Incidence and Prediction of Unrelated Mortality After Successful Endoscopic Eradication Therapy for Barrett's Neoplasia.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Follow-up (FU) strategies after endoscopic eradication therapy (EET) for Barrett's neoplasia do not consider the risk of mortality from causes other than esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC). We aimed to evaluate this risk during long-term FU, and to assess whether the Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI) can predict mortality. METHODS: We included all patients with successful EET from the nationwide Barrett registry in the Netherlands. Data were merged with National Statistics for accurate mortality data. We evaluated annual mortality rates (AMRs, per 1000 person-years) and standardized mortality ratio for other-cause mortality. Performance of the CCI was evaluated by discrimination and calibration. RESULTS: We included 1154 patients with a mean age of 64 years (±9). During median 59 months (p25-p75 37-91; total 6375 person-years), 154 patients (13%) died from other causes than EAC (AMR, 24.1; 95% CI, 20.5-28.2), most commonly non-EAC cancers (n = 58), cardiovascular (n = 31), or pulmonary diseases (n = 26). Four patients died from recurrent EAC (AMR, 0.5; 95% CI, 0.1-1.4). Compared with the general Dutch population, mortality was significantly increased for patients in the lowest 3 age quartiles (ie, age <71 years). Validation of CCI in our population showed good discrimination (Concordance statistic, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.72-0.84) and fair calibration. CONCLUSION: The other-cause mortality risk after successful EET was more than 40 times higher (48; 95% CI, 15-99) than the risk of EAC-related mortality. Our findings reveal that younger post-EET patients exhibit a significantly reduced life expectancy when compared with the general population. Furthermore, they emphasize the strong predictive ability of CCI for long-term mortality after EET. This straightforward scoring system can inform decisions regarding personalized FU, including appropriate cessation timing. (NL7039).

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.

Glucagon-Like Peptide-1 Receptor Agonists Do Not Increase Aspiration During Upper Endoscopy in Patients With Diabetes.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Glucagon-like peptide-1-receptor agonists (GLP1-RAs) have been associated with greater retention of gastric contents, however, there is minimal controlled, population-based data evaluating the potential adverse effects of GLP1-RA in the periprocedural setting. We aimed to determine if there is increased risk of aspiration and aspiration-related complications after upper endoscopy in patients using GLP1-RAs. METHODS: We used a nationwide commercial administrative claims database to conduct a retrospective cohort study of patients aged 18 to 64 with type 2 diabetes who underwent outpatient upper endoscopy from 2005 to 2021. We identified 6,806,046 unique upper endoscopy procedures. We compared claims for aspiration and associated pulmonary adverse events in the 14 days after upper endoscopy between users of GLP1-RAs, dipeptidyl peptidase 4 inhibitors (DPP4is), and chronic opioids. We adjusted for age, sex, Charlson Comorbidity score, underlying respiratory disease, and gastroparesis. RESULTS: We found that pulmonary adverse events after upper endoscopy are rare, ranging from 6 to 25 events per 10,000 procedures. When comparing GLP1-RAs with DPP4i, crude relative risks of aspiration (0.67; 95% CI, 0.25-1.75), aspiration pneumonia (0.95; 95% CI, 0.40-2.29), pneumonia (1.07; 95% CI, 0.62-1.86), or respiratory failure (0.75; 95% CI, 0.38-1.48) were not higher in patients prescribed a GLP1-RA. When comparing GLP1-RAs with opioids, crude relative risks were 0.42 (95% CI, 0.15-1.16) for aspiration, 0.60 (95% CI, 0.24-1.52) for aspiration pneumonia, 0.30 (95% CI, 0.19-0.49) for pneumonia, and 0.24 (95% CI, 0.13-0.45) for respiratory failure. These results were consistent across several sensitivity analyses. CONCLUSIONS: GLP1-RA use is not associated with an increased risk of pulmonary complications after upper endoscopy compared with DPP4i use in patients with type 2 diabetes.

