Prevalence and Costs of Esophageal Strictures in the United States.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Esophageal strictures are a leading cause of dysphagia, but data regarding the epidemiology of esophageal strictures are limited. This study aimed to investigate the prevalence, health care utilization, and financial burden of esophageal strictures in the United States. METHODS: We performed a retrospective cohort study using 2 large national insurance claims databases (MarketScan and Medicare). Using International Classification of Diseases-9 and -10 diagnostic codes, annual prevalence was calculated for both cohorts overall, and stratified by age and sex strata. Most common diagnostic and procedural codes associated with esophageal strictures were extracted and analyzed to estimate health care utilization. Direct annual medical costs of esophageal strictures were calculated. RESULTS: The annual prevalence of esophageal strictures in MarketScan in 2021 was 203.14 cases/100,000 people, whereas the annual prevalence in Medicare cohort in 2017 was 1123.47 cases/100,000. Although rates were relatively stable over time, esophageal stricture prevalence increased with advancing age. No prevalence differences were noticed between males and females. Gastroesophageal reflux disease/erosive esophagitis was the top diagnostic code associated with esophageal strictures, although an increase in the proportion of eosinophilic esophagitis codes was noted over time. Esophageal dilation codes were present in ∼50% of stricture cases. The total health care costs associated with esophageal strictures were estimated at $1.39 billion in 2017. CONCLUSIONS: Esophageal strictures are common, affecting between 1/100 and 1/1000 patients in the United States, with the highest rates seen in patients aged 75 years and older. Accordingly, strictures have a significant financial burden on the health care system, with costs greater than $1 billion annually.

Adherence to prescription proton pump inhibitor therapy amongst individuals diagnosed with Barrett's esophagus.

INTRODUCTION: In the United States, clinical guidelines recommend daily use of proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) amongst individuals diagnosed with Barrett's esophagus to decrease the risk of progression to dysplasia and neoplasia. Prior studies documenting adherence to PPIs in this population have not characterized heterogeneity in adherence patterns. Factors that may relate to adherence are incompletely described. METHODS: We used administrative claims data from the Merative MarketScan Commercial Claims and Encounters database to conduct a retrospective study of adherence to prescription PPIs. A cohort of individuals diagnosed with incident Barrett's esophagus between 2010 and 2019 was identified. Group-based trajectory models were generated to detect longitudinal adherence subgroups. RESULTS: 79 701 individuals with a new diagnosis of Barrett's esophagus were identified. The best fitting model detected five distinct adherence trajectory groups: consistently high (44% of the population), moderate decline (18%), slow decline (12%), rapid decline (10%), and decline-then-increase (16%). Compared to individuals starting PPIs, those already using PPIs were less likely to have a declining adherence pattern. Other factors associated with membership in a declining adherence group included (but were not limited to): female sex, having a past diagnosis of anxiety or depression, and having one or more emergency department visits in the past year. DISCUSSION: Using an exploratory method, we detected heterogeneity in adherence to prescription PPIs. Less than half of individuals were classified into the consistently high adherence group, suggesting that many individuals with Barrett's esophagus receive inadequate pharmacologic therapy.

Pathologic complete response in patients with esophageal cancer receiving neoadjuvant chemotherapy or chemoradiation: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Neoadjuvant chemoradiation and chemotherapy are recommended for the treatment of nonmetastatic esophageal cancer. The benefit of neoadjuvant treatment is mostly limited to patients who exhibit pathologic complete response (pCR). Existing estimates of pCR rates among patients receiving neoadjuvant therapy have not been synthesized and lack precision. METHODS: We conducted an independently funded systematic review and meta-analysis (PROSPERO CRD42023397402) of pCR rates among patients diagnosed with esophageal cancer treated with neoadjuvant chemo(radiation). Studies were identified from Medline, EMBASE, and CENTRAL database searches. Eligible studies included trials published from 1992 to 2022 that focused on nonmetastatic esophageal cancer, including the gastroesophageal junction. Histology-specific pooled pCR prevalence was determined using the Freeman-Tukey transformation and a random effects model. RESULTS: After eligibility assessment, 84 studies with 6451 patients were included. The pooled prevalence of pCR after neoadjuvant chemotherapy in squamous cell carcinomas was 9% (95% CI: 6%-14%), ranging from 0% to 32%. The pooled prevalence of pCR after neoadjuvant chemoradiation in squamous cell carcinomas was 32% (95% CI: 26%-39%), ranging from 8% to 66%. For adenocarcinoma, the pooled prevalence of pCR was 6% (95% CI: 1%-12%) after neoadjuvant chemotherapy, and 22% (18%-26%) after neoadjuvant chemoradiation. CONCLUSIONS: Under one-third of patients with esophageal cancer who receive neoadjuvant chemo(radiation) experience pCR. Patients diagnosed with squamous cell carcinomas had higher rates of pCR than those with adenocarcinomas. As pCR represents an increasingly utilized endpoint in neoadjuvant trials, these estimates of pooled pCR rates may serve as an important benchmark for future trial design.

Effect of surgery versus chemotherapy in pancreatic cancer patients: a target trial emulation.

BACKGROUND: To estimate the causal effect of surgery vs chemotherapy on survival in patients with T1-3NxM0 pancreatic cancer in a rigorous framework addressing selection bias and immortal time bias. METHODS: We used population-based Danish health-care registries to conduct a cohort study emulating a hypothetical randomized trial to estimate the absolute difference in survival, comparing surgery with chemotherapy. We included pancreatic cancer patients diagnosed during 2008-2021. Exposure was surgery or chemotherapy initiated within a 16-week grace period after diagnosis. At the time of diagnosis, data of each patient were duplicated; one copy was assigned to the surgery protocol, and one copy to the chemotherapy protocol of the hypothetical trial. Copies were censored when the assigned treatment deviated from the observed treatment. To account for informative censoring, uncensored patients were weighted according to confounders. For comparison, we also applied a more conventional analysis using propensity score-based inverse probability weighting. RESULTS: We included 1744 patients with a median age of 68 years: 73.6% underwent surgery, and 18.6% had chemotherapy without surgery; 7.8% received no treatment. The 3-year survival was 39.7% (95% confidence interval [CI] = 36.7% to 42.6%) after surgery and 22.7% (95% CI = 17.7% to 28.4%) after chemotherapy, corresponding to an absolute difference of 17.0% (95% CI = 10.8% to 23.1%). In the conventional survival analysis, this difference was 23.0% (95% CI = 17.0% to 29.0%). CONCLUSION: Surgery was superior to chemotherapy in achieving long-term survival for pancreatic cancer. The difference comparing surgery and chemotherapy was substantially smaller when using the clone-censor-weight approach than conventional survival analysis.