenges, including tissue heterogeneity, sampling error, interobserver variability, and inconsistent adherence to surveillance biopsy guidelines, may affect the predictive value results of Esopredict obtained at different anatomic locations or different sampling time points.

METHODS

To investigate the spatiotemporal performance of Esopredict across multiple spatiotemporal sampling points, we profiled 220 biopsies obtained from 58 BE patients, including 11 patients with overlapping spatial and temporal biopsies. We focused on spatial profiling (i.e., multiple biopsies obtained at several anatomic locations during a single endoscopy) and temporal profiling (i.e., biopsies obtained from multiple endoscopies performed at different time points). Each patient had an initial histologic diagnosis of nondysplastic Barrett esophagus, indefinite for dysplasia, or low-grade dysplasia. Final follow-up (endpoint) biopsies showed either high-grade dysplasia or EAC (progressors), or nondysplastic Barrett esophagus, indefinite for dysplasia, or low-grade dysplasia (nonprogressors). Biopsies were analyzed with Esopredict to compute a progression risk score, which quantified the likelihood of future progression to high-grade dysplasia or EAC within 5 years.

RESULTS

In 52 spatially profiled patients, Esopredict demonstrated a sensitivity of 81% (17/21 progressor patients), based on the highest-scoring biopsy from each patient; sensitivity increased to 100% (12/12) when end point biopsies occurred within 5 years of the index (initial) biopsy. In 28 temporally profiled patients, sensitivity was 100% (8/8 patients), based on the biopsy performed at the time point closest to the end point biopsy.

DISCUSSION

Esopredict showed high predictive performance in multiple spatiotemporal samples in BE patients. These data further support the use of Esopredict as a robust test to distinguish high-risk BE patients, who may benefit from endoscopic eradication therapy or increased surveillance frequency, from low-risk patients, who may be candidates for less frequent surveillance and noninterventional observation.

Adjunctive Use of Wide-Area Transepithelial Sampling-3D in Patients With Symptomatic Gastroesophageal Reflux Increases Detection of Barrett's Esophagus and Dysplasia

INTRODUCTION

Patients with gastroesophageal reflux (GERD) symptoms undergoing screening upper endoscopy for Barrett's esophagus (BE) frequently demonstrate columnar-lined epithelium, with forceps biopsies (FBs) failing to yield intestinal metaplasia (IM). Repeat endoscopy is then often necessary to confirm a BE diagnosis. The aim of this study was to assess the yield of IM leading to a diagnosis of BE by the addition of wide-area transepithelial sampling (WATS-3D) to FB in the screening of patients with GERD.

METHODS

We performed a prospective registry study of patients with GERD undergoing screening upper endoscopy. Patients had both WATS-3D and FB. Patients were classified by their Z line appearance: regular, irregular (<1 cm columnar-lined epithelium), possible short-segment BE (1 to <3 cm), and possible long-segment BE (≥3 cm). Demographics, IM yield, and dysplasia yield were calculated. Adjunctive yield was defined as cases identified by WATS-3D not detected by FB, divided by cases detected by FB. Clinicians were asked if WATS-3D results affected patient management.

RESULTS

Of 23,933 patients, 6,829 (28.5%) met endoscopic criteria for BE. Of these, 2,878 (42.1%) had IM identified by either FB or WATS-3D. Among patients fulfilling endoscopic criteria for BE, the adjunctive yield of WATS-3D was 76.5% and absolute yield was 18.1%. One thousand three hundred seventeen patients (19.3%) who fulfilled endoscopic BE criteria had IM detected solely by WATS-3D. Of 240 patients with dysplasia, 107 (44.6%) were found solely by WATS-3D. Among patients with positive WATS-3D but negative FB, the care plan changed in 90.7%.

DISCUSSION

The addition of WATS-3D to FB in patients with GERD being screened for BE resulted in confirmation of BE in an additional one-fifth of patients. Furthermore, dysplasia diagnoses approximately doubled.

Validation of an Epigenetic Prognostic Assay to Accurately Risk-Stratify Patients with Barrett's Esophagus

INTRODUCTION:

Esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC) is the second-most lethal cancer in the United States, with Barrett esophagus (BE) being the strongest risk factor. Assessing the future risk of neoplastic progression in patients with BE is difficult; however, high-grade dysplasia (HGD) and early EAC are treatable by endoscopic eradication therapy (EET), with survival rates of 90%. Thus, it would be beneficial to develop a molecular assay to identify high-risk patients, who merit more frequent endoscopic surveillance or EET, as well as low-risk patients, who can avoid EET and undergo less frequent surveillance.

METHODS:

Deidentified endoscopic biopsies were acquired from 240 patients with BE at 6 centers and confirmed as future progressors or nonprogressors. Tissues were analyzed by a set of methylation-specific biomarker assays. Test performance was assessed in an independent validation set using 4 stratification levels: low risks, low-moderate risks, high-moderate risks, and high risks.

RESULTS:

Relative to patients in the low-risk group, high-risk patients were 15.2 times more likely to progress within 5 years to HGD or EAC. For patients in the high-risk category, the average risk of progressing to HGD or EAC within 5 years was 21.5%, 4-fold the BE population prevalence within 5 years, whereas low-risk patients had a progression risk of only 1.85%.

DISCUSSION:

This clinical assay, Esopredict, stratifies future neoplastic progression risk to identify higher-risk patients with BE who can benefit from EET or more frequent surveillance and lower-risk patients who can benefit from reduced surveillance.

Quality indicators in Barrett's endoscopy: Best is yet to come

There is growing interest in establishing quality indicators (QIs) for endoscopic screening and surveillance in Barrett's esophagus (BE). QIs are objective, measurable, and evidence-based metrics that are applicable in a health-care setting to monitor a process and identify key performance indicators (KPIs) to achieve defined goals. In the Barrett's endoscopy setting, QIs can offer a standardized approach to monitor and maintain high-quality endoscopy for BE screening and surveillance that will allow measuring performance of an endoscopist as an individual, a group, or a facility. Since BE is an endoscopically identifiable premalignant condition with histological corroboration, adherence to QIs is paramount for the early and accurate detection of dysplasia and neoplasia. It is the holy grail for BE screening and surveillance. Although several suggested QIs for Barrett's endoscopy exist, issues remain in determining the most appropriate ones. These issues include inconsistent use of terminology, unclear definitions, and a scarcity of studies linking these QIs with relevant patient outcomes, making it difficult for clinicians to understand the concept and clinical importance. Hence, there is an urgent need to determine what should constitute appropriate QIs for Barrett's endoscopy, clearly define items used in the QIs, and identify ways to measure these KPIs. Ultimately, well-defined and validated QIs will contribute to clinically effective, safe, timely, and patient-focused care. In this review, we summarize recent literature and discuss four proposed QIs: (i) neoplasia detection rate; (ii) postendoscopy Barrett's neoplasia; (iii) Barrett's inspection time; and (iv) adherence to the Seattle biopsy protocol.

Significant Reduction in the Diagnosis of Barrett's Esophagus and Related Dysplasia During the COVID-19 Pandemic

INTRODUCTION

The coronavirus disease 19 (COVID-19) pandemic disrupted endoscopy practices, creating unprecedented decreases in cancer screening and surveillance services. We aimed to assess the impact of the pandemic on the proportion of patients diagnosed with Barrett's esophagus (BE) and BE-related dysplasia and adherence to established quality indicators.

METHODS

Data from all esophagogastroduodenoscopies in the GI Quality Improvement Consortium, a national repository of matched endoscopy and pathology data, were analyzed from January 2018 to December 2022. Four cohorts were created based on procedure date and COVID-19 data: pre-pandemic (January 2018 to February 2020), pandemic-phase I (March 2020 to July 2020), pandemic-phase II (August 2020 to May 2021), and pandemic-phase III (June 2021 to December 2022). Observed and expected number of BE and BE-related dysplasia cases per month and adherence to the Seattle biopsy protocol and recommended surveillance intervals for nondysplastic BE (NDBE) were evaluated.