Prevalence and Predictors of Barrett's Esophagus After Negative Initial Endoscopy: Analysis From Two National Databases.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Guidelines suggest a single screening esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) in patients with multiple risk factors for Barrett's esophagus (BE). We aimed to determine BE prevalence and predictors on repeat EGD after a negative initial EGD, using 2 large national databases (GI Quality Improvement Consortium [GIQuIC] and TriNetX). METHODS: Patients who underwent at least 2 EGDs were included and those with BE or esophageal adenocarcinoma detected at initial EGD were excluded. Patient demographics and prevalence of BE on repeat EGD were collected. Multivariate logistic regression was performed to assess for independent risk factors for BE detected on the repeat EGD. RESULTS: In 214,318 and 153,445 patients undergoing at least 2 EGDs over a median follow-up of 28-35 months, the prevalence of BE on repeat EGD was 1.7% in GIQuIC and 3.4% in TriNetX, respectively (26%-45% of baseline BE prevalence). Most (89%) patients had nondysplastic BE. The prevalence of BE remained stable over time (from 1 to >5 years from negative initial EGD) but increased with increasing number of risk factors. BE prevalence in a high-risk population (gastroesophageal reflux disease plus ≥1 risk factor for BE) was 3%-4%. CONCLUSIONS: In this study of >350,000 patients, rates of BE on repeat EGD ranged from 1.7%-3.4%, and were higher in those with multiple risk factors. Most were likely missed at initial evaluation, underscoring the importance of a high-quality initial endoscopic examination. Although routine repeat endoscopic BE screening after a negative initial examination is not recommended, repeat screening may be considered in carefully selected patients with gastroesophageal reflux disease and ≥2 risk factors for BE, potentially using nonendoscopic tools.

Significant Reduction in the Diagnosis of Barrett's Esophagus and Related Dysplasia During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

INTRODUCTION: The coronavirus disease 19 (COVID-19) pandemic disrupted endoscopy practices, creating unprecedented decreases in cancer screening and surveillance services. We aimed to assess the impact of the pandemic on the proportion of patients diagnosed with Barrett's esophagus (BE) and BE-related dysplasia and adherence to established quality indicators. METHODS: Data from all esophagogastroduodenoscopies in the GI Quality Improvement Consortium, a national repository of matched endoscopy and pathology data, were analyzed from January 2018 to December 2022. Four cohorts were created based on procedure date and COVID-19 data: pre-pandemic (January 2018 to February 2020), pandemic-phase I (March 2020 to July 2020), pandemic-phase II (August 2020 to May 2021), and pandemic-phase III (June 2021 to December 2022). Observed and expected number of BE and BE-related dysplasia cases per month and adherence to the Seattle biopsy protocol and recommended surveillance intervals for nondysplastic BE (NDBE) were evaluated. RESULTS: Among 2,446,857 esophagogastroduodenoscopies performed during the study period, 104,124 (4.3%) had pathology-confirmed BE. The histologic distribution was 87.4% NDBE, 1.8% low-grade dysplasia, 2.4% indefinite for dysplasia, and 1.4% high-grade dysplasia. The number of monthly BE (-47.9% pandemic-phase I, -21.5% pandemic-phase II, and -19.0% pandemic-phase III) and BE-related dysplasia (high-grade dysplasia: 41.2%, -27.7%, and -19.0%; low-grade dysplasia: 49.1%, -35.3%, and -26.5%; any dysplasia: 46.7%, -32.3%, and -27.9%) diagnoses were significantly reduced during the pandemic phases compared with pre-pandemic data. Adherence rates to the Seattle protocol and recommended surveillance intervals for NDBE did not decline during the pandemic. DISCUSSION: There was a significant decline in the number of BE and BE-related dysplasia diagnoses during the COVID-19 pandemic, with an approximately 50% reduction in the number of cases of dysplasia diagnosed in the early pandemic. The absence of a compensatory increase in diagnoses in the pandemic-phase II and III periods may result in deleterious downstream effects on esophageal adenocarcinoma morbidity and mortality.

