Wide-area transepithelial sampling for dysplasia detection in Barrett's esophagus: a systematic review and meta-analysis

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.

Improving esophageal cancer screening across the globe: Translating knowledge into action

Esophageal cancer (EC) is a pressing global health concern, ranking as the eighth most common cancer and the sixth leading cause for cancer-related deaths worldwide. Esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC) and esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) are the two major histological types of esophageal cancer associated with distinct risk factors and geographical distributions. Unfortunately, the outcomes for both types of EC remain discouraging, with a five-year survival rate of less than 20% when diagnosed at advanced stages. Advanced endoscopic techniques have the potential to vastly enhance patient outcomes and impede the progression of pre-malignant lesions to cancer. However, low screening rates with endoscopy due to its invasive nature and high cost hinder its effectiveness. Despite extensive research on risk predictors, a significant number of cases still go undiagnosed, highlighting the need for improved screening techniques that can be implemented at the population level. To increase uptake, a shift towards minimally invasive, well-tolerated and cost-effective non-endoscopic technologies is crucial. The implementation of such devices in primary care settings, specifically targeting high-risk populations, can be a promising strategy. With early detection and enrollment in surveillance programs, there is hope for substantial improvement in morbidity and mortality rates through modern minimally invasive endoscopic and surgical techniques.

The Role of Screening and Early Detection in Upper Gastrointestinal Cancers

Upper gastrointestinal cancers are among the leading causes of cancer deaths worldwide with exceptionally poor prognosis, which is largely attributable to frequently delayed diagnosis. Although effective screening is critical for early detection, the highly variable incidence of upper gastrointestinal cancers presents challenges, rendering universal screening programs suboptimal in most populations globally. Optimal strategies in regions of modest incidence, such as the United States, require a targeted approach, focused on high-risk individuals based on demographic, familial, and clinicopathologic risk factors. Assessment of underlying precancerous lesions has key implications for risk stratification and informing clinical decisions to improve patient outcomes.

The Evolving Role of Artificial Intelligence in Gastrointestinal Histopathology: An Update

Significant advances in artificial intelligence (AI) over the past decade potentially may lead to dramatic effects on clinical practice. Digitized histology represents an area ripe for AI implementation. We describe several current needs within the world of gastrointestinal histopathology, and outline, using currently studied models, how AI potentially can address them. We also highlight pitfalls as AI makes inroads into clinical practice.

WATS 3D : An Interobserver Study of Barrett's Esophagus-Associated Dysplasia Among Gastrointestinal Pathologists

INTRODUCTION

Wide-area transepithelial sampling with 3-dimensional computer-assisted analysis (WATS 3D ) has been shown to increase the detection rate of dysplasia (and intestinal metaplasia) in patients with Barrett's esophagus (BE). The purpose of this study was to evaluate the interobserver variability and accuracy of diagnosing BE-associated dysplasia in WATS 3D specimens among gastrointestinal (GI) pathologists without prior experience with this technology.

METHODS

Five GI pathologists underwent a 4-hour in-person (at microscope) and virtual training session and then evaluated digital images of discrete cellular foci from 60 WATS 3D cases with BE (20 nondysplastic BE [NDBE], 20 low-grade dysplasia [LGD], and 20 high-grade dysplasia/esophageal adenocarcinoma [HGD/EAC]). Each case consisted of 1 hematoxylin and eosin-stained image (cell block), and 1 liquid cytology or papanicolaou-stained smear image (120 images in total).

RESULTS

The overall kappa value among the 5 study pathologists was excellent (overall kappa = 0.93; kappa = 0.93 and 0.97 for cell block and smear specimens, respectively). There were no significant differences noted in kappa values in interpretation of the cell block vs smear specimens or in any of the individual diagnostic categories when the latter were evaluated separately. Furthermore, agreement was perfect (100%) regarding detection of neoplasia (either LGD, HGD, or EAC). Diagnoses were made with complete confidence in 91% of instances.

DISCUSSION

We conclude that GI pathologists, without any prior experience in interpretation of WATS 3D specimens, can undergo a short training session and then diagnose these specimens with a very high level of accuracy and reproducibility.

Latest Advances in Endoscopic Detection of Oesophageal and Gastric Neoplasia

Endoscopy is the gold standard for the diagnosis of cancers and cancer precursors in the oesophagus and stomach. Early detection of upper GI cancers requires high-quality endoscopy and awareness of the subtle features these lesions carry. Endoscopists performing surveillance of high-risk patients including those with Barrett's oesophagus, previous squamous neoplasia or chronic atrophic gastritis should be familiar with endoscopic features, classification systems and sampling techniques to maximise the detection of early cancer. In this article, we review the current approach to diagnosis of these conditions and the latest advanced imaging and diagnostic techniques.