RESULTS

Among 2,446,857 esophagogastroduodenoscopies performed during the study period, 104,124 (4.3%) had pathology-confirmed BE. The histologic distribution was 87.4% NDBE, 1.8% low-grade dysplasia, 2.4% indefinite for dysplasia, and 1.4% high-grade dysplasia. The number of monthly BE (-47.9% pandemic-phase I, -21.5% pandemic-phase II, and -19.0% pandemic-phase III) and BE-related dysplasia (high-grade dysplasia: 41.2%, -27.7%, and -19.0%; low-grade dysplasia: 49.1%, -35.3%, and -26.5%; any dysplasia: 46.7%, -32.3%, and -27.9%) diagnoses were significantly reduced during the pandemic phases compared with pre-pandemic data. Adherence rates to the Seattle protocol and recommended surveillance intervals for NDBE did not decline during the pandemic.

DISCUSSION

There was a significant decline in the number of BE and BE-related dysplasia diagnoses during the COVID-19 pandemic, with an approximately 50% reduction in the number of cases of dysplasia diagnosed in the early pandemic. The absence of a compensatory increase in diagnoses in the pandemic-phase II and III periods may result in deleterious downstream effects on esophageal adenocarcinoma morbidity and mortality.

Advanced endoscopic imaging for detection of Barrett's esophagus

Barrett's esophagus (BE) is the precursor to esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC), and is caused by chronic gastroesophageal reflux. BE can progress over time from metaplasia to dysplasia, and eventually to EAC. EAC is associated with a poor prognosis, often due to advanced disease at the time of diagnosis. However, if BE is diagnosed early, pharmacologic and endoscopic treatments can prevent progression to EAC. The current standard of care for BE surveillance utilizes the Seattle protocol. Unfortunately, a sizable proportion of early EAC and BE-related high-grade dysplasia (HGD) are missed due to poor adherence to the Seattle protocol and sampling errors. New modalities using artificial intelligence (AI) have been proposed to improve the detection of early EAC and BE-related HGD. This review will focus on AI technology and its application to various endoscopic modalities such as high-definition white light endoscopy, narrow-band imaging, and volumetric laser endomicroscopy.

Diagnosis and management of Barrett esophagus: European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) Guideline

MR1 : ESGE recommends the following standards for Barrett esophagus (BE) surveillance:- a minimum of 1-minute inspection time per cm of BE length during a surveillance endoscopy- photodocumentation of landmarks, the BE segment including one picture per cm of BE length, and the esophagogastric junction in retroflexed position, and any visible lesions- use of the Prague and (for visible lesions) Paris classification- collection of biopsies from all visible abnormalities (if present), followed by random four-quadrant biopsies for every 2-cm BE length.Strong recommendation, weak quality of evidence. MR2:  ESGE suggests varying surveillance intervals for different BE lengths. For BE with a maximum extent of ≥ 1 cm and < 3 cm, BE surveillance should be repeated every 5 years. For BE with a maximum extent of ≥ 3 cm and < 10 cm, the interval for endoscopic surveillance should be 3 years. Patients with BE with a maximum extent of ≥ 10 cm should be referred to a BE expert center for surveillance endoscopies. For patients with an irregular Z-line/columnar-lined esophagus of < 1 cm, no routine biopsies or endoscopic surveillance are advised.Weak recommendation, low quality of evidence. MR3:  ESGE suggests that, if a patient has reached 75 years of age at the time of the last surveillance endoscopy and/or the patient's life expectancy is less than 5 years, the discontinuation of further surveillance endoscopies can be considered. Weak recommendation, very low quality of evidence. MR4:  ESGE recommends offering endoscopic eradication therapy using ablation to patients with BE and low grade dysplasia (LGD) on at least two separate endoscopies, both confirmed by a second experienced pathologist.Strong recommendation, high level of evidence. MR5:  ESGE recommends endoscopic ablation treatment for BE with confirmed high grade dysplasia (HGD) without visible lesions, to prevent progression to invasive cancer.Strong recommendation, high level of evidence. MR6:  ESGE recommends offering complete eradication of all remaining Barrett epithelium by ablation after endoscopic resection of visible abnormalities containing any degree of dysplasia or esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC).Strong recommendation, moderate quality of evidence. MR7:  ESGE recommends endoscopic resection as curative treatment for T1a Barrett's cancer with well/moderate differentiation and no signs of lymphovascular invasion.Strong recommendation, high level of evidence. MR8:  ESGE suggests that low risk submucosal (T1b) EAC (i. e. submucosal invasion depth ≤ 500 µm AND no [lympho]vascular invasion AND no poor tumor differentiation) can be treated by endoscopic resection, provided that adequate follow-up with gastroscopy, endoscopic ultrasound (EUS), and computed tomography (CT)/positrion emission tomography-computed tomography (PET-CT) is performed in expert centers.Weak recommendation, low quality of evidence. MR9:  ESGE suggests that submucosal (T1b) esophageal adenocarcinoma with deep submucosal invasion (tumor invasion > 500 µm into the submucosa), and/or (lympho)vascular invasion, and/or a poor tumor differentiation should be considered high risk. Complete staging and consideration of additional treatments (chemotherapy and/or radiotherapy and/or surgery) or strict endoscopic follow-up should be undertaken on an individual basis in a multidisciplinary discussion.Strong recommendation, low quality of evidence. MR10 A: ESGE recommends that the first endoscopic follow-up after successful endoscopic eradication therapy (EET) of BE is performed in an expert center.Strong recommendation, very low quality of evidence. B:  ESGE recommends careful inspection of the neo-squamocolumnar junction and neo-squamous epithelium with high definition white-light endoscopy and virtual chromoendoscopy during post-EET surveillance, to detect recurrent dysplasia.Strong recommendation, very low level of evidence. C:  ESGE recommends against routine four-quadrant biopsies of neo-squamous epithelium after successful EET of BE.Strong recommendation, low level of evidence. D:  ESGE suggests, after successful EET, obtaining four-quadrant random biopsies just distal to a normal-appearing neo-squamocolumnar junction to detect dysplasia in the absence of visible lesions.Weak recommendation, low level of evidence. E:  ESGE recommends targeted biopsies are obtained where there is a suspicion of recurrent BE in the tubular esophagus, or where there are visible lesions suspicious for dysplasia.Strong recommendation, very low level of evidence. MR11:  After successful EET, ESGE recommends the following surveillance intervals:- For patients with a baseline diagnosis of HGD or EAC:at 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, and 10 years after last treatment, after which surveillance may be stopped.- For patients with a baseline diagnosis of LGD:at 1, 3, and 5 years after last treatment, after which surveillance may be stopped.Strong recommendation, low quality of evidence.

An Automated Tissue Systems Pathology Test Can Standardize the Management and Improve Health Outcomes for Patients With Barrett's Esophagus

INTRODUCTION

Low-grade dysplasia (LGD) in Barrett's esophagus (BE) is associated with an increased risk of progression to high-grade dysplasia or esophageal adenocarcinoma. However, because of substantial interobserver variability in the diagnosis of LGD, a patient's management plan and health outcome depend largely on which pathologist reviews their case. This study evaluated the ability of a tissue systems pathology test that objectively risk stratifies patients with BE (TissueCypher, TSP-9) to standardize management in a manner consistent with improved health outcomes for patients with BE.

METHODS

A total of 154 patients with BE with community-based LGD from the prospectively followed screening cohort of the SURF trial were studied. Management decisions were simulated 500 times with varying generalist (n = 16) and expert (n = 14) pathology reviewers to determine the most likely care plan with or without use of the TSP-9 test for guidance. The percentage of patients receiving appropriate management based on the known progression/nonprogression outcomes was calculated.