Multicenter, Prospective Trial of Nonendoscopic Biomarker-Driven Detection of Barrett's Esophagus and Esophageal Adenocarcinoma.

INTRODUCTION: Preliminary data suggest that an encapsulated balloon (EsoCheck), coupled with a 2 methylated DNA biomarker panel (EsoGuard), detects Barrett's esophagus (BE) and esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC) with high accuracy. The initial assay requires sample freezing upon collection. The purpose of this study was to assess a next-generation EsoCheck sampling device and EsoGuard assay in a much-enlarged multicenter study clinically enhanced by using a Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendments of 1988-compliant assay and samples maintained at room temperature. METHODS: Cases with nondysplastic BE (NDBE), dysplastic BE (indefinite for dysplasia, low-grade dysplasia, high-grade dysplasia), EAC, junctional adenocarcinoma, plus endoscopy controls without esophageal intestinal metaplasia, were prospectively enrolled. Medical assistants at 6 institutions delivered the encapsulated balloon per orally with inflation in the stomach. The inflated balloon sampled the distal 5 cm of the esophagus and then was deflated and retracted into the capsule, preventing sample contamination. EsoGuard bisulfite sequencing assayed levels of methylated vimentin and methylated cyclin A1. RESULTS: A total of 243 evaluable patients-88 cases (median age 68 years, 78% men, 92% White) and 155 controls (median age 57 years, 41% men, 88% White)-underwent adequate EsoCheck sampling. The mean procedural time was approximately 3 minutes. Cases included 31 with NDBE, 16 with indefinite for dysplasia/low-grade dysplasia, 23 with high-grade dysplasia, and 18 with EAC/junctional adenocarcinoma. Thirty-seven NDBE and dysplastic BE cases (53%) were short-segment BE (<3 cm). Overall sensitivity was 85% (95% confidence interval 0.78-0.93) and specificity was 85% (95% confidence interval 0.79-0.90). Sensitivity for NDBE was 84%. EsoCheck/EsoGuard detected 100% of cancers (n = 18). DISCUSSION: EsoCheck/EsoGuard demonstrated high sensitivity and specificity in detecting BE and BE-related neoplasia.

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.

Liquid nitrogen spray cryotherapy for eradication of dysplastic Barrett's esophagus: results from a multicenter prospective registry.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Liquid nitrogen spray cryotherapy (SCT) is an alternative to radiofrequency ablation (RFA) for eradication of dysplastic Barrett's esophagus (BE). We aimed to assess the safety, efficacy, and durability of SCT in a multicenter U.S. registry. METHODS: This is a multicenter prospective registry of adults with BE treated with truFreeze Spray Cryotherapy (Steris, Mentor, Ohio, USA) (4 community and 11 academic sites, 2013-2022). Complete eradication of intestinal metaplasia (CEIM) and dysplasia (CED) were assessed in BE with dysplasia or intramucosal adenocarcinoma. Kaplan-Meier analysis of CEIM and CED was performed. Hazard ratios for CEIM stratified by baseline risk factors were calculated. RESULTS: Among 138 subjects with low-grade dysplasia (24%), high-grade dysplasia (49%), and intramucosal adenocarcinoma (27%), 34% received prior RFA therapy. Subjects received a median of 2 SCT sessions. Adverse events were uncommon, with 5.5% reporting strictures and 0.7% a perforation. Rates of CEIM and CED, respectively, were 66% and 84% after 2 years and 67% and 92% after 3 years. In RFA-naïve patients, CEIM was 77% and CED was 96% at 3 years. Increasing BE length (per centimeter: adjusted hazard ratio, 0.90; 95% confidence interval, 0.83-0.96) and prior treatment with RFA (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.39; 95% confidence interval, 0.22-0.69) were associated with a lower rate of CEIM. Recurrence occurred in 8.8% (n = 6) at a mean follow-up of 2.5 years after CEIM. CONCLUSION: In this largest reported prospective cohort, liquid nitrogen SCT was safe and effective for the treatment of dysplastic and neoplastic BE. Response was lower in those with prior failed RFA; in that cohort, approximately 50% attained CEIM at 3 years.