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.

Benefit of adjunctive wide-area transepithelial sampling with 3-dimensional computer-assisted analysis plus forceps biopsy based on Barrett's esophagus segment length

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Wide-area transepithelial sampling with 3-dimensional computer-assisted analysis (WATS-3D) has been shown to increase the diagnostic yield of intestinal metaplasia (IM) and dysplasia within a segment of suspected or known Barrett's esophagus (BE) when used as an adjunct to forceps biopsies. Few data are available regarding how segment length affects WATS-3D yield. The purpose of this study was to evaluate adjunctive WATS-3D use in patients with varying lengths of BE.

METHODS

A total of 8471 patients (52.5% male; mean age, 63 years) enrolled in 2 registry studies were included in this study. All patients were being screened or surveyed for BE with both forceps biopsies and WATS-3D. The adjunctive and absolute yield of WATS-3D was calculated according to the length of the patient's BE segment.

RESULTS

The overall adjunctive and absolute increased diagnostic yields with WATS-3D were 47.6% and 17.5%, respectively, for detection of IM, and 139% and 2.4% for detection of dysplasia. IM and dysplasia detection both increased with the use of WATS-3D regardless of segment length. Increase in IM diagnostic yield was significantly higher in short- versus long-segment cases but higher in long-segment cases for dysplasia detection.

CONCLUSIONS

This study shows that when WATS-3D is added as an adjunct to forceps biopsies, it is effective at increasing the diagnostic yield of both BE and associated dysplasia in patients with both short and long segments of esophageal columnar-lined epithelium.

Categorizing Risks within Barrett's Esophagus To Guide Surveillance and Interception; Suggesting a New Framework

Barrett's esophagus is a precancerous condition that can progress in a stepwise manner to dysplasia and eventually esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC). Once diagnosed, patients with Barrett's esophagus are kept on surveillance to detect progression so that timely intervention can occur with endoscopic therapy. Several demographic and clinical risk factors are known to increase progression toward EAC, such as longer Barrett's segments, and these patients are kept on tighter surveillance. While p53 IHC has been advocated as an adjunct to histopathologic diagnosis, use of this biomarker is variable, and no other molecular factors are currently applied. Given the new evidence available, it is time to consider whether other risk factors or tools could be applied in clinical practice to decide on closer or attenuated surveillance. In this commentary, we summarize the most relevant risk factors for Barrett's esophagus progression, highlight the most promising novel risk stratification tools-including nonendoscopic triage and commercial biomarker panels, and propose a new framework suggesting how to incorporate risk stratification into clinical practice.

Surveillance in Barrett's Esophagus: Challenges, Progress, and Possibilities

Endoscopic surveillance of Barrett's esophagus, aiming to detect prevalent dysplasia and adenocarcinoma, followed by effective endoscopic treatment, is an integral part of the esophageal adenocarcinoma prevention paradigm. However, several limitations, such as the subtle appearance of dysplasia, sampling error (inherent in current surveillance protocols), and noncompliance with surveillance recommendations, lead to missed dysplasia and neoplasia, reducing the effectiveness of surveillance as currently practiced. Careful endoscopic assessment with high-resolution white-light endoscopy, dye-based or electronic chromoendoscopy, and comprehensive sampling of the BE mucosa, remains the cornerstone of endoscopic surveillance. Emerging innovations in this area span the gamut of more efficient sampling methods, advanced imaging tools, artificial intelligence, and molecular marker-powered approaches as adjuncts, to identify prevalent and predict incident dysplasia or adenocarcinoma. Development and implementation of validated quality indicators will allow additional advancement of this critical field. These approaches will hopefully enable efficient and effective cancer prevention and treatment.

Wide-area transepithelial sampling with computer-assisted analysis to detect high grade dysplasia and cancer in Barrett's esophagus: a multicenter randomized study

BACKGROUND

Current surveillance for Barrett's esophagus (BE), consisting of four-quadrant random forceps biopsies (FBs), has an inherent risk of sampling error. Wide-area transepithelial sampling (WATS) may increase detection of high grade dysplasia (HGD) and esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC). In this multicenter randomized trial, we aimed to evaluate WATS as a substitute for FB.

METHODS

Patients with known BE and a recent history of dysplasia, without visible lesions, at 17 hospitals were randomized to receive either WATS followed by FB or vice versa. All WATS samples were examined, with computer assistance, by at least two experienced pathologists at the CDx Diagnostics laboratory. Similarly, all FBs were examined by two expert pathologists. The primary end point was concordance/discordance for detection of HGD/EAC between the two techniques.