RESULTS

The percentage of patients with 100% of simulations resulting in appropriate management significantly increased from 9.1% for pathology alone, to 58.4% when TSP-9 results were used with pathology, and further increased to 77.3% of patients receiving appropriate management when only TSP-9 results were used. Use of the test results also significantly increased the consistency of management decisions for patients when their slides were reviewed by different pathologists ( P < 0.0001).

DISCUSSION

Management guided by the TSP-9 test can standardize care plans by increasing the early detection of progressors who can receive therapeutic interventions, while also increasing the percentage of nonprogressors who can avoid unnecessary therapy and be managed by surveillance alone.

Magnitude and Time-Trends of Post-Endoscopy Esophageal Adenocarcinoma and Post-Endoscopy Esophageal Neoplasia in a Population-Based Cohort Study: The Nordic Barrett's Esophagus Study

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Post-endoscopy esophageal adenocarcinoma (PEEC) and post-endoscopy esophageal neoplasia (PEEN) undermine early cancer detection in Barrett's esophagus (BE). We aimed to assess the magnitude and conduct time-trend analysis of PEEC and PEEN among patients with newly diagnosed BE.

METHODS

This population-based cohort study was conducted in Denmark, Finland, and Sweden between 2006 and 2020 and included 20,588 patients with newly diagnosed BE. PEEC and PEEN were defined as esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC) or high-grade dysplasia (HGD)/EAC, respectively, diagnosed 30-365 days from BE diagnosis (index endoscopy). HGD/EAC diagnosed from 0-29 days and HGD/EAC diagnosed >365 days from BE diagnosis (incident HGD/EAC) were assessed. Patients were followed up until HGD/EAC, death, or end of study period. Incidence rates (IR) per 100,000 person-years with 95% confidence interval (95% CI) were calculated using Poisson regression.

RESULTS

Among 293 patients diagnosed with EAC, 69 (23.5%) were categorized as PEEC, 43 (14.7%) as index EAC, and 181 (61.8%) as incident EAC. The IRs/100,000 person-years for PEEC and incident EAC were 392 (95% CI, 309-496), and 208 (95% CI, 180-241), respectively. Among 279 patients diagnosed with HGD/EAC (Sweden only), 17.2% were categorized as PEEN, 14.6% as index HGD/EAC, and 68.1% as incident HGD/EAC. IRs/100,000 person-years for PEEN, and incident HGD/EAC were 421 (95% CI, 317-558), and 285 (95% CI, 247-328), respectively. Sensitivity analyses that varied time interval for occurrence of PEEC/PEEN demonstrated similar results. A time-trend analysis for IRs demonstrated rising incidence rates of PEEC/PEEN.

CONCLUSIONS

Almost a quarter of all EACs are detected within a year after an ostensibly negative upper endoscopy in patients with newly diagnosed BE. Interventions to improve detection may reduce PEEC/PEEN rates.

Effect of biopsy protocol adherence vs non-adherence on dysplasia detection rates in Barrett's esophagus surveillance endoscopies: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background  Barrett's esophagus (BE) surveillance endoscopies are advised for early diagnosis of esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC). Current guidelines recommend obtaining four-quadrant random biopsies every 2 centimeters of BE length alongside with targeted biopsies if visible lesions are present. Low adherence rates for this random biopsy protocol are widely reported. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to assess the effect of adherence versus non-adherence to the four-quadrant biopsy protocol on detection of dysplasia in BE patients. Methods  We searched for studies that reported effects of adherence and non-adherence to the four-quadrant biopsy protocol on dysplasia detection rates in BE patients. Adherence was defined as taking a minimum of 4 quadrant random biopsies per 2 cm of BE segment. Studies with low risk of bias and without applicability concerns were included in a good quality synthesis. Pooled relative risks (RRs) with 95% confidence interval (CI) of dysplasia detection rates were calculated. Results  A total of 1,570 studies were screened and 8 studies were included. Four studies were included in the good quality synthesis. In the pooled good quality analysis, four-quadrant biopsy protocol adherence significantly increased detection of dysplasia compared to non-adherence (RR 1.90, 95 % CI = 1.36-2.64; I2 = 45 %). Pooled RRs for LGD and HGD/EAC were 2.00 (95 % CI = 1.49-2.69; I2 = 0 %) and 2.03 (95 % CI = 0.98-4.24; I2 = 28 %), respectively. Conclusion  This systematic review and meta-analysis demonstrates that four-quadrant biopsy protocol adherence is associated with increased detection of dysplasia in BE patients. Efforts should be made to increase biopsy protocol adherence rates.

Highlighting the Undetectable - Fluorescence Molecular Imaging in Gastrointestinal Endoscopy

Flexible high-definition white-light endoscopy is the current gold standard in screening for cancer and its precursor lesions in the gastrointestinal tract. However, miss rates are high, especially in populations at high risk for developing gastrointestinal cancer (e.g., inflammatory bowel disease, Lynch syndrome, or Barrett's esophagus) where lesions tend to be flat and subtle. Fluorescence molecular endoscopy (FME) enables intraluminal visualization of (pre)malignant lesions based on specific biomolecular features rather than morphology by using fluorescently labeled molecular probes that bind to specific molecular targets. This strategy has the potential to serve as a valuable tool for the clinician to improve endoscopic lesion detection and real-time clinical decision-making. This narrative review presents an overview of recent advances in FME, focusing on probe development, techniques, and clinical evidence. Future perspectives will also be addressed, such as the use of FME in patient stratification for targeted therapies and potential alliances with artificial intelligence. KEY MESSAGES: • Fluorescence molecular endoscopy is a relatively new technology that enables safe and real-time endoscopic lesion visualization based on specific molecular features rather than on morphology, thereby adding a layer of information to endoscopy, like in PET-CT imaging. • Recently the transition from preclinical to clinical studies has been made, with promising results regarding enhancing detection of flat and subtle lesions in the colon and esophagus. However, clinical evidence needs to be strengthened by larger patient studies with stratified study designs. • In the future fluorescence molecular endoscopy could serve as a valuable tool in clinical workflows to improve detection in high-risk populations like patients with Barrett's esophagus, Lynch syndrome, and inflammatory bowel syndrome, where flat and subtle lesions tend to be malignant up to five times more often. • Fluorescence molecular endoscopy has the potential to assess therapy responsiveness in vivo for targeted therapies, thereby playing a role in personalizing medicine. • To further reduce high miss rates due to human and technical factors, joint application of artificial intelligence and fluorescence molecular endoscopy are likely to generate added value.

High rate of missed Barrett's esophagus when screening with forceps biopsies

BACKGROUND

Screening for Barrett's esophagus (BE) with endoscopy plus forceps biopsy (FB) has poor compliance with the recommended Seattle protocol and fails to sample large areas of mucosa. This statistical modeling study estimates, for the first time, the actual frequency of missed BE cases by FB.

METHODS

Published, calibrated models in the literature were combined to calculate the age-specific prevalence of BE in white males with gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). We started with estimates of the prevalence of BE and GERD, and applied the relative risk for BE in patients with GERD based on the literature. This created estimates of the true prevalence of BE in white males with GERD by decade of life. The proportion of BE missed was calculated as the difference between the prevalence and the proportion with a positive screen.

RESULTS

The prevalence of BE in white males with GERD was 8.9%, 12.1%, 15.3%, 18.7% and 22.0% for the third through eighth decades of life. Even after assuming no false positives, missed cases of BE were about 50% when estimated for patients of ages 50 or 60 years, and over 60% for ages of 30, 40 or 70 years. Sensitivity analysis was done for all variables in the model calculations. For ages 50 and 60 years, this resulted in values from 30.3 to 57.3% and 36.4 to 60.9%.

