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

Measuring and improving quality in esophageal care and swallowing disorders

Evaluating clinical care through quality-related metrics is increasingly common. There are now numerous quality statements and indicators related to the medical management of benign and pre-malignant esophageal diseases. Expert consensus leveraging evidence-based recommendations from published society guidelines has been the most frequently used basis for developing esophageal quality statements. While surgical care of patients with esophageal malignancies, including squamous cell carcinoma, has also been developed, those related to benign esophageal disease now include domains of diagnosis, treatment, and monitoring for gastroesophageal reflux disease, eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE), achalasia, and Barrett's esophagus (BE). Several recent studies evaluating adherence to quality metrics affirm substantial variation in practice patterns with opportunities for improvement in care across esophageal diseases. In particular, patient education regarding treatment options in achalasia, frequency of esophageal biopsies among patients with dysphagia to evaluate for EoE, and endoscopic evaluation within a BE segment are areas identified to have need for improvement. As the management of esophageal diseases becomes more complex and interdisciplinary, adherence to quality metrics may be a source of standardization and improvement in delivery and ultimately patient outcomes. Indeed, the development of national quality databases has resulted in a significant growth in the use of these metrics for quality improvement activities and may form the basis for future inclusion in quality reporting and payment programs.

National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) guidance on monitoring and management of Barrett's oesophagus and stage I oesophageal adenocarcinoma

Barrett's oesophagus is the only known precursor to oesophageal adenocarcinoma, a cancer with very poor prognosis. The main risk factors for Barrett's oesophagus are a history of gastro-oesophageal acid reflux symptoms and obesity. Men, smokers and those with a family history are also at increased risk. Progression from Barrett's oesophagus to cancer occurs via an intermediate stage, known as dysplasia. However, dysplasia and early cancer usually develop without any clinical signs, often in individuals whose symptoms are well controlled by acid suppressant medications; therefore, endoscopic surveillance is recommended to allow for early diagnosis and timely clinical intervention. Individuals with Barrett's oesophagus need to be fully informed about the implications of this diagnosis and the benefits and risks of monitoring strategies. Pharmacological treatments are recommended for control of symptoms, but not for chemoprevention. Dysplasia and stage 1 oesophageal adenocarcinoma have excellent prognoses, since they can be cured with endoscopic or surgical therapies. Endoscopic resection is the most accurate staging technique for early Barrett's-related oesophageal adenocarcinoma. Endoscopic ablation is effective and indicated to eradicate Barrett's oesophagus in patients with dysplasia. Future research should focus on improved accuracy for dysplasia detection via new technologies and providing more robust evidence to support pathways for follow-up and treatment.

Revisiting Proton Pump Inhibitors as Chemoprophylaxis Against the Progression of Barrett's Esophagus

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Barrett's esophagus (BE) is associated with chronic gastroesophageal reflux disease and is a known precursor to esophageal adenocarcinoma. While endoscopic surveillance strategies and the role for endoscopic eradication therapy have been well established, there has been much interest in identifying chemopreventive agents to disrupt or halt the metaplasia-dysplasia-carcinoma sequence in patients with BE.

RECENT FINDINGS

No pharmacological agent has held more hope in reducing the risk of neoplastic progression in BE than proton pump inhibitors (PPIs). However, data supporting PPIs for chemoprevention have largely been from observational cohort and case-control studies with mixed results. In this review, we revisit the literature and highlight the role of PPIs in patients with BE as it pertains to chemoprophylaxis against the progression of BE to dysplasia and esophageal adenocarcinoma.

Development and validation of a novel risk prediction algorithm to estimate 10-year risk of oesophageal cancer in primary care: prospective cohort study and evaluation of performance against two other risk prediction models

Background

Methods to identify patients at increased risk of oesophageal cancer are needed to better identify those for targeted screening. We aimed to derive and validate novel risk prediction algorithms (CanPredict) to estimate the 10-year risk of oesophageal cancer and evaluate performance against two other risk prediction models.

