Nondysplastic Barrett's Esophagus Patients Research Articles

Barrett Esophagus: Quality of life and factors associated with illness perception

BackgroundHealth‐related Quality of life (HRQoL) in patients with Barrett's esophagus (BE), a premalignant condition, may be influenced by gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) symptoms and the risk of developing esophageal adenocarcinoma.MethodsWe aim to investigate HRQoL in non‐dysplastic Barrett Esophagus (NDBE) patients, identify factors associated with a negative illness perception of the diagnosis BE and compare outcomes between patients treated in a specialized BE center with non‐expert centers. In this multi‐center cross‐sectional study, HRQoL of NDBE patients were assessed using the Short Form 36, Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, Cancer worry Scale, and Reflux Disease Questionnaire. A multivariable, linear regression analysis was conducted to assess factors associated with illness perception (Illness perception scale) of the BE diagnosis. Outcome parameters of patients from expert centers were compared to non‐expert centers.ResultsA total of 859 NDBE patients (mean age 63.6% and 74.5% male), of which 640 from BE expert centers were included. BE patients scored similar or higher means (i.e. better) on generic HRQoL in comparison with a Dutch norm population. The multivariable regression model showed that cancer worry, GERD symptoms, signs of anxiety and depression, and female gender were associated with a negative illness perception of BE. GERD symptoms were reported in the minority (22.4%) of BE patients. Levels of anxiety symptoms were comparable to a Dutch norm population (mean 3.7 vs. 3.9 p 0.183) and lower for depression symptoms (mean 6.8 vs. 7.6 p < 0.001). Overall, there were no differences found on outcomes between expert centers and non‐expert centers.ConclusionNDBE patients scored similar or better on generic HRQoL, anxiety and depression than an age and gender matched norm population. The presence of cancer worry, gastrointestinal symptoms, anxiety and depression, and female gender are factors associated with a negative illness perception of the diagnosis BE.

A new artificial intelligence system successfully detectsand localises early neoplasia in Barrett's esophagus by using convolutional neural networks.

Background and aimsSeattle protocol biopsies for Barrett's Esophagus (BE) surveillance are labour intensive with low compliance. Dysplasia detection rates vary, leading to missed lesions. This can potentially be offset with computer aided detection. We have developed convolutional neural networks (CNNs) to identify areas of dysplasia and where to target biopsy.Methods119 Videos were collected in high‐definition white light and optical chromoendoscopy with i‐scan (Pentax Hoya, Japan) imaging in patients with dysplastic and non‐dysplastic BE (NDBE). We trained an indirectly supervised CNN to classify images as dysplastic/non‐dysplastic using whole video annotations to minimise selection bias and maximise accuracy. The CNN was trained using 148,936 video frames (31 dysplastic patients, 31 NDBE, two normal esophagus), validated on 25,161 images from 11 patient videos and tested on 264 iscan‐1 images from 28 dysplastic and 16 NDBE patients which included expert delineations. To localise targeted biopsies/delineations, a second directly supervised CNN was generated based on expert delineations of 94 dysplastic images from 30 patients. This was tested on 86 i‐scan one images from 28 dysplastic patients.FindingsThe indirectly supervised CNN achieved a per image sensitivity in the test set of 91%, specificity 79%, area under receiver operator curve of 93% to detect dysplasia. Per‐lesion sensitivity was 100%. Mean assessment speed was 48 frames per second (fps). 97% of targeted biopsy predictions matched expert and histological assessment at 56 fps. The artificial intelligence system performed better than six endoscopists.InterpretationOur CNNs classify and localise dysplastic Barrett's Esophagus potentially supporting endoscopists during surveillance.

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

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. 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. 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. 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.