CONCLUSION

Screening for BE with endoscopy and FB misses approximately 50% of BE cases. More sensitive methods of BE detection or better adherence to the Seattle protocol are needed.

AGA Clinical Practice Update on New Technology and Innovation for Surveillance and Screening in Barrett's Esophagus: Expert Review

DESCRIPTION

The purpose of this best practice advice (BPA) article from the Clinical Practice Update Committee of the American Gastroenterological Association is to provide an update on advances and innovation regarding the screening and surveillance of Barrett's esophagus.

METHODS

The BPA statements presented here were developed from expert review of existing literature combined with discussion and expert opinion to provide practical advice. Formal rating of the quality of evidence or strength of BPAs was not the intent of this clinical practice update. This expert review was commissioned and approved by the AGA Institute Clinical Practice Updates Committee (CPUC) and the AGA Governing Board to provide timely guidance on a topic of high clinical importance to the AGA membership, and underwent internal peer review by the CPUC and external peer review through standard procedures of Clinical Gastroenterology and Hepatology. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 1: Screening with standard upper endoscopy may be considered in individuals with at least 3 established risk factors for Barrett's esophagus (BE) and esophageal adenocarcinoma, including individuals who are male, non-Hispanic white, age >50 years, have a history of smoking, chronic gastroesophageal reflux disease, obesity, or a family history of BE or esophageal adenocarcinoma. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 2: Nonendoscopic cell-collection devices may be considered as an option to screen for BE. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 3: Screening and surveillance endoscopic examination should be performed using high-definition white light endoscopy and virtual chromoendoscopy, with endoscopists spending adequate time inspecting the Barrett's segment. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 4: Screening and surveillance exams should define the extent of BE using a standardized grading system documenting the circumferential and maximal extent of the columnar lined esophagus (Prague classification) with a clear description of landmarks and the location and characteristics of visible lesions (nodularity, ulceration), when present. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 5: Advanced imaging technologies such as endomicroscopy may be used as adjunctive techniques to identify dysplasia. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 6: Sampling during screening and surveillance exams should be performed using the Seattle biopsy protocol (4-quadrant biopsies every 1-2 cm and target biopsies from any visible lesion). BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 7: Wide-area transepithelial sampling may be used as an adjunctive technique to sample the suspected or established Barrett's segment (in addition to the Seattle biopsy protocol). BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 8: Patients with erosive esophagitis should be biopsied when concern of dysplasia or malignancy exists. A repeat endoscopy should be performed after 8 weeks of twice a day proton pump inhibitor therapy. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 9: Tissue systems pathology-based prediction assay may be utilized for risk stratification of patients with nondysplastic BE. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 10: Risk stratification models may be utilized to selectively identify individuals at risk for Barrett's associated neoplasia. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 11: Given the significant interobserver variability among pathologists, the diagnosis of BE-related neoplasia should be confirmed by an expert pathology review. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 12: Patients with BE-related neoplasia should be referred to endoscopists with expertise in advanced imaging, resection, and ablation. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 13: All patients with BE should be placed on at least daily proton pump inhibitor therapy. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 14: Patients with nondysplastic BE should undergo surveillance endoscopy in 3 to 5 years. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 15: In patients undergoing surveillance after endoscopic eradication therapy, random biopsies should be taken of the esophagogastric junction, gastric cardia, and the distal 2 cm of the neosquamous epithelium as well as from all visible lesions, independent of the length of the original BE segment.

Kyoto international consensus report on anatomy, pathophysiology and clinical significance of the gastro-oesophageal junction

OBJECTIVE

An international meeting was organised to develop consensus on (1) the landmarks to define the gastro-oesophageal junction (GOJ), (2) the occurrence and pathophysiological significance of the cardiac gland, (3) the definition of the gastro-oesophageal junctional zone (GOJZ) and (4) the causes of inflammation, metaplasia and neoplasia occurring in the GOJZ.

DESIGN

Clinical questions relevant to the afore-mentioned major issues were drafted for which expert panels formulated relevant statements and textural explanations.A Delphi method using an anonymous system was employed to develop the consensus, the level of which was predefined as ≥80% of agreement. Two rounds of voting and amendments were completed before the meeting at which clinical questions and consensus were finalised.

RESULTS

Twenty eight clinical questions and statements were finalised after extensive amendments. Critical consensus was achieved: (1) definition for the GOJ, (2) definition of the GOJZ spanning 1 cm proximal and distal to the GOJ as defined by the end of palisade vessels was accepted based on the anatomical distribution of cardiac type gland, (3) chemical and bacterial (Helicobacter pylori) factors as the primary causes of inflammation, metaplasia and neoplasia occurring in the GOJZ, (4) a new definition of Barrett's oesophagus (BO).

CONCLUSIONS

This international consensus on the new definitions of BO, GOJ and the GOJZ will be instrumental in future studies aiming to resolve many issues on this important anatomic area and hopefully will lead to better classification and management of the diseases surrounding the GOJ.

Prevalence and Predictors of Missed Dysplasia on Index Barrett's Esophagus Diagnosing Endoscopy in a Veteran Population

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Limitations of endoscopic sampling may result in missed dysplasia at the diagnosis of Barrett's esophagus (BE). However, the role of close follow-up endoscopy is unclear. The aim was to evaluate the proportion of patients diagnosed with "missed" dysplasia within 18 months of their index nondysplastic BE (NDBE) diagnosis.

METHODS

This was a retrospective analysis of a cohort of BE patients diagnosed during 1990-2019 at the Houston VA. Patients with BE on index esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) were classified as NDBE, indefinite dysplasia, or dysplastic (low- or high-grade dysplasia) based on initial biopsies. We identified NDBE patients who had follow-up EGD within 3-18 months after index EGD. We used logistic regression models to estimate odds ratios and 95% confidence intervals for risk factors of dysplasia on follow-up EGD.

RESULTS

We identified 614 patients who had BE on index EGD. Among those with NDBE and follow-up EGD within 3-18 months (n = 271), 4.1% had definite dysplasia on follow-up, and an additional 14.0% had indefinite dysplasia. Proportions of definite or indefinite dysplasia at follow-up within 3-18 months significantly decreased from 32.6% among patients with index EGD before 2009 to 11.7% among patients with index EGD after 2013 (P for trend = .068). Those with any indefinite or definite dysplastic BE at follow-up within 3-18 months after index EGD (n = 49) were more likely to have BE length ≥3 cm on index EGD (odds ratio, 3.39; 95% confidence interval, 1.63-7.08) than those with persistent NDBE or no BE on follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

The occurrence of missed dysplasia on an index EGD has decreased over time. However, those with long segment BE were more than 3 times as likely to have missed dysplasia, and this group could benefit from dysplasia surveillance within 18 months of BE diagnosis.

Diagnosis and Management of Barrett's Esophagus: An Updated ACG Guideline

Barrett's esophagus (BE) is a common condition associated with chronic gastroesophageal reflux disease. BE is the only known precursor to esophageal adenocarcinoma, a highly lethal cancer with an increasing incidence over the last 5 decades. These revised guidelines implement Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation methodology to propose recommendations for the definition and diagnosis of BE, screening for BE and esophageal adenocarcinoma, surveillance of patients with known BE, and the medical and endoscopic treatment of BE and its associated early neoplasia. Important changes since the previous iteration of this guideline include a broadening of acceptable screening modalities for BE to include nonendoscopic methods, liberalized intervals for surveillance of short-segment BE, and volume criteria for endoscopic therapy centers for BE. We recommend endoscopic eradication therapy for patients with BE and high-grade dysplasia and those with BE and low-grade dysplasia. We propose structured surveillance intervals for patients with dysplastic BE after successful ablation based on the baseline degree of dysplasia. We could not make recommendations regarding chemoprevention or use of biomarkers in routine practice due to insufficient data.