Gastrointestinal-isolated Distress is Common in Alpha-gal Allergic Patients on Mammalian Meat Challenge.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Alpha-gal allergy causes a delayed reaction to mammalian meats and has been reported worldwide. Patients with the allergy may present with isolated gastrointestinal (GI) symptoms, but this phenotype is poorly understood. METHODS: We pooled and analyzed symptoms and demographics of patients from two prospective cohorts of patients with a diagnosis of alpha-gal allergy who reacted after eating mammalian meat under observation. We compared the characteristics of patients who demonstrated GI-isolated symptoms on a challenge with those who exhibited symptoms outside the GI tract (skin, respiratory, and circulatory). RESULTS: Among the 91 children and adult alpha-gal allergic patients who exhibited symptoms after oral challenge with mammalian meat, 72.5% experienced GI distress with one or more GI symptoms, which was the most frequent class of symptoms, compared with skin changes in 57.1% and respiratory distress in 5.5%. The most common GI symptoms were abdominal pain (71%) and vomiting (22.0%). GI-isolated symptoms occurred in 37 patients (40.7%) who reacted, and those patients reacted more quickly than patients who exhibited systemic symptoms (median onset of symptoms in GI-isolated group 90 min vs 120 min) and were more likely to be children than adults (relative risk=1.94, 95% CI: 1.04-3.63). CONCLUSIONS: Isolated-GI distress occurred in 4 in every 10 alpha-gal allergic individuals who developed symptoms on oral food challenge with mammalian meat. Alpha-gal allergic patients, particularly children, may exhibit GI distress alone, and adult and pediatric gastroenterologists should be aware of the diagnosis and management of the allergy.

A Delphi Method for Development of a Barrett's Esophagus Question Prompt List as a Communication Tool for Optimal Patient-physician Communication.

BACKGROUND METHODS: The question prompt list content was derived through a modified Delphi process consisting of 3 rounds. In round 1, experts provided 5 answers to the prompts "What general questions should patients ask when given a new diagnosis of Barrett's esophagus" and "What questions do I not hear patients asking, but given my expertise, I believe they should be asking?" Questions were reviewed and categorized into themes. In round 2, experts rated questions on a 5-point Likert scale. In round 3, experts rerated questions modified or reduced after the previous rounds. Only questions rated as "essential" or "important" were included in Barrett's esophagus question prompt list (BE-QPL). To improve usability, questions were reduced to minimize redundancy and simplified to use language at an eighth-grade level (Fig. 1). RESULTS: Twenty-one esophageal medical and surgical experts participated in both rounds (91% males; median age 52 years). The expert panel comprised of 33% esophagologists, 24% foregut surgeons, and 24% advanced endoscopists, with a median of 15 years in clinical practice. Most (81%), worked in an academic tertiary referral hospital. In this 3-round Delphi technique, 220 questions were proposed in round 1, 122 (55.5%) were accepted into the BE-QPL and reduced down to 76 questions (round 2), and 67 questions (round 3). These 67 questions reached a Flesch Reading Ease of 68.8, interpreted as easily understood by 13 to 15 years olds. CONCLUSIONS: With multidisciplinary input, we have developed a physician-derived BE-QPL to optimize patient-physician communication. Future directions will seek patient feedback to distill the questions further to a smaller number and then assess their usability.

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.