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

INTRODUCTION: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.METHODS:In a blinded, nested case-control cohort, progressors and nonprogressors were matched (age, sex, and Barrett's esophagus length). All random biopsy levels from the baseline endoscopy (spatial samples) and all available previous endoscopies back to 10 years before progression (temporal samples) were assayed. Because the 1:1 ratio of progressors to nonprogressors does not reflect the real-world Barrett's population, negative and positive predictive values were adjusted for prevalence.RESULTS:Seventy-six patients (58 men), mean age of 63 ± 9 years, were studied. A high-risk score was associated with a prevalence-adjusted annual progression rate of 6.9%. The assay identified 31% of progressors when assessing a single biopsy level from the baseline endoscopy. Sensitivity increased to 50% and 69% in spatial and temporal analyses, respectively, while specificity remained at 95%.DISCUSSION:The assay identified a significant subset of NDBE patients who progress at a rate comparable with published estimates for expert-confirmed low-grade dysplasia. Assessing additional spatial and temporal biopsies increased the predictive accuracy, allowing for identification of most future progressors. Additional studies will evaluate the predictive performance of the assay in low-prevalence settings.

Barrett Esophagus Length, Nodularity, and Low-grade Dysplasia are Predictive of Progression to Esophageal Adenocarcinoma.

To investigate factors predictive of progression from nondysplastic Barrett esophagus (NDBE) or low-grade dysplasia (LGD) to high-grade dysplasia (HGD) or esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC) using a large, prospective cohort of patients, wherein all esophageal biopsies undergo expert gastrointestinal pathologist review. Efficacy and cost-effectiveness of endoscopic surveillance to detect incident EAC in the setting of Barrett esophagus (BE), particularly in NDBE patients, is questioned. Previous studies have reported factors predictive of progression to EAC to guide surveillance intervals, but their strength is limited by small sample size and absence of expert gastrointestinal pathologist involvement in esophageal biopsy review. NDBE and LGD subjects were identified from a prospective registry in a tertiary care center. "Progressors" were BE subjects who developed HGD/EAC>12 months after the initial NDBE or LGD diagnosis. Cox proportional hazards model were used to identify predictors of progression. In total, 318 with NDBE and 301 with BE-LGD (mean age, 62.6 y, 85% male) were included. The mean follow-up was 5.3 years. The 7 NDBE and 21 LGD subjects progressed to HGD/EAC. BE length [hazards ratio (HR), 1.16; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.03-1.29], presence of nodularity (HR, 4.98; 95% CI, 1.80-11.7), and baseline LGD (HR, 2.57; 95% CI, 1.13-6.57) were significant predictors of progression on multivariate analysis. In this well-defined cohort of NDBE and BE-LGD subjects, BE length, presence of LGD, and nodularity were independent predictors of progression to HGD/EAC. These factors may aid in identifying high-risk patients who may benefit from closer endoscopic surveillance/therapy.

The incidence of esophageal cancer and dysplasia in a Chinese population with nondysplastic Barrett's esophagus.

AimThe aim of this study was to investigate the incidence of dysplastic transformation of Barrett's esophagus (BE) in a Chinese population.MethodData from nondysplastic BE patients at Taichung Veterans General Hospital were collected from May 2008 to June 2017. The enrolled individuals received regular upper gastrointestinal (UGI) endoscopy during follow up. The pathological transformations, including low‐grade dysplasia (LGD), high‐grade dysplasia (HGD), or esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC), were collected prospectively until June 2017. Rates of progression were calculated in cases with a diagnosis of dysplasia or EAC.ResultsThere were 51 subjects who met the inclusion criteria, with a mean follow up of 3.71 years (SD, 1.61) and a total follow up of 189.1 patient‐years. Eight cases (15.7%) developed LGD, with a calculated incidence rate of 2.9% per year. The mean time to development of LGD was 3.26 years (SD, 2.68–3.84). One subject (2%) developed EAC, with a calculated incidence rate of 0.4% per year. No case with HGD was detected.ConclusionIn a Chinese population with nondysplastic BE, 15.7% of cases developed LGD, with an incidence rate of 2.9% per year, and 2% of cases developed EAC, with an incidence rate of 0.4% per year.

Predicting Progression in Barrett's Esophagus: Development and Validation of the Barrett's Esophagus Assessment of Risk Score (BEAR Score).

