Assessment of Outcomes From 1-Year Surveillance After Detection of Early Gastric Cancer Among Patients at High Risk in Japan.

Importance: Single endoscopic examination often misses early gastric cancer (GC), even when both high-definition white light imaging and narrow-band imaging are used. It is unknown whether new GC can be detected approximately 1 year after intensive index endoscopic examination. Objective: To examine whether new GC can be detected approximately 1 year after intensive index endoscopic examination using both white light and narrow-band imaging. Design, Setting, and Participants: This case-control study was a preplanned secondary analysis of a randomized clinical trial involving 4523 patients with a high risk of GC who were enrolled between October 1, 2014, and September 22, 2017. Data were analyzed from December 26, 2019, to April 21, 2021. Participants in the clinical trial received index endoscopy to detect early GC via 2 examinations of the entire stomach using white light and narrow-band imaging. The duration of follow-up was 15 months. The secondary analysis included 107 patients with newly detected GC (case group) and 107 matched patients without newly detected GC (control group) within 15 months after index endoscopy. Interventions: Surveillance endoscopy was scheduled between 9 and 15 months after index endoscopy. If new lesions suspected of being early GC were detected during surveillance endoscopy, biopsies were obtained to confirm the presence of cancer. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary end point was the rate of new GC detected within 15 months after index endoscopy. The main secondary end point was identification of risk factors associated with new GC detected within 15 months after index endoscopy. Results: Among 4523 patients (mean [SD] age, 70.6 [7.5] years; 3527 men [78.0%]; all of Japanese ethnicity) enrolled in the clinical trial, 4472 received index endoscopy; the rate of early GC detected on index endoscopy was 3.0% (133 patients). Surveillance endoscopy was performed in 4146 of 4472 patients (92.7%) who received an index endoscopy; the rate of new GC detected within 15 months after index endoscopy was 2.6% (107 patients). Among 133 patients for whom early GC was detected during index endoscopy, 110 patients (82.7%) received surveillance endoscopy within 15 months after index endoscopy; the rate of newly detected GC was 10.9% (12 patients). For the secondary analysis of risk factors associated with newly detected GC, characteristics were well balanced between the 107 patients included in the case group vs the 107 patients included in the matched control group (mean [SD] age, 71.7 [7.2] years vs 71.8 [7.0] years; 94 men [87.9%] in each group; 82 patients [76.6%] vs 87 patients [81.3%] with a history of gastric neoplasm). Multivariate analysis revealed that the presence of open-type atrophic gastritis (odds ratio, 6.00; 95% CI, 2.25-16.01; P < .001) and early GC detection by index endoscopy (odds ratio, 4.67; 95% CI, 1.08-20.21; P = .04) were independent risk factors associated with new GC detection. Conclusions and Relevance: In this study, the rate of new GC detected by surveillance endoscopy approximately 1 year after index endoscopy was similar to that of early GC detected by index endoscopy. These findings suggest that 1-year surveillance is warranted for patients at high risk of GC.

Assessment of the Diagnostic Performance of Endoscopic Ultrasonography After Conventional Endoscopy for the Evaluation of Esophageal Squamous Cell Carcinoma Invasion Depth.

Importance: Distinguishing between mucosal and submucosal cancers is important for selecting the optimal treatment for patients with esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC); however, standard procedures for diagnosing cancer invasion depth have not yet been determined. Objective: To evaluate the diagnostic performance of endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) after conventional endoscopy for the evaluation of ESCC invasion depth. Design, Setting, and Participants: This prospective single-arm confirmatory diagnostic study comprising 372 patients with T1 esophageal cancer was conducted at 41 secondary or tertiary hospitals in Japan. Enrollment began on July 20, 2017; patients were enrolled in 2 steps, with the first registration occurring from August 4, 2017, to December 11, 2019, and the second from August 9, 2017, to December 11, 2019. After the completion of all first and second registration examinations, patients received treatment and were followed up for 30 days, with follow-up ending on February 14, 2020. Patients were eligible for inclusion if they had pathologically or endoscopically diagnosed esophageal cancer with T1 clinical depth of invasion. Interventions: In the first registration, nonmagnifying endoscopy (non-ME) and magnifying endoscopy (ME) were used to diagnose cancer invasion depth. In the second registration, patients from the first registration who had cancers invading the muscularis mucosa or submucosa were enrolled and received EUS. After completion of the protocol examinations, patients received treatment with endoscopic resection or esophagectomy. The pathological results of the resected specimens were used as the reference standard for evaluating cancer invasion depth. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary end point was the proportion of overdiagnosis of submucosal cancer (defined as invasion depth >200 µm) after receipt of non-ME and ME, with or without the addition of EUS. The secondary end points were underdiagnosis, sensitivity, and specificity. Results: Among 372 patients enrolled in the first registration, 371 received non-ME and ME. Of those, 300 patients were enrolled in the second registration, and 293 patients received EUS. A total of 269 patients (217 men [80.7%]; median age, 69 years; interquartile range, 62-75 years) were included in the final analysis. The addition of EUS was associated with a 6.6% increase in the proportion of overdiagnosis (from 16 of 74 patients [21.6%; 95% CI, 12.9%-32.7%] after non-ME and ME to 29 of 103 patients [28.2%; 95% CI, 19.7%-37.9%] after the addition of EUS; 1-sided P = .93). All subgroup analyses found similar increases in overdiagnosis of submucosal cancer. The addition of EUS was associated with a 4.5% reduction in the proportion of underdiagnosis (from 57 of 195 patients [29.2%; 95% CI, 23.0%-36.2%] after non-ME and ME to 41 of 166 patients [24.7%; 95% CI, 18.3%-32.0%] after the addition of EUS). After non-ME and ME, diagnostic sensitivity was 50.4% (95% CI, 41.0%-59.9%), specificity was 89.6% (95% CI, 83.7%-93.9%), and accuracy was 72.9% (95% CI, 67.1%-78.1%). After the addition of EUS, diagnostic sensitivity was 64.3% (95% CI, 54.9%-73.1%), specificity was 81.2% (95% CI, 74.1%-87.0%), and accuracy was 74.0% (95% CI, 68.3%-79.1%). Conclusions and Relevance: This study found that the addition of EUS was not associated with improvements in the diagnostic accuracy of cancer invasion depth. These findings do not support the routine use of EUS after conventional endoscopy for evaluating the invasion depth among patients with T1 ESCC.