Burden and Cost of Gastrointestinal, Liver, and Pancreatic Diseases in the United States: Update 2021.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Gastrointestinal diseases account for considerable health care use and expenditures. We estimated the annual burden, costs, and research funding associated with gastrointestinal, liver, and pancreatic diseases in the United States. METHODS: We generated estimates using data from the National Ambulatory Medical Care Survey; National Hospital Ambulatory Medical Care Survey; Nationwide Emergency Department Sample; National Inpatient Sample; Kids' Inpatient Database; Nationwide Readmissions Database; Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results program; National Vital Statistics System; Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Wide-Ranging Online Data for Epidemiologic Research; MarketScan Commercial Claims and Encounters data; MarketScan Medicare Supplemental data; United Network for Organ Sharing registry; Medical Expenditure Panel Survey; and National Institutes of Health (NIH). RESULTS: Gastrointestinal health care expenditures totaled $119.6 billion in 2018. Annually, there were more than 36.8 million ambulatory visits for gastrointestinal symptoms and 43.4 million ambulatory visits with a primary gastrointestinal diagnosis. Hospitalizations for a principal gastrointestinal diagnosis accounted for more than 3.8 million admissions, with 403,699 readmissions. A total of 22.2 million gastrointestinal endoscopies were performed, and 284,844 new gastrointestinal cancers were diagnosed. Gastrointestinal diseases and cancers caused 255,407 deaths. The NIH supported $3.1 billion (7.5% of the NIH budget) for gastrointestinal research in 2020. CONCLUSIONS: Gastrointestinal diseases are responsible for millions of health care encounters and hundreds of thousands of deaths that annually costs billions of dollars in the United States. To reduce the high burden of gastrointestinal diseases, focused clinical and public health efforts, supported by additional research funding, are warranted.

Rio de Janeiro Global Consensus on Landmarks, Definitions, and Classifications in Barrett's Esophagus: World Endoscopy Organization Delphi Study.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Despite the significant advances made in the diagnosis and treatment of Barrett's esophagus (BE), there is still a need for standardized definitions, appropriate recognition of endoscopic landmarks, and consistent use of classification systems. Current controversies in basic definitions of BE and the relative lack of anatomic knowledge are significant barriers to uniform documentation. We aimed to provide consensus-driven recommendations for uniform reporting and global application. METHODS: The World Endoscopy Organization Barrett's Esophagus Committee appointed leaders to develop an evidence-based Delphi study. A working group of 6 members identified and formulated 23 statements, and 30 internationally recognized experts from 18 countries participated in 3 rounds of voting. We defined consensus as agreement by ≥80% of experts for each statement and used the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations (GRADE) tool to assess the quality of evidence and the strength of recommendations. RESULTS: After 3 rounds of voting, experts achieved consensus on 6 endoscopic landmarks (palisade vessels, gastroesophageal junction, squamocolumnar junction, lesion location, extraluminal compressions, and quadrant orientation), 13 definitions (BE, hiatus hernia, squamous islands, columnar islands, Barrett's endoscopic therapy, endoscopic resection, endoscopic ablation, systematic inspection, complete eradication of intestinal metaplasia, complete eradication of dysplasia, residual disease, recurrent disease, and failure of endoscopic therapy), and 4 classification systems (Prague, Los Angeles, Paris, and Barrett's International NBI Group). In round 1, 18 statements (78%) reached consensus, with 12 (67%) receiving strong agreement from more than half of the experts. In round 2, 4 of the remaining statements (80%) reached consensus, with 1 statement receiving strong agreement from 50% of the experts. In the third round, a consensus was reached on the remaining statement. CONCLUSIONS: We developed evidence-based, consensus-driven statements on endoscopic landmarks, definitions, and classifications of BE. These recommendations may facilitate global uniform reporting in BE.

Wide Variability in Dysplasia Detection Rate and Adherence to Seattle Protocol and Surveillance Recommendations in Barrett's Esophagus: A Population-Based Analysis Using the GIQuIC National Quality Benchmarking Registry.

