COMPUTER-AIDED DIAGNOSIS IMPROVES CHARACTERIZATION OF BARRETT'S NEOPLASIA BY GENERAL ENDOSCOPISTS.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Characterization of visible abnormalities in Barrett esophagus (BE) patients can be challenging, especially for unexperienced endoscopists. This results in suboptimal diagnostic accuracy and poor inter-observer agreement. Computer-aided diagnosis (CADx) systems may assist endoscopists. We aimed to develop, validate and benchmark a CADx system for BE neoplasia. METHODS: The CADx system received pretraining with ImageNet with consecutive domain-specific pretraining with GastroNet which includes 5 million endoscopic images. It was subsequently trained and internally validated using 1,758 narrow-band imaging (NBI) images of early BE neoplasia (352 patients) and 1,838 NBI images of non-dysplastic BE (173 patients) from 8 international centers. CADx was tested prospectively on corresponding image and video test sets with 30 cases (20 patients) of BE neoplasia and 60 cases (31 patients) of non-dysplastic BE. The test set was benchmarked by 44 general endoscopists in two phases (phase 1: no CADx assistance; phase 2: with CADx assistance). Ten international BE experts provided additional benchmark performance. RESULTS: Stand-alone sensitivity and specificity of the CADx system were 100% and 98% for images and 93% and 96% for videos, respectively. CADx outperformed general endoscopists without CADx assistance in terms of sensitivity (p=0.04). Sensitivity and specificity of general endoscopist increased from 84% to 96% and 90 to 98% with CAD assistance (p<0.001), respectively. CADx assistance increased endoscopists' confidence in characterization (p<0.001). CADx performance was similar to Barrett experts. CONCLUSION: CADx assistance significantly increased characterization performance of BE neoplasia by general endoscopists to the level of expert endoscopists. The use of this CADx system may thereby improve daily Barrett surveillance.

A Prediction Model for Successful Increase of Adalimumab Dose Intervals in Patients with Crohn's Disease: Secondary Analysis of the Pragmatic Open-Label Randomised Controlled Non-inferiority LADI Trial.

BACKGROUND: In the pragmatic open-label randomised controlled non-inferiority LADI trial we showed that increasing adalimumab (ADA) dose intervals was non-inferior to conventional dosing for persistent flares in patients with Crohn's disease (CD) in clinical and biochemical remission. AIMS: To develop a prediction model to identify patients who can successfully increase their ADA dose interval based on secondary analysis of trial data. METHODS: Patients in the intervention group of the LADI trial increased ADA intervals to 3 and then to 4 weeks. The dose interval increase was defined as successful when patients had no persistent flare (> 8 weeks), no intervention-related severe adverse events, no rescue medication use during the study, and were on an increased dose interval while in clinical and biochemical remission at week 48. Prediction models were based on logistic regression with relaxed LASSO. Models were internally validated using bootstrap optimism correction. RESULTS: We included 109 patients, of which 60.6% successfully increased their dose interval. Patients that were active smokers (odds ratio [OR] 0.90), had previous CD-related intra-abdominal surgeries (OR 0.85), proximal small bowel disease (OR 0.92), an increased Harvey-Bradshaw Index (OR 0.99) or increased faecal calprotectin (OR 0.997) were less likely to successfully increase their dose interval. The model had fair discriminative ability (AUC = 0.63) and net benefit analysis showed that the model could be used to select patients who could increase their dose interval. CONCLUSION: The final prediction model seems promising to select patients who could successfully increase their ADA dose interval. The model should be validated externally before it may be applied in clinical practice. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT03172377.