Endoscopic diagnosis and screening of Barrett's esophagus: Inconsistency of diagnostic criteria between Japan and Western countries

Barrett's esophagus (BE) is an endoscopically identifiable premalignant condition for esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC). To diagnose BE precisely, careful inspection of the anatomic landmarks, including the esophagogastric junction and the squamocolumnar junction is important. The distal end of the palisade vessels and the proximal end of the gastric folds are used as the landmark of the esophagogastric junction in endoscopic diagnosis, with the latter solely used internationally, except in some Asian countries, including Japan. In addition, the diagnostic criteria adopted internationally for BE are inconsistent, particularly between Japan and Western countries. Recently updated guidelines in Western countries have included length criteria, with a 1‐cm threshold of columnar epithelium by endoscopic observation and/or histologic confirmation of the presence of specialized intestinal metaplasia. Since BE is endoscopically diagnosed at any length without histologic assessment in Japan, the reported prevalence of short‐segment BE is very high in Japan compared with that in Western countries. Although guidelines on screening exist for BE, the current strategies based on the presence of chronic gastroesophageal reflux disease with multiple risk factors may miss the opportunity for early detection of EAC. Indeed, up to 40% of patients with EAC have no history of chronic gastroesophageal reflux disease. To discuss BE on the same footing worldwide, standardization of diagnostic criteria, screening indication, and establishment of effective techniques for detecting dysplastic lesions are eagerly awaited. Japanese guidelines for BE should be revised regarding the length criteria, including the minimum length and long‐segment BE, in line with the recently updated Western guidelines.

Impact of expert center endoscopic assessment of confirmed low grade dysplasia in Barrett's esophagus diagnosed in community hospitals

BACKGROUND : The optimal management for patients with low grade dysplasia (LGD) in Barrett's esophagus (BE) is unclear. According to the Dutch national guideline, all patients with LGD with histological confirmation of the diagnosis by an expert pathologist (i. e. "confirmed LGD"), are referred for a dedicated re-staging endoscopy at an expert center. We aimed to assess the diagnostic value of re-staging endoscopy by an expert endoscopist for patients with confirmed LGD. METHODS : This retrospective cohort study included all patients with flat BE diagnosed in a community hospital who had confirmed LGD and were referred to one of the nine Barrett Expert Centers (BECs) in the Netherlands. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients with prevalent high grade dysplasia (HGD) or cancer during re-staging in a BEC. RESULTS : Of the 248 patients with confirmed LGD, re-staging in the BEC revealed HGD or cancer in 23 % (57/248). In 79 % (45/57), HGD or cancer in a newly detected visible lesion was diagnosed. Of the remaining patients, re-staging in the BEC showed a second diagnosis of confirmed LGD in 68 % (168/248), while the remaining 9 % (23/248) had nondysplastic BE. CONCLUSION : One quarter of patients with apparent flat BE with confirmed LGD diagnosed in a community hospital had prevalent HGD or cancer after re-staging at an expert center. This endorses the advice to refer patients with confirmed LGD, including in the absence of visible lesions, to an expert center for re-staging endoscopy.

Advanced imaging and artificial intelligence for Barrett's esophagus: What we should and soon will do

Barrett's esophagus (BE) is a well-established risk factor for esophageal adenocarcinoma. It is recommended that patients have regular endoscopic surveillance, with the ultimate goal of detecting early-stage neoplastic lesions before they can progress to invasive carcinoma. Detection of both dysplasia or early adenocarcinoma permits curative endoscopic treatments, and with this aim, thorough endoscopic assessment is crucial and improves outcomes. The burden of missed neoplasia in BE is still far from being negligible, likely due to inappropriate endoscopic surveillance. Over the last two decades, advanced imaging techniques, moving from traditional dye-spray chromoendoscopy to more practical virtual chromoendoscopy technologies, have been introduced with the aim to enhance neoplasia detection in BE. As witnessed in other fields, artificial intelligence (AI) has revolutionized the field of diagnostic endoscopy and is set to cover a pivotal role in BE as well. The aim of this commentary is to comprehensively summarize present evidence, recent research advances, and future perspectives regarding advanced imaging technology and AI in BE; the combination of computer-aided diagnosis to a widespread adoption of advanced imaging technologies is eagerly awaited. It will also provide a useful step-by-step approach for performing high-quality endoscopy in BE, in order to increase the diagnostic yield of endoscopy in clinical practice.

Progression of Barrett's esophagus, crypt dysplasia, and low-grade dysplasia diagnosed by wide-area transepithelial sampling with 3-dimensional computer-assisted analysis: a retrospective analysis

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Wide-area transepithelial sampling with 3-dimensional computer-assisted analysis (WATS3D) is used as an adjunct to forceps biopsy sampling in Barrett's esophagus (BE). BE-associated crypt dysplasia (CD), which can be detected by WATS3D, involves crypts but not surface epithelium. The risk of neoplastic progression of CD has never been evaluated. The prognosis of WATS3D-diagnosed nondysplastic BE (NDBE) and low-grade dysplasia (LGD) is also unknown. We assessed the risk of progression of WATS3D-reported NDBE, CD, and LGD with high-grade dysplasia (HGD) or esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC).

METHODS

We analyzed patients who underwent WATS3D in routine care. Eligible patients had 2 WATS3D ≥12 months apart. Patients were categorized by the initial WATS3D finding as NDBE, CD, or LGD. Patient-years of observation were calculated by multiplying the mean follow-up by the number of patients. Progression, defined as a subsequent finding of HGD/EAC on forceps biopsy sampling, was assessed. The crude progression rate was calculated, and Kaplan-Meier analysis compared progression rates stratified by baseline histology. Bivariate analysis identified progression risk factors.

RESULTS

Of 151,224 WATS3D cases, 43,145 (29%) had BE. Of these, 4545 patients had 2 WATS3D separated by ≥12 months. The mean follow-up was 1.97 years (range, 1.0-6.42). In patients with baseline NDBE, progression was .08% per patient-year (95% confidence interval [CI], .02%-.14%). Progression of baseline CD was significantly higher, at 1.42% per patient-year (95% CI, 0%-3.01%). For baseline LGD, progression was 5.79% per patient-year (95% CI, 1.02%-10.55%). Other risk factors for progression were increasing age and BE segment length.

CONCLUSIONS

NDBE found on WATS3D has a very low risk of progression. CD reported on WATS3D appears to be a neoplastic precursor lesion, with a risk of progression in this study significantly higher than NDBE but lower than LGD. The clinical utility of CD requires further investigation.

Educational intervention to improve quality of care in Barrett's esophagus: the AQUIRE randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Despite quality measures in upper endoscopy (EGD) for Barrett's esophagus (BE), considerable variability remains in practice among gastroenterologists. This randomized controlled trial evaluated the role of structured intensive training on the quality of EGD in BE.

METHODS

In this multicenter study, 8 sites (from the GI Quality Consortium) were cluster randomized (1:1) to receive AQUIRE (A Quality Improvement program in cancer care during Endoscopy) training (intervention) or continue local standard practices (control). The primary outcome was compliance with the Seattle biopsy protocol. Secondary outcomes were change in knowledge of BE detection and sampling assessed by questionnaire and dysplasia detection rate (DDR) before and after completion of the 6-month study period.

RESULTS

The intervention sites (n = 4) had 31 gastroenterologists and the control sites (n = 4) had 34. There was a significant improvement in the compliance rates with the Seattle biopsy protocol from baseline to the end of the study in the intervention sites (64.8%-73.2%, P = .002) but not in the control sites (69.5%-69.4%, P = .953). The accurate response rate on the questionnaire at the intervention sites increased from 73% at baseline to 88% after AQUIRE training (difference, 14.8%; standard deviation, 18.7; P = .008). DDR did not change significantly from baseline to 6 months in either the control or intervention groups (P = .06).

