Dysplastic Recurrence After Successful Treatment for Early Barrett's Neoplasia: Development and Validation of a Prediction Model.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: The combination of endoscopic resection and radiofrequency ablation is the treatment of choice for eradication of Barrett's esophagus (BE) with dysplasia and/or early cancer. Currently, there are no evidence-based recommendations on how to survey patients after successful treatment, and most patients undergo frequent follow-up endoscopies. We aimed to develop and externally validate a prediction model for visible dysplastic recurrence, which can be used to personalize surveillance after treatment. METHODS: We collected data from the Dutch Barrett Expert Center Registry, a nationwide registry that captures outcomes from all patients with BE undergoing endoscopic treatment in the Netherlands in a centralized care setting. We used predictors related to demographics, severity of reflux, histologic status at baseline, and treatment characteristics. We built a Fine and Gray survival model with least absolute shrinkage and selection operator penalization to predict the incidence of visible dysplastic recurrence after initial successful treatment. The model was validated externally in patients with BE treated in Switzerland and Belgium. RESULTS: A total of 1154 patients with complete BE eradication were included for model building. During a mean endoscopic follow-up of 4 years, 38 patients developed recurrent disease (1.0%/person-year). The following characteristics were independently associated with recurrence (strongest to weakest predictor): a new visible lesion during treatment phase, higher number of endoscopic resection treatments, male sex, increasing BE length, high-grade dysplasia or cancer at baseline, and younger age. External validation showed a C-statistic of 0.91 (95% confidence interval, 0.86-0.94) with good calibration. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first externally validated model to predict visible dysplastic recurrence after successful endoscopic eradication treatment of BE with dysplasia or early cancer. On external validation, our model has good discrimination and calibration. This model can help clinicians and patients to determine a personalized follow-up strategy.

Development and External Validation of a Model to Predict Complex Treatment After Radiofrequency Ablation for Barrett's Esophagus With Early Neoplasia.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Endoscopic eradication therapy for Barrett's esophagus (BE)-related neoplasia is safe and leads to complete eradication in the majority of patients. However, a subgroup will experience a more complex treatment course with a risk for failure or disease progression. Early identification of these patients may improve patient counseling and treatment outcomes. We aimed to develop a prognostic model for a complex treatment course. METHODS: We collected data from a nationwide registry that captures outcomes for all patients undergoing endoscopic eradication therapy for early BE neoplasia. A complex treatment course was defined as neoplastic progression, treatment failure, or the need for endoscopic resection during the radiofrequency ablation treatment phase. We developed a prognostic model using logistic regression. We externally validated our model in an independent registry. RESULTS: A total of 1386 patients were included, of whom 78 (6%) had a complex treatment course. Our model identified patients with a BE length of 9 cm or longer with a visible lesion containing high-grade dysplasia/cancer, and patients with less than 50% squamous conversion after radiofrequency ablation were identified as high risk for a complex treatment. This applied to 8% of the study population and included 93% of all treatment failures and 76% of all patients with advanced neoplastic progression. The model appeared robust in multiple sensitivity analyses and performed well in external validation (area under the curve, 0.84). CONCLUSIONS: We developed a prognostic model that identified patients with a BE length of 9 cm or longer and high-grade dysplasia/esophageal adenocarcinoma and those with poor squamous regeneration as high risk for a complex treatment course. The good performance in external validation suggests that it may be used in clinical management (Netherlands Trial Register: NL7039).

Extending treatment criteria for Barrett's neoplasia: results of a nationwide cohort of 138 endoscopic submucosal dissection procedures.

BACKGROUND: The use of endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) is gradually expanding for treatment of neoplasia in Barrett's esophagus (BE). We aimed to report outcomes of all ESDs for BE neoplasia performed in the Netherlands. METHODS: Retrospective assessment of outcomes, using treatment and follow-up data from a joint database. RESULTS: 130/138 patients had complete ESDs, with 126/130 (97 %) en bloc resections. Median (interquartile range (IQR)) procedure time was 121 minutes (90-180). Pathology findings were high grade dysplasia (HGD) (5 %) or esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC) T1a (43 %) or T1b (52 %; 19 % sm1, 33 % ≥ sm2). Among resections of HGD or T1a EAC lesions, 87 % (95 %CI 75 %-92 %) were both en bloc and R0; the corresponding value for T1b EAC lesions was 49 % (36 %-60 %). Among R1 resections, 10/34 (29 %) showed residual cancer, all detected at first endoscopic follow-up. The remaining 24 patients (71 %) showed no residual neoplasia. Six of these patients underwent surgery with no residual tumor; the remaining 18 underwent endoscopic follow-up during median 31 months with 1 local recurrence (annual recurrence rate 2 %). Among R0 resections, annual local recurrence rate during median 27 months was 0.5 %. CONCLUSION: In expert hands, ESD allows safe removal of bulky intraluminal neoplasia and submucosal cancer. ESD of the latter showed R1 resection margins in 50 %, yet only one third had persisting neoplasia at follow-up. To better stratify R1 patients with an indication for additional surgery, repeat endoscopy after healing of the ESD might be a helpful possible prognostic factor for residual cancer.

Validation of the Prague C&M classification of Barrett's esophagus in clinical practice.

BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIMS: The Prague C&M classification for Barrett's esophagus has found widespread acceptance but has only been validated by Barrett's experts scoring video sequences. To date, validation has been lacking for its application in routine practice during real-time endoscopy. The aim of this study was to evaluate agreement between Barrett's experts and community hospital endoscopists when using this classification to describe Barrett's esophagus and hiatal hernia length during real-time endoscopy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients underwent two consecutive endoscopies performed by different endoscopists. The study was performed in two cohorts: one cohort was seen by Barrett's experts and the other cohort by community hospital endoscopists. Landmarks were recorded according to the Prague classification. Outcomes were interobserver agreement (assessed with intraclass correlation coefficient [ICC]), absolute agreement, and relative agreement. RESULTS: A total of 187 patients were included, with median extent of C3M5 (IQR C1 - 7 M4 - 9) for Barrett's esophagus and 3 cm (IQR 2-5) for hiatal hernia length. ICC was 0.91 (95 % confidence interval [CI] 0.88-0.93) for maximum length, 0.92 (95% CI 0.90-0.94) for circumferential extent, and 0.59 (95% CI 0.49-0.68) for hiatal hernia length. Absolute agreement within ≤ 1 cm was 74% (95% CI 68-80) for circumference, 68% (95% CI 62-75) for length, and 63% (95% CI 56 - 70) for hiatal hernia length. Relative agreement was 91% for Barrett's esophagus and 80 % for hiatal hernia length. Barrett's experts and community hospital endoscopists showed no differences in agreement. Shorter Barrett's segments (≤ 5 cm) had lower agreement compared with longer segments (> 5 cm). CONCLUSIONS: Agreement was good for Barrett's esophagus and reasonable for hiatal hernia length. These findings strengthen the value of the Prague C&M classification to describe Barrett's esophagus and hiatal hernia length. Although absolute agreement during real-time endoscopy was high, one should anticipate that Barrett's values may vary by 1 - 2 cm between two endoscopies.