INTRODUCTION: Variability in adherence rates to the Seattle protocol and to surveillance interval recommendations, established quality indicators (QIs) in Barrett's esophagus (BE), is unknown. METHODS: We evaluated endoscopist and site-based adherence rates to these QIs from January 2018 to May 2021 using the GI Quality Improvement Consortium national registry with matched endoscopy and pathology data. RESULTS: Across 153 practices with 572 endoscopists performing 20,155 endoscopies, adherence to the Seattle protocol varied by endoscopists (median 93.8%, IQR 18.9%) and by site (median 90.0%, IQR 20.1%). Adherence to appropriate surveillance intervals for nondysplastic BE also varied by endoscopist (median 82.4%, IQR 36.3%) and site (median 77.2%, IQR 29.8%). The overall dysplasia detection rate was 3.1% and varied among endoscopists and sites. DISCUSSION: These US population-based results can serve as a benchmark for quality initiatives and intervention trials aimed at improving outcomes for patients with BE.

Alpha-Gal Sensitization in a US Screening Population Is Not Associated With a Decreased Meat Intake or Gastrointestinal Symptoms.

INTRODUCTION: Patients with alpha-gal syndrome, a delayed reaction to mammalian meat, can present with isolated gastrointestinal (GI) symptoms. We aimed to estimate the frequency of alpha-gal sensitization in a Southeastern US population and determine the association between sensitization and mammalian product dietary intake or GI symptoms. METHODS: We performed a cross-sectional study of participants who underwent a screening colonoscopy at our center between 2013 and 2015. We quantified serum alpha-gal immunoglobulin E antibodies in participants who were prospectively enrolled at screening colonoscopy and compared diet intake and lower GI symptoms reported in standardized questionnaires among those with elevated versus no alpha-gal IgE antibodies. RESULTS: Alpha-gal IgE antibodies were common-31.4% of screening colonoscopy participants (127 of 404) had elevated serum alpha-gal IgE >0.1 kU/L. Alpha-gal-sensitized participants endorsed similar rates of abdominal pain compared with those without alpha-gal antibodies (33% vs 38%, adjusted odds ratio 0.9, 95% confidence interval 0.7-1.3). Mammalian meat consumption did not differ based on alpha-gal sensitization status (average 1.43 servings/d in sensitized subjects vs 1.50 in alpha-gal IgE-negative subjects, P = 0.9). Alpha-gal-sensitized participants with levels ≥10 (n = 21) were overrepresented in the lowest quartiles of mammalian meat consumption, but not among those with GI symptoms in general. Participants with high alpha-gal antibody levels >2 kU/L (n = 45) or ≥10 U/L (n = 21) did not have a reduced mean daily mammalian meat intake compared with seronegative people. DISCUSSION: Elevated alpha-gal IgE antibodies were common and not associated with a reduced mammalian meat intake, abdominal pain, or diarrhea. Seropositivity did not predict symptomatic alpha-gal sensitization in this general screening population. Other host factors likely contribute to the phenotypic expression of alpha-gal syndrome.

Patients With Esophageal Adenocarcinoma With Prior Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease Symptoms Are Similar to Those Without Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease: A Cross-Sectional Study.