CONCLUSIONS

This study confirms the capacity of a structured educational intervention to improve utilization of a standard biopsy protocol and knowledge of standards of care in BE but without significant change in DDR.

Magnitude and Time-Trend Analysis of Postendoscopy Esophageal Adenocarcinoma: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Identification of postendoscopy esophageal adenocarcinoma (PEEC) among Barrett's esophagus (BE) patients presents an opportunity to improve survival of esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC). We aimed to estimate the proportion of PEEC within the first year after BE diagnosis.

METHODS

Multiple databases (Medline, Embase, Scopus, and Cochrane databases) were searched until September 2020 for original studies with at least 1-year follow-up evaluation that reported EAC and/or high-grade dysplasia (HGD) in the first year after index endoscopy in nondysplastic BE, low-grade dysplasia, or indefinite dysplasia. The proportions of PEEC defined using EAC alone and EAC+HGD were calculated by dividing EAC or EAC+HGD in the first year over the total number of EAC or EAC+HGD, respectively.

RESULTS

We included 52 studies with 145,726 patients and a median follow-up period of 4.8 years. The proportion of PEEC (EAC) was 21% (95% CI, 13-31) and PEEC (EAC+HGD) was 26% (95% CI, 19-34). Among studies with nondysplastic BE only, the PEEC (EAC) proportion was 17% (95% CI, 11-23) and PEEC (EAC+HGD) was 14% (95% CI, 8-19). Among studies with 5 or more years of follow-up evaluation, the PEEC (EAC) proportion was 10% and PEEC (EAC+HGD) was 19%. Meta-regression analysis showed a strong inverse relationship between PEEC and incident EAC (P < .001). The PEEC (EAC) proportion increased from 5% in studies published before 2000 to 30% after 2015. Substantial heterogeneity was observed for most analyses.

CONCLUSIONS

PEEC accounts for a high proportion of HGD/EACs and is proportional to reduction in incident EAC. Using best endoscopic techniques now and performing future research on improving neoplasia detection through implementation of quality measures and educational tools is needed to reduce PEEC.

Barrett's esophagus: The pathomorphological and molecular genetic keystones of neoplastic progression

Barrett's esophagus is a widespread chronically progressing disease of heterogeneous nature. A life threatening complication of this condition is neoplastic transformation, which is often overlooked due to lack of standardized approaches in diagnosis, preventative measures and treatment. In this essay, we aim to stratify existing data to show specific associations between neoplastic transformation and the underlying processes which predate cancerous transition. We discuss pathomorphological, genetic, epigenetic, molecular and immunohistochemical methods related to neoplasia detection on the basis of Barrett's esophagus. Our review sheds light on pathways of such neoplastic progression in the distal esophagus, providing valuable insight into progression assessment, preventative targets and treatment modalities. Our results suggest that molecular, genetic and epigenetic alterations in the esophagus arise earlier than cancerous transformation, meaning the discussed targets can help form preventative strategies in at-risk patient groups.

Acceptability and Adequacy of a Non-endoscopic Cell Collection Device for Diagnosis of Barrett's Esophagus: Lessons Learned

BACKGROUND

Endoscopic screening for Barrett's esophagus (BE) is common, costly, and underperformed in at-risk people. A non-endoscopic cell collection device can be used to collect esophageal cells, enabling BE screening.

AIMS

This study assessed the acceptability and adequacy of a commercial non-endoscopic cell collection device in a US population.

METHODS

Six sites enrolled patients with confirmed BE or heartburn/regurgitation for ≥ 6 months. Patients underwent administration of the device, consisting of a sponge encapsulated in a capsule. The capsule dwelled in the stomach for 7.5 min and was retracted via an attached suture. An adequate sample was ≥ 1 columnar cell by H&E staining. Sample quality was rated using a 0-5 scale, with 0 = no columnar cells and 5 = plentiful groups. Trefoil Factor 3 (TFF3) staining was performed. Accuracy was assessed using esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD)/biopsy as the gold standard.

RESULTS

Of 191 patients, 99.5% successfully swallowed the device. Overall sample adequacy was 91% (171/188), with 84% (158/188) high quality. The detachment rate was 2/190 (1%). Overall sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of the assay with TFF3 staining were 76%, 77%, and 76%. Sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy for ≥ 3 cm BE were 86%, 77%, and 82%. Asked if willing to repeat the procedure, 93% would, and 65% indicated a preference for the device over EGD.

CONCLUSIONS

This study demonstrated a high rate of sample adequacy and promising acceptability of this non-endoscopic sampling device in a US population. Diagnostic characteristics suggest that non-endoscopic assessment of BE deserves further development as an alternative to endoscopy.

Role of Wide-Area Transepithelial Sampling With 3D Computer-Assisted Analysis in the Diagnosis and Management of Barrett's Esophagus

Barrett's esophagus (BE) is a premalignant condition in which cancer prevention is performed by endoscopic surveillance combined with Seattle protocol mucosal biopsies. The Seattle protocol has significant limitations, including a high rate of sampling error due to the focality of dysplasia/carcinoma, low endoscopist adherence to the protocol, and a high degree of variability in pathologic interpretation. These factors all contribute to a high incidence of cancers missed within 1 year of surveillance endoscopy. Wide-area transepithelial sampling with computer-assisted three-dimensional analysis (WATS3D) is a relatively new technique that minimizes sampling error by using a brush biopsy device that extensively samples "at risk" mucosa and helps pathologists diagnose dysplasia/neoplasia by generating three-dimensional images of whole crypts using a neural network-based software program. Several large prospective trials (involving both academic and community practices) have shown significantly increased rates of detection of dysplasia and intestinal metaplasia in both screening and surveillance in patients with BE when used as an adjunct to Seattle protocol-based forceps biopsies. The WATS3D diagnostic platform was included in the most recent American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy Barrett's guideline as an adjunct to forceps biopsies (conditional recommendation and low quality of evidence). This review summarizes the scientific and pathologic basis of WATS3D technology, its potential impact on BE surveillance and management, and its limitations and future directions.

Barrett's Esophagus: Diagnosis, Management, and Key Updates

Barrett's esophagus (BE) is the precursor lesion for esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC) development. Unfortunately, BE screening/surveillance has not provided the anticipated EAC reduction benefit. Noninvasive techniques are increasingly available or undergoing testing to screen for BE among those with/without known risk factors, and the use of artificial intelligence platforms to aid endoscopic screening and surveillance will likely become routine, minimizing missed cases or lesions. Management of high-grade dysplasia and intramucosal EAC is clear with endoscopic eradication therapy preferred to surgery. BE with low-grade dysplasia can be managed with removal of visible lesions combined with endoscopic eradication therapy or endoscopic surveillance at present.

Virtual Biopsy by Electrical Impedance Spectroscopy in Barrett's Carcinoma

Purpose

Early detection of adenocarcinomas in the esophagus is crucial for achieving curative endoscopic therapy. Targeted biopsies of suspicious lesions, as well as four-quadrant biopsies, represent the current diagnostic standard. However, this procedure is time-consuming, cost-intensive, and examiner-dependent. The aim of this study was to test whether impedance spectroscopy is capable of distinguishing between healthy, premalignant, and malignant lesions. An ex vivo measurement method was developed to examine esophageal lesions using impedance spectroscopy immediately after endoscopic resection.

Methods

After endoscopic resection of suspicious lesions in the esophagus, impedance measurements were performed on resected cork-covered tissue using a measuring head that was developed, with eight gold electrodes, over 10 different measurement settings and with frequencies from 100 Hz to 1 MHz.