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Increased Adalimumab Dose Intervals in Crohn's Disease Patients in Stable Remission: The Randomized Controlled LADI Trial.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: We aimed to assess cost-effectiveness of increasing adalimumab dose intervals compared to the conventional dosing interval in patients with Crohn's disease [CD] in stable clinical and biochemical remission. DESIGN: We conducted a pragmatic, open-label, randomized controlled non-inferiority trial, comparing increased adalimumab intervals with the 2-weekly interval in adult CD patients in clinical remission. Quality of life was measured with the EQ-5D-5L. Costs were measured from a societal perspective. Results are shown as differences and incremental net monetary benefit [iNMB] at relevant willingness to accept [WTA] levels. RESULTS: We randomized 174 patients to the intervention [n = 113] and control [n = 61] groups. No difference was found in utility (difference: -0.017, 95% confidence interval [-0.044; 0.004]) and total costs (-€943, [-€2226; €1367]) over the 48-week study period between the two groups. Medication costs per patient were lower (-€2545, [-€2780; -€2192]) in the intervention group, but non-medication healthcare (+€474, [+€149; +€952]) and patient costs (+€365 [+€92; €1058]) were higher. Cost-utility analysis showed that the iNMB was €594 [-€2099; €2050], €69 [-€2908; €1965] and -€455 [-€4,096; €1984] at WTA levels of €20 000, €50 000 and €80 000, respectively. Increasing adalimumab dose intervals was more likely to be cost-effective at WTA levels below €53 960 per quality-adjusted life year. Above €53 960 continuing the conventional dose interval was more likely to be cost-effective. CONCLUSION: When the loss of a quality-adjusted life year is valued at less than €53 960, increasing the adalimumab dose interval is a cost-effective strategy in CD patients in stable clinical and biochemical remission. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT03172377.

Increased versus conventional adalimumab dose interval for patients with Crohn's disease in stable remission (LADI): a pragmatic, open-label, non-inferiority, randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Despite its effectiveness in treating Crohn's disease, adalimumab is associated with an increased risk of infections and high health-care costs. We aimed to assess clinical outcomes of increased adalimumab dose intervals versus conventional dosing in patients with Crohn's disease in stable remission. METHODS: The LADI study was a pragmatic, open-label, multicentre, non-inferiority, parallel, randomised controlled trial, done in six academic hospitals and 14 general hospitals in the Netherlands. Adults (aged ≥18 years) diagnosed with luminal Crohn's disease (with or without concomitant perianal disease) were eligible when in steroid-free clinical and biochemical remission (defined as Harvey-Bradshaw Index [HBI] score <5, faecal calprotectin <150 µg/g, and C-reactive protein <10 mg/L) for at least 9 months on a stable dose of 40 mg subcutaneous adalimumab every 2 weeks. Patients were randomly assigned (2:1) to the intervention group or control group by the coordinating investigator using a secure web-based system with variable block randomisation (block sizes of 6, 9, and 12). Randomisation was stratified on concomitant use of thiopurines and methotrexate. Patients and health-care providers were not masked to group assignment. Patients allocated to the intervention group increased adalimumab dose intervals to 40 mg every 3 weeks at baseline and further to every 4 weeks if they remained in clinical and biochemical remission at week 24. Patients in the control group continued their 2-weekly dose interval. The primary outcome was the cumulative incidence of persistent flares at week 48 defined as the presence of at least two of the following criteria: HBI score of 5 or more, C-reactive protein 10 mg/L or more, and faecal calprotectin more than 250 µg/g for more than 8 weeks and a concurrent decrease in the adalimumab dose interval or start of escape medication. The non-inferiority margin was 15% on a risk difference scale. All analyses were done in the intention-to-treat and per-protocol populations. This trial was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03172377, and is not recruiting. FINDINGS: Between May 3, 2017, and July 6, 2020, 174 patients were randomly assigned to the intervention group (n=113) or the control group (n=61). Four patients from the intervention group and one patient from the control group were excluded from the analysis for not meeting inclusion criteria. 85 (50%) of 169 participants were female and 84 (50%) were male. At week 48, the cumulative incidence of persistent flares in the intervention group (three [3%] of 109) was non-inferior compared with the control group (zero; pooled adjusted risk difference 1·86% [90% CI -0·35 to 4·07). Seven serious adverse events occurred, all in the intervention group, of which two (both patients with intestinal obstruction) were possibly related to the intervention. Per 100 person-years, 168·35 total adverse events, 59·99 infection-related adverse events, and 42·57 gastrointestinal adverse events occurred in the intervention group versus 134·67, 75·03, and 5·77 in the control group, respectively. INTERPRETATION: The individual benefit of increasing adalimumab dose intervals versus the risk of disease recurrence is a trade-off that should take patient preferences regarding medication and the risk of a flare into account. FUNDING: Netherlands Organisation for Health Research and Development.