RESULTS

172 patients were included, of whom 21 had HGD/EAC detected by both modalities, 18 had HGD/EAC detected by WATS but missed by FB, and 12 were detected by FB but missed by WATS. The detection rate of HGD/EAC did not differ between WATS and FB (P = 0.36). Using WATS as an adjunct to FB significantly increased the detection of HGD/EAC vs. FB alone (absolute increase 10 % [95 %CI 6 % to 16 %]). Mean procedural times in minutes for FB alone, WATS alone, and the combination were 6.6 (95 %CI 5.9 to 7.1), 4.9 (95 %CI 4.1 to 5.4), and 11.2 (95 %CI 10.5 to 14.0), respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Although the combination of WATS and FB increases dysplasia detection in a population of BE patients enriched for dysplasia, we did not find a statistically significant difference between WATS and FB for the detection of HGD/EAC as single modality.

Barrett's Esophagus: An Updated Review

Barrett’s esophagus (BE) is a change in the distal esophageal mucosal lining, whereby metaplastic columnar epithelium replaces squamous epithelium of the esophagus. This change represents a pre-malignant mucosal transformation which has a known association with the development of esophageal adenocarcinoma. Gastroesophageal reflux disease is a risk factor for BE, other risk factors include patients who are Caucasian, age > 50 years, central obesity, tobacco use, history of peptic stricture and erosive gastritis. Screening for BE remains selective based on risk factors, a screening program in the general population is not routinely recommended. Diagnosis of BE is established with a combination of endoscopic recognition, targeted biopsies, and histologic confirmation of columnar metaplasia. We aim to provide a comprehensive review of the epidemiology, pathogenesis, screening and advanced techniques of detecting and eradicating Barrett’s esophagus.

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.

Today's Mistakes and Tomorrow's Wisdom in Development and Use of Biomarkers for Barrett's Esophagus

BACKGROUND

A histological diagnosis of dysplasia is our current best predictor of progression in Barrett's esophagus (BE), the precursor of esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC). Despite periodic endoscopic surveillance and assessment of dysplastic changes, we fail to identify the majority of those who progress before the development of EAC, whereas the majority of patients undergo endoscopy without showing progression.

SUMMARY

Low-grade dysplasia (LGD), confirmed by expert pathologists, identifies BE patients at higher risk for progression, but the diagnosis of LGD is challenging. Recent research indicates that progression from BE to EAC is heterogeneous and can accelerate via genome doubling and genome catastrophes, resulting in different ways to progression. We identified 3 target areas, which may help to overcome the current lack of an accurate biomarker: (1) the implementation of somatic point mutations, chromosomal alterations, and epigenetic changes (genomics and epigenomics), (2) evaluate and develop biomarkers over space and time, (3) use new sampling methods such as noninvasive self-expandable sponges and endoscopic brushes. This review focus on the state of the art in risk stratifying BE and on recent advances which may overcome the limitations of current strategies.

KEY MESSAGES

A panel of clinical factors, genomics, epigenomics, and/or proteomics will most likely lead to an assay that accurately risk stratifies BE patients into low- or high-risk for progression. This biomarker panel needs to be developed and validated in large cohorts containing a sufficient number of progressors, with testing samples over space (spatial distribution) and time (temporal distribution). For implementation in clinical practice, the technique should be affordable and applicable to formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded samples, which represent standard of care.

Management of nondysplastic Barrett’s esophagus: When to survey? When to ablate?

Barrett’s esophagus (BE), a precursor for esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC), is defined as salmon-colored mucosa extending more than 1 cm proximal to the gastroesophageal junction with histological evidence of intestinal metaplasia. The actual risk of EAC in nondysplastic Barrett’s esophagus (NDBE) is low with an annual incidence of 0.3%. The mainstay in the management of NDBE is control of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) along with enrollment in surveillance programs. The current recommendation for surveillance is four-quadrant biopsies every 2 cm (or 1 cm in known or suspected dysplasia) followed by biopsy of mucosal irregularity (nodules, ulcers, or other visible lesions) performed at 3- to 5-year intervals. Challenges to surveillance include missed cancers, suboptimal adherence to surveillance guidelines, and lack of strong evidence for efficacy. There is minimal role for endoscopic eradication therapy in NDBE. The role for enhanced imaging techniques, artificial intelligence, and risk prediction models using clinical data and molecular markers is evolving.