Results

A total of 105 measurements were performed in 60 patients. A dataset of 400 per investigation and a total of more than 42,000 impedance measurements were therefore collected. Electrical impedance spectroscopy (EIS) was able to detect dysplastic esophageal mucosa with a sensitivity of 81% in Barrett’s esophagus.

Conclusion

In summary, EIS was able to distinguish different tissue characteristics in the different esophageal tissues. EIS thus holds potential for further development of targeted biopsies during surveillance endoscopy.

Trial Registration

NCT04046601

Independent Validation of a Tissue Systems Pathology Assay to Predict Future Progression in Nondysplastic Barrett's Esophagus: A Spatial-Temporal Analysis

An automated risk prediction assay has previously been shown to objectively identify patients with nondysplastic Barrett's esophagus (NDBE) who are at increased risk of malignant progression. To evaluate the predictive performance of the assay in 76 patients with NDBE of which 38 progressed to high-grade dysplasia/esophageal adenocarcinoma (progressors) and 38 did not (nonprogressors) and to determine whether assessment of additional (spatial) levels per endoscopy and/or multiple (temporal) time points improves assay performance.

Racial Disparities in Adherence to Quality Indicators in Barrett's Esophagus: An Analysis Using the GIQuIC National Benchmarking Registry

INTRODUCTION

Racial disparities in outcomes in esophageal adenocarcinoma are well established. Using a nationwide registry, we aimed to compare clinical and endoscopic characteristics of blacks and whites with Barrett's esophagus (BE) and adherence to defined quality indicators.

METHODS

We analyzed data from the Gastrointestinal Quality Improvement Consortium Registry between January 2012 and December 2019. Patients who underwent esophagogastroduodenoscopy with an indication of BE screening or surveillance, or an endoscopic finding of BE, were included. Adherence to recommended endoscopic surveillance intervals of 3-5 years for nondysplastic BE and adherence to Seattle biopsy protocol were assessed. Multivariate logistic regression was conducted to assess variables associated with adherence.

RESULTS

A total of 100,848 esophagogastroduodenoscopies in 84,789 patients met inclusion criteria (blacks-3,957 and whites-96,891). Blacks were less likely to have histologically confirmed BE (34.3% vs 51.7%, P < 0.01), had shorter BE lengths (1.61 vs 2.35 cm, P < 0.01), and were less likely to have any dysplasia (4.3% vs 7.1%, P < 0.01). Although whites were predominantly male (62.2%), about half of blacks with BE were female (53.0%). Blacks with nondysplastic BE were less likely to be recommended appropriate surveillance intervals (OR 0.78; 95% CI 0.68-0.89). Adherence rates to the Seattle protocol were modestly higher among blacks overall (OR 1.12, 95% CI 1.04-1.20), although significantly lower among blacks with BE segments >6 cm.

DISCUSSION

The use of sex as a risk factor for BE screening may be inappropriate among blacks. Fewer blacks were recommended appropriate surveillance intervals, and blacks with longer segment BE were less likely to undergo Seattle biopsy protocol.

Disparate Health Care in Barrett's Esophagus: The First Step Is Awareness

Disparities in medical treatment related to differences in race, gender, and creed are present in all fields of practice. This a complex issue requires multiple perspectives to gain advancements in patient care. This editorial examines the recently published article uses the GI Quality Improving Consortium to investigate disparities in adherence to quality indicators in Barrett's esophagus.

Adequacy of EGD Reporting: a Review of 100 Reports from 100 Endoscopists

INTRODUCTION

Esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) is commonly performed in patients with gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). An EGD report should document pertinent findings such as esophagitis, a columnar-lined esophagus (CLE), the location of the squamo-columnar and gastroesophageal junctions, the size and type of a hiatal hernia and the number and location of any biopsies. The aim of this study was to evaluate how commonly these findings were noted in the EGD reports of patients referred for antireflux surgery.

METHODS

A retrospective review was performed of patient charts from 2012 to 2015 to identify 100 consecutive EGD reports from different endoscopists in different patients. Each EGD report was reviewed for pertinent findings and the use of a classification system for esophagitis (Savory-Miller or Los Angeles) and for reporting a CLE (Prague).

RESULTS

In 100 EGD reports, esophagitis was noted in 33 patients, but was graded in only 14 (42%). A CLE was noted in 28 patients, but the length was reported in only 16 (57%) and no report used the Prague classification system. A hiatal hernia was noted in 61 patients, measured in 31 (51%) and the type classified in 26%. A biopsy was taken in 93 patients and the location noted in 86 patients (93%). The number of biopsies was recorded in only 20 patients (22%). In 12 patients the EGD was for Barrett's surveillance, yet a Seattle biopsy protocol was reported to be used in only 3 patients.

CONCLUSION

Endoscopy reports frequently do not include the use of a grading system for esophagitis or the Prague system for CLE. This hampers the assessment of change with therapy or over time. The size of a hiatal hernia was typically reported in a subjective fashion and only infrequently was the type specified. Lack of clarity about the presence of a paraesophageal hernia can impede evaluation of acute symptoms. In patients with Barrett's esophagus a standard biopsy protocol was infrequently reported to be used. These findings raise concern about the quality of upper endoscopy, both in the performance of the procedure and the documentation of findings. A consistent reporting system is recommended for routine use with upper endoscopy.

Barrett's esophagus: current standards in advanced imaging

Esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC) continues to be one of the fastest rising incident cancers in the Western population with the majority of patients presenting with late stage disease and associated with a dismal 5-year survival rate. Barrett's esophagus (BE) is the only identifiable precursor lesion to EAC. Strategies to screen for and survey BE are critical to detect earlier cancers and reduce morbidity and mortality related to EAC. A high-quality endoscopic examination with careful inspection of the Barrett's segment and adherence to the Seattle protocol for tissue sampling are critical. Advanced imaging modalities offer the potential to improve dysplasia detection, predict histopathology in real time and guide endoscopic eradication therapy (EET). Several technologies have been studied and although most are not yet recommended for routine clinical practice, high definition white light endoscopy (HD-WLE) as well as chromoendoscopy (including virtual chromoendoscopy) improved dysplasia detection in numerous studies supporting their use. Future studies should evaluate the role of artificial intelligence in optimizing detection of dysplasia in BE patients.

Best Practices in Surveillance for Barrett's Esophagus

Barrett's esophagus is the precursor lesion for esophageal adenocarcinoma. The goals of endoscopic surveillance are to detect dysplasia and early esophageal adenocarcinoma in order to improve patient outcomes. Despite the ongoing debate regarding the efficacy of surveillance, all current gastrointestinal societies recommend surveillance at this time. Optimal surveillance technique includes adequate inspection time, evaluation using high-definition white light and chromoendoscopy, appropriate documentation of the metaplastic segment using the Prague C & M criteria as well as the Paris classification should lesions be found, utilization of the Seattle biopsy protocol, and endoscopic resection of visible lesions.

Endoscopic Eradication Therapy for Barrett's Neoplasia: Where Do We Stand a Decade Later?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Barrett's esophagus (BE) is the only known precursor to esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC), a cancer associated with increasing incidence and poor survival. Early identification and effective treatment of BE-related neoplasia prior to the development of invasive adenocarcinoma are essential to limiting the morbidity and mortality associated with this cancer. In this review, we summarized the recent evidence guiding endoscopic eradication therapies (EET) for neoplastic BE.

RECENT FINDINGS

New sampling technologies and the application of artificial intelligence (AI) systems have potential to revolutionize early neoplasia detection in BE. EET for BE are safe and effective in achieving complete eradication of intestinal metaplasia (CE-IM) and reducing the progression to EAC, a practice endorsed by all GI society guidelines. EET should be considered in patients with high-grade dysplasia (HGD), intramucosal carcinoma (IMC), and select cases with low-grade dysplasia (LGD). The increasing use of endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) in the West may allow EET of select cases with submucosal EAC. Post-EET surveillance strategies will continue to evolve as knowledge of specific risk factors and long-term neoplasia recurrence rates improve. In the last decade, major advancements in EET for neoplastic BE have been achieved. These now represent the standard of care in the management of BE-related dysplasia and intramucosal cancer.