Barrett's esophagus surveillance in a prospective Dutch multi-center community-based cohort of 985 patients demonstrates low risk of neoplastic progression.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Barrett's esophagus (BE) is accompanied by an increased risk of developing esophageal cancer. Accurate risk-stratification is warranted to improve endoscopic surveillance. Most data available on risk factors is derived from tertiary care centers or from cohorts with limited surveillance time or surveillance quality. The aim of this study was to assess endoscopic and clinical risk factors for progression to high-grade dysplasia (HGD) or esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC) in a large prospective cohort of BE patients from community hospitals supported by an overarching infrastructure to ensure optimal surveillance quality. METHODS: A well-defined prospective multicenter cohort study was initiated in six community hospitals in the Amsterdam region in 2003. BE patients were identified by PALGA search and included in a prospective surveillance program with a single endoscopist performing all endoscopies at each hospital. Planning and data collection was performed by experienced research nurses who attended all endoscopies. Endpoint was progression to HGD/EAC. RESULTS: Nine hundred eighty-five patients were included for analysis. During median follow-up of 7.9 years (IQR 4.1-12.5) 67 patients were diagnosed with HGD (n = 28) or EAC (n = 39), progression rate 0.78% per patient-year. As a clinical risk factor age at time of endoscopy was associated with neoplastic progression (HR 1.05; 95% CI 1.03-1.08). Maximum Barrett length and low-grade dysplasia (LGD) at baseline were endoscopic predictors of progression (HR 1.15; 95% CI 1.09-1.21 and HR 2.36; 95% CI 1.29-4.33). CONCLUSION: Risk of progression to HGD/EAC in a large, prospective, community-based Barrett's cohort was low. Barrett's length, LGD and age were important risk factors for progression. (www.trialregister.nl NTR1789).

Evaluation of a panel of tumor-specific differentially-methylated DNA regions in IRF4, IKZF1 and BCAT1 for blood-based detection of colorectal cancer.

BACKGROUND: Differentially-methylated regions (DMRs) are characteristic of colorectal cancer (CRC) and some occur more frequently than common mutations. This study aimed to evaluate the clinical utility of assaying circulating cell-free DNA for methylation in BCAT1, IKZF1 and IRF4 for detection of CRC. METHODS: A multiplexed real-time PCR assay targeting DMRs in each of the three genes was developed. Assay accuracy was explored in plasma specimens banked from observational cross-sectional trials or from volunteers scheduled for colonoscopy or prior to CRC surgery. RESULTS: 1620 specimens were suitable for study inclusion including 184 and 616 cases with CRC and adenomas, respectively, and 820 cases without neoplasia (overall median age, 63.0 years; 56% males). Combining the PCR signals for all targeted DMRs returned the best sensitivity for CRC (136/184, 73.9%, 95% CI 67.1-79.7), advanced adenomas (53/337, 15.7%, 95% CI 12.0-20.1) and high-grade dysplastic (HGD) adenomas (9/35, 25.7%, 95% CI 14.0-42.3) with a 90.1%, specificity for neoplasia (739/820, 95% CI 87.9-92.0, p < 0.01). Detection of methylation in all three genes were more likely in CRC cases than those without it (OR 28.5, 95% CI 7.3-121.2, p < 0.0001). Of the 81 positive cases without neoplasia, 62 (76.5%) were positive by a single PCR replicate only and predominantly due to detection of methylated BCAT1 (53.2%). Single replicate positivity was significantly higher than that in CRC (26/136, 19.1%, p < 0.0001), and single BCAT1 replicate positivity was more likely in cases without neoplasia than in CRC (OR 17.7, 95% CI 6.6-43.3, p < 0.0001). When a positive result was limited to those with ≥ 1 PCR replicate positive for either IKZF1 or IRF4, or at least two replicates positive for BCAT1, the multi-panel test maintained a high sensitivity for CRC (131/184, 71.2%, 95% CI 64.3-77.3) and HGD adenomas (8/35, 22.9%, 95% CI 11.8-39.3, p = 0.029) but improved specificity significantly (772/820, 94.1%, 95% CI 92.3-95.6, p < 0.0001 vs. any PCR replicate positive). CONCLUSION: The multi-panel methylation assay differentiates cases with CRC from those without it and does so with high specificity when criteria for BCAT1 detection are applied. The marker panel is flexible and studies in those at average risk for CRC are now warranted to determine which panel configuration best suits screening goals. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ACTRN12611000318987. Registered 25 March 2011, https://www.anzctr.org.au/ ACTRN12611000318987.