INTRODUCTION: A substantial proportion of patients with esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC) do not report gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) symptoms. This study aimed to compare the risk factor profiles and cancer stage at presentation of patients with EAC with and without prior GERD. METHODS: In this retrospective cross-sectional study, patients with EAC were divided into 2 cohorts: (i) EAC with prior GERD: patients who reported typical GERD symptoms (heartburn or regurgitation) ≥1 year before cancer diagnosis and (ii) EAC without prior GERD: patients who did not report prior GERD symptoms or reported symptoms within 1 year of their cancer diagnosis. Baseline demographics, risk factors, and cancer stage at presentation were compared between the 2 cohorts. In addition, the distribution of patients based on numbers of BE/EAC-associated risk factors (1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 or more) was examined in the symptomatic and asymptomatic cohorts. RESULTS: Over 13 years, 388 patients with EAC with prior GERD and 245 patients with EAC without prior GERD were recruited. Both groups had similar baseline demographics and risk factors, but patients with EAC with prior GERD were more likely to have a history of BE. Asymptomatic patients had more advanced disease. Patients with 3 or more BE/EAC-related risk factors formed the largest proportion of patients in both the symptomatic and asymptomatic cohorts. DISCUSSION: Patients with EAC with and without prior GERD symptoms are phenotypically similar, suggesting that BE screening efforts to prevent or detect early EAC should not be restricted to just those with GERD.

A Consensus Diagnosis Utilizing Surface KI-67 Expression as an Ancillary Marker in Low-Grade Dysplasia Helps Identify Patients at High Risk of Progression to High-Grade Dysplasia and Esophaegal Adenocarcinoma.

Esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC) develops in a step-wise manner, from low-grade dysplasia (LGD) to high-grade dysplasia (HGD), and ultimately to invasive EAC. However, there remains diagnostic uncertainty about LGD and its risk of progression to HGD/EAC. The aim is to investigate the role of Ki-67, immune-histochemical marker of proliferation, surface expression in patients with confirmed LGD, and risk stratify progression to HGD/EAC. A retrospective cohort study was conducted. Patients with confirmed LGD and indefinite for dysplasia (IND), with a mean follow-up of ≥1 year, were included. Pathology specimens were stained for Ki-67 and analyzed for evidence of surface expression. Our results reveal that 29% of patients with confirmed LGD who stained positive with Ki-67 progressed to HGD/EAC as opposed to none (0%) of the patients who stained negative, a statistically significant result (P = 0.003). Similarly, specimens from patients with IND were stained and analyzed revealing a nonsignificant trend toward a higher rate of progression for Ki-67 positive cases versus Ki-67 negative, 30% versus 21%, respectively. Ki-67 expression by itself can identify patients with LGD at a high risk of progression.

Utility and Cost-Effectiveness of a Nonendoscopic Approach to Barrett's Esophagus Surveillance After Endoscopic Therapy.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: A non-endoscopic approach to Barrett's esophagus (BE) surveillance after radiofrequency ablation (RFA) would offer a less invasive method for monitoring. We assessed the test characteristics and cost-effectiveness of the Cytosponge (Medtronic, Minneapolis, MN) in post-RFA patients. METHODS: We performed a multicenter study of dysplastic BE patients after at least one round of RFA. A positive Cytosponge before endoscopy was defined as intestinal metaplasia (IM) on cytological assessment and/or TFF3 immunohistochemistry. Sensitivity, specificity, and receiver operator characteristic (ROC) curves were calculated. Multivariable regression was used to estimate the odds of a positive Cytosponge in BE. A microsimulation cost-effectiveness model was performed to assess outcomes of various surveillance strategies: endoscopy-only, Cytosponge-only, and alternating endoscopy/Cytosponge. RESULTS: Of 234 patients, Cytosponge adequately sampled the distal esophagus in 175 (75%). Of the 142 with both endoscopic and histologic data, 19 (13%) had residual/recurrent BE. For detecting any residual Barrett's, Cytosponge had a sensitivity of 74%, specificity of 85%, accuracy of 84%, and ROC curve showed an area under the curve of 0.74. The adjusted odds of a positive Cytosponge in BE were 17.1 (95% CI, 5.2-55.9). Cytosponge-only surveillance dominated all the surveillance strategies, being both less costly and more effective. Cytosponge-only surveillance required <1/4th the endoscopies, resulting in only 0.69 additional EAC cases/1000 patients, and no increase in EAC deaths when compared to currently-practiced endoscopy-only surveillance. CONCLUSIONS: A positive Cytosponge test was strongly associated with residual BE after ablation. While the assay needs further refinement in this context, it could serve as a cost-effective surveillance examination.