Artificial Intelligence and Its Role in Identifying Esophageal Neoplasia

Randomized trials have demonstrated that ablation of dysplastic Barrett's esophagus can reduce the risk of progression to cancer. Endoscopic resection for early stage esophageal adenocarcinoma and squamous cell carcinoma can significantly reduce postoperative morbidity compared to esophagectomy. Unfortunately, current endoscopic surveillance technologies (e.g., high-definition white light, electronic, and dye-based chromoendoscopy) lack sensitivity at identifying subtle areas of dysplasia and cancer. Random biopsies sample only approximately 5% of the esophageal mucosa at risk, and there is poor agreement among pathologists in identifying low-grade dysplasia. Machine-based deep learning medical image and video assessment technologies have progressed significantly in recent years, enabled in large part by advances in computer processing capabilities. In deep learning, sequential layers allow models to transform input data (e.g., pixels for imaging data) into a composite representation that allows for classification and feature identification. Several publications have attempted to use this technology to help identify dysplasia and early esophageal cancer. The aims of this reviews are as follows: (a) discussing limitations in our current strategies to identify esophageal dysplasia and cancer, (b) explaining the concepts behind deep learning and convolutional neural networks using language appropriate for clinicians without an engineering background, (c) systematically reviewing the literature for studies that have used deep learning to identify esophageal neoplasia, and (d) based on the systemic review, outlining strategies on further work necessary before these technologies are ready for "prime-time," i.e., use in routine clinical care.

An Analysis of the GIQuIC Nationwide Quality Registry Reveals Unnecessary Surveillance Endoscopies in Patients With Normal and Irregular Z-Lines

INTRODUCTION

Population-based estimates of adherence to Barrett's esophagus (BE) guidelines are not available. Using a national registry, we assessed surveillance intervals for patients with normal and irregular Z-lines based on the presence or absence of intestinal metaplasia (IM) and among patients with suspected or confirmed BE.

METHODS

We analyzed data from the GI Quality Improvement Consortium Registry. Endoscopy data, including procedure indication, demographics, endoscopy and histology findings, and recommendations for further endoscopy, were assessed from January 2013 through December 2019. Patients with an indication of BE screening or surveillance or an endoscopic finding of BE were included. Biopsy and surveillance practices were assessed based on the length of columnar epithelium (0 cm, <1 cm, 1-3 cm, and >3 cm) and diagnosis based on histology findings.

RESULTS

A total of 1,907,801 endoscopies were assessed; 135,704 endoscopies (7.1%) performed in 114,894 patients met the inclusion criteria (men 61.4%, Whites 91%, and mean age of 61.7 years [SD 12.5]). Among patients with normal Z-lines, surveillance endoscopy was recommended for 81% of patients with IM and 20% of individuals without IM. Among patients with irregular Z-lines, surveillance endoscopy was recommended for 81% with IM and 24% without IM. Approximately 30% of patients with confirmed nondysplastic BE (lengths 1-3 and >3 cm) had recommended surveillance intervals of <3 years.

DISCUSSION

An analysis of data from a nationwide quality registry demonstrated that patients without BE are receiving recommendations for surveillance endoscopies and many patients with nondysplastic BE are reexamined too soon.

The SpaTemp cohort: 168 nondysplastic Barrett's esophagus surveillance patients with and without progression to early neoplasia to evaluate the distribution of biomarkers over space and time

The ReBus cohort is a matched nested case-control cohort of patients with nondysplastic (ND) Barrett's esophagus (BE) at baseline who progressed (progressors) or did not progress (nonprogressors) to high-grade dysplasia (HGD) or cancer. This cohort is constructed using the most stringent inclusion criteria to optimize explorative studies on biomarkers predicting malignant progression in NDBE. These explorative studies may benefit from expanding the number of cases and by incorporating samples that allow assessment of the biomarker over space (spatial variability) and over time (temporal variability). To (i) update the ReBus cohort by identifying new progressors and (ii) identify progressors and nonprogressors within the updated ReBus cohort containing spatial and temporal information. The ReBus cohort was updated by identifying Barrett's patients referred for endoscopic work-up of neoplasia at 4 tertiary referral centers. Progressors and nonprogressors with a multilevel (spatial) endoscopy and additional prior (temporal) endoscopies were identified to evaluate biomarkers over space and over time. The original ReBus cohort consisted of 165 progressors and 723 nonprogressors. We identified 65 new progressors meeting the same strict selection criteria, resulting in a total number of 230 progressors and 723 matched nonprogressors in the updated ReBus cohort. Within the updated cohort, 61 progressors and 107 nonprogressors (mean age 61 ± 10 years) with a spatial endoscopy (median level 3 [2-4]) were identified. 33/61 progressors and 50/107 nonprogressors had a median of 3 (2-4) additional temporal endoscopies. Our updated ReBus cohort consists of 230 progressors and 723 matched nonprogressors using the most strict selection criteria. In a subgroup of 168 Barrett's patients (the SpaTemp cohort), multiple levels have been sampled at baseline and during follow-up providing a unique platform to study spatial and temporal distribution of biomarkers in BE.

Overutilization of Endoscopic Surveillance in Barrett's Esophagus: The Perils of Too Much of a Good Thing

A cost-utility analysis in the current issue of AJG examines the ramifications of the overuse of surveillance endoscopy in Barrett's esophagus (BE). This study suggests that excess surveillance is expensive, increasing costs by 50% or more, with only nominal increases in quality-adjusted life expectancy. This study joins a growing literature of cost-utility analyses that suggest that more is not likely better when it comes to surveillance endoscopy. Given the plentiful literature showing overutilization of surveillance endoscopy in BE, the authors argue for a focus on the quality of endoscopy rather than increased frequency of surveillance to improve returns on our healthcare investment.

Endoscopic eradication therapy for Barrett's oesophagus: state of the art

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Barrett's oesophagus is the only identifiable precursor lesion to oesophageal adenocarcinoma. The stepwise progression of Barrett's oesophagus to dysplasia and invasive carcinoma provides the opportunity to intervene and reduce the morbidity and mortality associated with this lethal cancer. Several studies have demonstrated the efficacy and safety of endoscopic eradication therapy (EET) for the management of Barrett's oesophagus related neoplasia. The primary goal of EET is to achieve complete eradication of intestinal metaplasia (CE-IM) followed by enrolment of patients in surveillance protocols to detect recurrence of Barrett's oesophagus and Barrett's oesophagus related neoplasia.

RECENT FINDINGS

EET depends on early and accurate detection and diagnosis of Barrett's oesophagus related neoplasia. All visible lesions should be resected followed by ablation of the remaining Barrett's epithelium. After treatment, patients should be enrolled in endoscopic surveillance programmes. For nondysplastic Barrett's oesophagus, surveillance alone is recommended. For low-grade dysplasia, both surveillance and ablation are reasonable options and should be decided on an individual basis according to patient risk factors and preferences. EET is preferred for high-grade dysplasia and intramucosal carcinoma. For T1b oesophageal adenocarcinoma, esophagectomy remains the standard of care, but endoscopic therapy can be considered in select cases.

SUMMARY

EET is now standard of care and endorsed by societal guidelines for the treatment of Barrett's oesophagus related neoplasia. Future studies should focus on risk stratification models using a combination of clinical data and biomarkers to identify ideal candidates for EET, and to predict recurrence. Optimal therapy for T1b cancer and surveillance strategy after CE-IM are topics that require further study.