Health outcomes of 1000 children born to mothers with inflammatory bowel disease in their first 5 years of life.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to describe the long-term health outcomes of children born to mothers with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) and to assess the impact of maternal IBD medication use on these outcomes. DESIGN: We performed a multicentre retrospective study in The Netherlands. Women with IBD who gave birth between 1999 and 2018 were enrolled from 20 participating hospitals. Information regarding disease characteristics, medication use, lifestyle, pregnancy outcomes and long-term health outcomes of children was retrieved from mothers and medical charts. After consent of both parents, outcomes until 5 years were also collected from general practitioners. Our primary aim was to assess infection rate and our secondary aims were to assess adverse reactions to vaccinations, growth, autoimmune diseases and malignancies. RESULTS: We included 1000 children born to 626 mothers (381 (61%) Crohn's disease, 225 (36%) ulcerative colitis and 20 (3%) IBD unclassified). In total, 196 (20%) had intrauterine exposure to anti-tumour necrosis factor-α (anti-TNF-α) (60 with concomitant thiopurine) and 240 (24%) were exposed to thiopurine monotherapy. The 564 children (56%) not exposed to anti-TNF-α and/or thiopurine served as control group. There was no association between adverse long-term health outcomes and in utero exposure to IBD treatment. We did find an increased rate of intrahepatic cholestasis of pregnancy (ICP) in case thiopurine was used during the pregnancy without affecting birth outcomes and long-term health outcomes of children. All outcomes correspond with the general age-adjusted population. CONCLUSION: In our study, we found no association between in utero exposure to anti-TNF-α and/or thiopurine and the long-term outcomes antibiotic-treated infections, severe infections needing hospital admission, adverse reactions to vaccinations, growth failure, autoimmune diseases and malignancies.

Diagnostic Yield of One-Time Colonoscopy vs One-Time Flexible Sigmoidoscopy vs Multiple Rounds of Mailed Fecal Immunohistochemical Tests in Colorectal Cancer Screening.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: We compared the diagnostic yields of colonoscopy, flexible sigmoidoscopy, and fecal immunochemical tests (FITs) in colorectal cancer (CRC) screening. METHODS: A total of 30,007 asymptomatic persons, 50-74 years old, were invited for CRC screening in the Netherlands. Participants were assigned to groups that received 4 rounds of FIT (mailed to 15,046 participants), once-only flexible sigmoidoscopy (n = 8407), or once-only colonoscopy (n = 6600). Patients with positive results from the FIT (≥10 µg Hb/g feces) were referred for colonoscopy. Patients who underwent flexible sigmoidoscopy were referred for colonoscopy if they had a polyp of ≥10 mm; adenoma with ≥25% villous histology or high-grade dysplasia; sessile serrated adenoma; ≥3 adenomas; ≥20 hyperplastic polyps; or invasive CRC. The primary outcome was number of advanced neoplasia detected (diagnostic yield) by each test. Secondary outcomes were number of colonoscopies needed to detect advanced neoplasia and number of interval CRCs found during each primary screening test. Patients with interval CRCs were found through linkage with Netherlands Cancer Registry. Advanced neoplasia were defined as CRC, adenomas ≥ 10 mm, adenomas with high-grade dysplasia, or adenomas with a villous component of at least 25%. RESULTS: The cumulative participation rate was significantly higher for FIT screening (73%) than for flexible sigmoidoscopy (31%; P < .001) or colonoscopy (24%; P < .001). The percentage of colonoscopies among invitees was higher for colonoscopy (24%) compared to FIT (13%; P < .001) or flexible sigmoidoscopy (3%; P < .001). In the intention to screen analysis, the cumulative diagnostic yield of advanced neoplasia was higher with FIT screening (4.5%; 95% CI 4.2-4.9) than with colonoscopy (2.2%; 95% CI, 1.8-2.6) or flexible sigmoidoscopy (2.3%; 95% CI, 2.0-2.7). In the as-screened analysis, the cumulative yield of advanced neoplasia was higher for endoscopic screening with colonoscopy (9.1%; 95% CI, 7.7-10.7) or flexible sigmoidoscopy (7.4%; 95% CI, 6.5-8.5) than with the FIT (6.1%; 95% CI, 5.7-6.6). All 3 screening strategies detected a similar proportion of patients with CRC. Follow-up times differed for each test (median 8.3 years for FIT and flexible sigmoidoscopy and 5.8 years for colonoscopy). Proportions of patients that developed interval CRC were 0.13% for persons with a negative result from FIT, 0.09% for persons with a negative result from flexible sigmoidoscopy, and 0.01% for persons with a negative result from colonoscopy. CONCLUSIONS: Mailed multiple-round FITs detect significantly more advanced neoplasia, on a population level, compared with once-only flexible sigmoidoscopy or colonoscopy screening. Significantly fewer colonoscopies are required by individuals screened by multiple FITs. Trialregister.nl numbers: first round, NTR1096; second round and additional invitees, NTR1512; fourth round, NTR5874; COCOS trial NTR1829.