To develop and validate a scoring tool capable of accurately predicting which patients with Barrett's esophagus (BE) will progress to dysplasia and/or esophageal adenocarcinoma. Endoscopic therapies have emerged capable of eradicating BE with high efficacy and low complication rates, but which patients should receive treatment is still debated. Current knowledge of risk factors is insufficient to allow for the accurate prediction of which patients will progress to dysplasia or adenocarcinoma. We retrospectively collected data from a cohort of BE patients over a 13-year period. A multivariable logistic regression model was constructed to predict progression. A simplified risk of progression (ROP) score was developed from weighted beta coefficients. Internal validation was performed using bootstrap analysis, and model discrimination was assessed using k-fold cross-validation. The cohort included 2591 BE patients of which 133 progressed to dysplasia/adenocarcinoma. Multivariable analysis with bootstrap internal validation resulted in 5 variables associated with an increased ROP (age ≥70 years, male sex, lack of proton-pump inhibitor use, segment greater than 3 cm, and history of esophageal candidiasis). Using this model, we developed a simple ROP score between 0 and 8. Receiver operating characteristic analysis showed a cutoff of 3 or higher to have a sensitivity and specificity of 70% and 79%, respectively. Patients with a score of 3 or higher had an odds ratio of 9.04 (95% confidence interval 6.06-13.46). The c-statistic obtained from 10-fold cross-validation was 0.76 (95% confidence interval 0.72-0.79), indicating good overall discrimination. Our data show the development and internal validation of the Barrett's Esophagus Assessment of Risk Score as capable of quantifying the likelihood of progression to dysplasia/adenocarcinoma. The Barrett's Esophagus Assessment of Risk Score can be used clinically to guide treatment decisions in nondysplastic BE patients.

Quantitation of spatial and temporal variability of biomarkers for Barrett's Esophagus.

Chemoprevention and risk-stratification studies in Barrett's esophagus (BE) rely on biomarkers but the variability in their temporal and spatial expression is unknown. If such variability exists, it will impact sampling techniques and sample size calculations. Specimens from three levels of biopsies over two serial endoscopies in nondysplastic BE patients were analyzed for aneuploidy, proliferation markers (Ki67, Mcm2), and cell cycle markers (cyclin A and cyclin D1). A modification of the image cytometry technique, where cytokeratin staining automatically distinguished epithelial and stromal cells, measured aneuploidy on whole tissue sections. Other biomarkers were studied by immunohistochemistry. Coefficient of variability (SD/mean) was calculated; a value <10% indicated low variability. A total of 120 specimens (20 subjects each with three biopsy levels at two time points) from nondysplastic BE patients (71 ± 8.8 years, all Caucasian, 90% males, C5.1M7.5 ± 3.4 cm) were analyzed. The mean interval between endoscopies was 32.8 ± 8.4 months. Aneuploidy had a spatial variability of 6.8% at visit 1 (mean diploid index: 1.1 ± 0.09) and 7.9% at visit 2 (mean diploid index: 1.1 ± 0.06) and a temporal variability of 7.0-8.1% for the three levels. For other biomarkers, the spatial variability ranged from ∼5 to 30% at visit 1 and 11-92% at visit 2 and the temporal variability ranged from 0 to 77%. To conclude, of all the biomarkers, only aneuploidy had both spatial and temporal variability of <10%. Spatial and temporal variability were biomarker dependent and could be as high as 90% even without progression. These data will be useful to design chemoprevention and risk-stratification studies in BE.

Low risk of adenocarcinoma and high-grade dysplasia in patients with non-dysplastic Barrett's esophagus: Results from a cohort from a country with low esophageal adenocarcinoma incidence.