Massively Parallel Sequencing of Esophageal Brushings Enables an Aneuploidy-Based Classification of Patients With Barrett's Esophagus.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Aneuploidy has been proposed as a tool to assess progression in patients with Barrett's esophagus (BE), but has heretofore required multiple biopsies. We assessed whether a single esophageal brushing that widely sampled the esophagus could be combined with massively parallel sequencing to characterize aneuploidy and identify patients with disease progression to dysplasia or cancer. METHODS: Esophageal brushings were obtained from patients without BE, with non-dysplastic BE (NDBE), low-grade dysplasia (LGD), high-grade dysplasia (HGD), or adenocarcinoma (EAC). To assess aneuploidy, we used RealSeqS, a technique that uses a single primer pair to interrogate ∼350,000 genome-spanning regions and identify specific chromosome arm alterations. A classifier to distinguish NDBE from EAC was trained on results from 79 patients. An independent validation cohort of 268 subjects was used to test the classifier at distinguishing patients at successive phases of BE progression. RESULTS: Aneuploidy progression was associated with gains of 1q, 12p, and 20q and losses on 9p and 17p. The entire chromosome 8q was often gained in NDBE, whereas focal gain of 8q24 was identified only when there was dysplasia. Among validation subjects, a classifier incorporating these features with a global measure of aneuploidy scored positive in 96% of EAC, 68% of HGD, but only 7% of NDBE. CONCLUSIONS: RealSeqS analysis of esophageal brushings provides a practical and sensitive method to determine aneuploidy in BE patients. It identifies specific chromosome changes that occur early in NDBE and others that occur late and mark progression to dysplasia. The clinical implications of this approach can now be tested in prospective trials.

Surveillance After Treatment of Barrett's Esophagus Benefits Those With High-Grade Dysplasia or Intramucosal Cancer Most.

INTRODUCTION: Endoscopic eradication therapy with radiofrequency ablation (RFA) and endoscopic mucosal resection is a safe and effective treatment for Barrett's esophagus. Although the outcomes of surveillance endoscopy after successful endoscopic eradication therapy have been described, no previous studies have modeled the natural history or the effect of surveillance endoscopy after successful ablation to prevent progression to invasive esophageal adenocarcinoma. METHODS: The US RFA Registry is a multicenter registry consisting of patients treated with RFA for Barrett's esophagus at 148 institutions (113 community-based and 35 academic-affiliated). The authors fit models to impute the natural history of recurrence and neoplastic progression after any recurrence or retreatment. Natural history estimates of invasive adenocarcinoma after ablation therapy were compared with as-treated estimates at 5 years to derive the preventive risk difference for surveillance. RESULTS: Natural history estimates for the postablation progression of high-grade dysplasia (HGD) or intramucosal adenocarcinoma to invasive adenocarcinoma after treatment were 6.3% at 5 years compared with 1.3% for low-grade dysplasia (LGD). The natural history model found a much higher preventative risk difference for surveillance for HGD/intramucosal adenocarcinoma (-4.8%), compared with LGD (-1.1%). The numbers needed to surveil at 5 years were 21 and 90 for these groups, respectively, to prevent one case of invasive esophageal adenocarcinoma, making surveillance after successful ablation of baseline HGD more than 4 times as effective at preventing invasive cancer than after successful ablation of baseline LGD. DISCUSSION: Endoscopic surveillance after successful ablation of baseline HGD or intramucosal cancer is much more effective than surveillance after successful treatment of baseline LGD in averting invasive adenocarcinoma. Although the modest benefits of surveillance for treated LGD may be greater than the risks for patients at average risk for adverse effects of endoscopy, clinicians should concentrate on retaining patients with baseline HGD or cancer in endoscopic surveillance programs.