The Amsterdam ReBus progressor cohort: identification of 165 Barrett's surveillance patients who progressed to early neoplasia and 723 nonprogressor patients.

Patient selection is suboptimal in most studies focused on identifying biological markers for neoplastic progression in Barrett's esophagus (BE). This study aims to describe a stringently selected community-based case-control cohort of non-dysplastic BE (NDBE) patients who progressed to high-grade dysplasia (HGD) or esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC) and BE patients who never progressed to be used for future biomarker studies. We identified all patients referred for endoscopic work-up of BE neoplasia at three tertiary referral centers for treatment of BE neoplasia between 2000 and 2013. We performed a detailed registration of any endoscopic surveillance history before neoplastic progression. Controls were selected from a retrospective BE surveillance registration in 10 community hospitals. A total of 887 patients were referred for endoscopic work-up of BE neoplasia. Based on predefined selection criteria, we identified 165 progressor patients (82% men; mean age 55 years ± 10.4) with a baseline endoscopy demonstrating NDBE > 2 years before neoplastic progression. Using the same predefined selection criteria, 723 nonprogressor patients (67% men; mean age 57 years ± 11.3) with >2 years of endoscopic surveillance were identified. Median length of the BE segment was 5 cm (IQR 4-7) in progressors and 4 cm (IQR 2-6) in controls. Median duration of surveillance was 89 months (IQR 54-139) in progressors and 76 months (IQR 47-116) in nonprogressors. Paraffin embedded biopsies are available for biomarker research in all patients. Ethical approval was obtained and material transfer agreements were signed with all 58 contributing pathology labs. This is the largest community-based case-control cohort of BE patients with and without progression to early neoplasia. The stringent selection criteria and the availability of paraffin embedded biopsy specimens make this a unique cohort for biomarker studies.

Patients With Barrett's Esophagus and Confirmed Persistent Low-Grade Dysplasia Are at Increased Risk for Progression to Neoplasia.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: For patients with Barrett's esophagus, the diagnosis of low-grade dysplasia (LGD) is subjective, and reported outcomes vary. We analyzed data from a multicenter study of endoscopic therapy to identify factors associated with progression to high-grade dysplasia (HGD) or esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC) in patients with LGD of the esophagus. METHODS: We performed a retrospective analysis of data from 255 patients with a primary diagnosis of LGD (78% men; mean age, 63 years) who participated in a randomized controlled trial of surveillance vs radiofrequency ablation in Europe. Three expert pathologists independently reviewed baseline and subsequent LGD specimens. The presence and degree of dysplasia was separately recorded for each biopsy and classified according to the Vienna Classification system. The primary end point was development of HGD or EAC. We performed univariate logistic regression analyses to assess the association between outcomes and factors such as number of pathologists confirming LGD, multifocality of LGD, and persistence of LGD over time. RESULTS: Of the 255 patients, 45 (18%) developed HGD or EAC during a median 42-month follow-up period (interquartile range, 25-61 months); patients were examined by a median 4 endoscopies (interquartile range, 3-6 endoscopies). The number of pathologists confirming LGD was strongly associated with progression to neoplasia; risk for progression increased greatly when all 3 pathologists agreed on LGD (odds ratio, 47.14; 95% confidence interval, 13.10-169.70). When LGD was detected at baseline and confirmed by a subsequent endoscopy, the odds for progression to neoplasia also increased greatly (odds ratio, 9.28; 95% confidence interval, 4.39-19.64). Multifocal LGD was not significantly associated with progression to neoplasia. CONCLUSIONS: The number of pathologists confirming LGD and persistence of LGD over time increase risk for development of HGD or EAC in patients with Barrett's esophagus and LGD. These simple, readily available variables can help stratify risk and select patients for prophylactic ablation therapy.