The risk of esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC) in non-dysplastic Barrett's esophagus (NDBE) is considered to be approximately 0.3% per year or even lower, according to population-based studies. Data from countries with low EAC incidence are scarce. Our principal aim was to determine the incidence of high-grade dysplasia (HGD) and EAC in NDBE. Our secondary aims were to identify the predictors of progression and to calculate the incidence of HGD/EAC, by using the calculation method for surveillance time in population-based studies. A cohort of NDBE patients was prospectively followed up. Cases of HGD and EAC (study end points) diagnosed during the first year of follow-up were considered as prevalent. Only cases with an endoscopic surveillance time > 1 year were included in our analysis. We enrolled 331 patients (251 men) in the surveillance program. Their median age was 59 years (interquartile range (IQR): 47-67 years). Their median NDBE length was 3 cm (IQR: 2-4 cm). Of these patients, 80 died during the follow-up (one from EAC) and two were lost to follow-up. After 2284 patient-years of endoscopic follow-up (median surveillance time, 5 years (IQR: 2-10 years)), we found that five cases of HGD and two cases of EAC were diagnosed. The incidence of HGD/EAC was 3.1 cases per 1000 patient-years (95% CI: 1.3-6.0) and that of EAC was 0.9 (95% CI: 0.2-2.9). The incidence of HGD/EAC in short segments (≤ 3 cm) was 0.7 cases per 1000 patient-years (95% CI: 0.3-3.4). The sole variable that we found associated with progression was NDBE length. If the total surveillance time was considered (3537 patient-years), the incidence of HGD and EAC was only slight lower. The incidence of HGD and EAC was very low in NDBE. Therefore, current surveillance guidelines must be reassessed, at least for short-segment BE.

Negative surveillance endoscopy occurs frequently in patients with short-segment non-dysplastic Barrett's esophagus.

Surveillance endoscopy of non-dysplastic Barrett's esophagus (NDBE) that fails to detect intestinal metaplasia (IM), or negative surveillance, is known to occur in clinical practice, although the frequency and possible outcomes in a large cohort in clinical practice is not well described. The goals of this study were to define frequency in which negative surveillance occurs and endoscopic outcomes in a screening cohort of short segment NDBE. A retrospective cohort (n = 184) of patients newly diagnosed with short segment NDBE at an outpatient academic tertiary care center between 2003 and 2011 were reviewed. Only those with one or more surveillance endoscopies were included to define a frequency of negative surveillance. Included patients were further assessed if they had two or more surveillance endoscopies and were classified into groups as sampling error or negative IM on consecutive surveillances based on the results of their surveillance endoscopies. The frequency of a negative surveillance endoscopy in all short-segment NDBE patients was 19.66% (92 endoscopic exams were negative for IM of 468 total surveillance exams). A negative surveillance endoscopy occurred in 40.76% (n = 75) patients. Sampling error occurred in 44.12% and negative IM on consecutive surveillance endoscopies in 55.88% of those with ≥ 2 surveillance endoscopies and an initially negative surveillance exam. The frequency of negative IM on consecutive surveillances was 19.00% of all patients who had two surveillance endoscopies. When the index diagnostic Barrett's esophagus segment length was < 1 cm, 32.14% (18/56) of all patients (with ≥ 2 surveillance endoscopies) had negative IM on consecutive surveillance endoscopies. Negative surveillance occurs frequently in short-segment NDBE. When an initial negative surveillance endoscopy occurs, it may be due to either a sampling error or lack of detectable IM on surveillance exam. When a <1 cm segment of NDBE is diagnosed, a significant proportion of patients may go on to have continuously undetected IM on consecutive surveillance endoscopic exams without intervention.

Let's Not Jump to Conclusions Regarding Low-Grade Dysplasia in Barrett's Esophagus

We were very interested to read the recent article by Wani et al.1 This study investigated the incidence of high-grade dysplasia (HGD) and esophageal adenocarcinoma in Barrett's esophagus (BE) with low-grade dysplasia (LGD). In contrast with previous studies that demonstrated the importance of LGD as a risk factor for neoplastic progression,2–5 the authors concluded that patients with BE and LGD had a low annual incidence of HGD/esophageal adenocarcinoma, which was not different from nondysplastic BE patients.