Endoscopic Screening For Gastric Cancer Research Articles

Endoscopic Screening for Gastric Cancer

Population endoscopic screening for gastric cancer is generally deemed not to be cost-effective except in Japan, where its prevalence is very high. However, in the absence of screening, patients present with advanced disease, and prognosis is poor. We conducted a cost utility analysis to determine whether endoscopic screening for stomach cancer in intermediate-risk population would be cost-effective and to better define the high-risk groups in the population who would benefit from such strategy. Cost-effectiveness analysis was performed by using a Markov Model. Simulation was performed on Singapore (intermediate-risk) population and various high-risk subgroups. Comparison was made between 2-yearly endoscopic mass screening program versus no screening. Data sources were extracted from relevant studies published from 1980-2004 identified via systematic PUBMED search. Main outcome measures were deaths caused by stomach cancer averted, cost per life saved, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio expressed as cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) saved. Screening of high-risk group of Chinese men (age-standardized rate, 25.9/100,000) from 50-70 years old is highly cost-effective, with cost benefit of United States $26,836 per QALY. Screening this cohort of 199,000 subjects prevents 743 stomach cancer deaths and saves 8234 absolute life years. Cost of averting 1 cancer death is United States $247,600. Cost-effectiveness was most sensitive to incidence of stomach cancer and cost of screening endoscopy. Screening of stomach cancer in moderate to high-risk population subgroups is cost-effective. Targeted screening strategies for stomach cancer should be explored.

Helicobacter pylori-positive patients with pruritic skin diseases are at increased risk for gastric cancer.

Helicobacter pylori infection has been implicated as a possible cause of extraintestinal disorders such as skin diseases. A number of case reports describe patients with skin diseases, such as prurigo nodularis, that are associated with gastric cancer. The aim of this study was to examine the prevalence of H. pylori infection and the incidence of gastric cancer in patients with pruritic skin diseases. The patients were examined for circulating specific IgG antibodies against H. pylori in sera using ELISA. H. pylori-positive patients who were more than 40 years old underwent endoscopic screening for gastric cancer. We examined 134 patients with pruritic skin diseases, including 55 cases of cutaneous pruritus, 21 cases of prurigo chronica multiforme, 15 cases of nummular dermatitis and 43 cases of chronic urticaria. Early gastric cancer was detected in 2/36 (5.6%) patients with cutaneous pruritus and 3/16 (18.8%) with prurigo chronica multiforme. The prevalence of early gastric cancer was 5.6%, which was much higher than that among patients undergoing general endoscopic screening for gastric cancer. These results suggest that H. pylori-positive patients with pruritic skin diseases may be at increased risk for development of gastric cancer, and endoscopic screening in such patients is recommended.

Ethnic issues in endoscopy

This is one of a series of statements discussing the use of GI endoscopy in common clinical situations. The Standards of Practice Committee of the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ASGE) prepared this text. In preparing this guideline, a search of the medical literature was performed by using PubMed. Additional references were obtained from the bibliographies of the identified articles and from recommendations of expert consultants. When few or no data exist from well-designed prospective trials, emphasis is placed on results from large series and reports from recognized experts. Guidelines for appropriate use of endoscopy are based on a critical review of the available data and expert consensus at the time the guidelines are drafted. Further controlled clinical studies may be needed to clarify aspects of this guideline. This guideline may be revised as necessary to account for changes in technology, new data, or other aspects of clinical practice. The recommendations are based on reviewed studies and are graded on the quality of the supporting evidence (Table 1). The strength of individual recommendations is based on both the aggregate evidence quality and an assessment of the anticipated benefits and harms. Weaker recommendations are indicated by phrases such as "we suggest," whereas stronger recommendations are typically stated as "we recommend." This guideline is intended to be an educational device to provide information that may assist endoscopists in providing care to patients. This guideline is not a rule and should not be construed as establishing a legal standard of care or as encouraging, advocating, requiring, or discouraging any particular treatment. Clinical decisions in any particular case involve a complex analysis of the patient's condition and available courses of action. Therefore, clinical considerations may lead an endoscopist to take a course of action that varies from this guideline.

Mass endoscopic screening for gastric cancer and initiation of Helicobacter pylor (Hp) eradication therapy in changle of China - a preliminary report

Mass endoscopic screening for gastric cancer and initiation of Helicobacter pylor (Hp) eradication therapy in changle of China - a preliminary report