Methods

Prospective open cohort study using routinely collected data from 1804 QResearch® general practices. We used 1354 practices (12.9 M patients) to develop the algorithm. We validated the algorithm in 450 separate practices from QResearch (4.12 M patients) and 355 Clinical Practice Research Datalink (CPRD) practices (2.53 M patients). The primary outcome was an incident diagnosis of oesophageal cancer found in GP, mortality, hospital, or cancer registry data. Patients were aged 25-84 years and free of oesophageal cancer at baseline. Cox proportional hazards models were used with prediction selection to derive risk equations. Risk factors included age, ethnicity, Townsend deprivation score, body mass index (BMI), smoking, alcohol, family history, relevant co-morbidities and medications. Measures of calibration, discrimination, sensitivity, and specificity were calculated in the validation cohorts.

Finding

There were 16,384 incident cases of oesophageal cancer in the derivation cohort (0.13% of 12.9 M). The predictors in the final algorithms were: age, BMI, Townsend deprivation score, smoking, alcohol, ethnicity, Barrett's oesophagus, hiatus hernia, H. pylori infection, use of proton pump inhibitors, anaemia, lung and blood cancer (with breast cancer in women). In the QResearch validation cohort in women the explained variation (R2) was 57.1%; Royston's D statistic 2.36 (95% CI 2.26-2.46); C statistic 0.859 (95% CI 0.849-0.868) and calibration was good. Results were similar in men. For the 20% at highest predicted risk, the sensitivity was 76%, specificity was 80.1% and the observed risk at 10 years was 0.76%. The results from the CPRD validation were similar.

Interpretation

We have developed and validated a novel prediction algorithm to quantify the absolute risk of oesophageal cancer. The CanPredict algorithms could be used to identify high risk patients for targeted screening.

Funding

Innovate UK and CRUK (grant 105857).

Vonoprazan versus lansoprazole in erosive esophagitis - A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

Proton-pump inhibitors (PPIs) are the mainstay of treatment in erosive esophagitis (EE). An alternative to PPIs in EE is Vonoprazan, a potassium competitive acid blocker. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing vonoprazan to lansoprazole.

METHODS

Multiple databases searched through November 2022. Meta-analysis was performed to assess endoscopic healing at two, four and eight weeks, including for patients with severe EE (Los Angeles C/D). Serious adverse events (SAE) leading to drug discontinuation were assessed. The quality of evidence was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology.

RESULTS

Four RCTs with 2208 patients were included in the final analysis. Vonoprazan 20 mg once-daily was compared to lansoprazole 30 mg once-daily dosing. Among all patients, at two and eight weeks post-treatment, vonoprazan resulted in significantly higher rates of endoscopic healing as compared to lansoprazole, risk ratios (RR) 1.1, p<0.001 and RR 1.04, p=0.03. The same effect was not observed at four weeks, RR 1.03 (CI 0.99-1.06, I2=0%) following therapy. Among patients with severe EE, vonoprazan resulted in higher rates of endoscopic healing at two weeks, RR 1.3 (1.2-1.4, I2=47%), p=<0.001, at four weeks, RR 1.2 (1.1-1.3, I2=36%), p=<0.001 and at eight weeks post-treatment, RR 1.1 (CI 1.03-1.3, I2=79%), p=0.009. We found no significant difference in the overall pooled rate of SAE and pooled rate of adverse events leading to drug discontinuation. Finally, the overall certainty of evidence for our main summary estimates was rated as high (grade A).

CONCLUSION

Based on limited number of published non-inferiority RCTs, our analysis demonstrates that among patients with EE, vonoprazan 20 mg once-daily dosing achieves comparable and in those with severe EE, higher endoscopic healing rates as compared to lansoprazole 30 mg once-daily dosing. Both drugs have a comparable safety profile.