Dynamic clonal equilibrium and predetermined cancer risk in Barrett's oesophagus.

Surveillance of Barrett's oesophagus allows us to study the evolutionary dynamics of a human neoplasm over time. Here we use multicolour fluorescence in situ hybridization on brush cytology specimens, from two time points with a median interval of 37 months in 195 non-dysplastic Barrett's patients, and a third time point in a subset of 90 patients at a median interval of 36 months, to study clonal evolution at single-cell resolution. Baseline genetic diversity predicts progression and remains in a stable dynamic equilibrium over time. Clonal expansions are rare, being detected once every 36.8 patient years, and growing at an average rate of 1.58 cm(2) (95% CI: 0.09-4.06) per year, often involving the p16 locus. This suggests a lack of strong clonal selection in Barrett's and that the malignant potential of 'benign' Barrett's lesions is predetermined, with important implications for surveillance programs.

Burden of disease and increasing prevalence of inflammatory bowel disease in a population-based cohort in the Netherlands.

BACKGROUND: Reported epidemiology and phenotype distributions vary widely and disease burden of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) is poorly described. Our aim was to establish these features in a population-based cohort covering 319 976 inhabitants. Furthermore, differences between tertiary referral and peripheral hospital patients were quantified. METHODS: IBD patients in the adherence area of three peripheral hospitals (2004-2012) were included. Medical and surgical treatment data were obtained. Quality of life and disease activity were evaluated. An outpatient cohort from a tertiary referral centre was accrued. RESULTS: A total of 1461 patients were included: 761 (52.1%) with ulcerative colitis (UC), 579 (39.5%) with Crohn's disease (CD) and 121 (8.3%) with IBD-unspecified. Point prevalence of IBD was 432.1 per 100 000 inhabitants in 2010, which increased significantly over time, P-value of less than 0.0001. The mean annual incidence was 17.2 for UC, 10.5 for CD and 2.2 for IBD-unspecified. Tertiary referral Crohn's patients used thiopurines and biological therapy and underwent surgery significantly more often than patients in peripheral hospitals (P<0.0001). Disease activity correlated negatively with quality of life (P<0.0001) in UC and CD. CONCLUSION: The prevalence of IBD is still increasing. Burden of disease was significantly more severe, mainly in Crohn's patients, in the referral centre, highlighting the importance of population-based studies to accurately describe phenotype distribution and disease burden.

Derivation of genetic biomarkers for cancer risk stratification in Barrett's oesophagus: a prospective cohort study.

OBJECTIVE: The risk of developing adenocarcinoma in non-dysplastic Barrett's oesophagus is low and difficult to predict. Accurate tools for risk stratification are needed to increase the efficiency of surveillance. We aimed to develop a prediction model for progression using clinical variables and genetic markers. METHODS: In a prospective cohort of patients with non-dysplastic Barrett's oesophagus, we evaluated six molecular markers: p16, p53, Her-2/neu, 20q, MYC and aneusomy by DNA fluorescence in situ hybridisation on brush cytology specimens. Primary study outcomes were the development of high-grade dysplasia or oesophageal adenocarcinoma. The most predictive clinical variables and markers were determined using Cox proportional-hazards models, receiver operating characteristic curves and a leave-one-out analysis. RESULTS: A total of 428 patients participated (345 men; median age 60 years) with a cumulative follow-up of 2019 patient-years (median 45 months per patient). Of these patients, 22 progressed; nine developed high-grade dysplasia and 13 oesophageal adenocarcinoma. The clinical variables, age and circumferential Barrett's length, and the markers, p16 loss, MYC gain and aneusomy, were significantly associated with progression on univariate analysis. We defined an 'Abnormal Marker Count' that counted abnormalities in p16, MYC and aneusomy, which significantly improved risk prediction beyond using just age and Barrett's length. In multivariate analysis, these three factors identified a high-risk group with an 8.7-fold (95% CI 2.6 to 29.8) increased HR when compared with the low-risk group, with an area under the curve of 0.76 (95% CI 0.66 to 0.86). CONCLUSIONS: A prediction model based on age, Barrett's length and the markers p16, MYC and aneusomy determines progression risk in non-dysplastic Barrett's oesophagus.

The ACCURE-trial: the effect of appendectomy on the clinical course of ulcerative colitis, a randomised international multicenter trial (NTR2883) and the ACCURE-UK trial: a randomised external pilot trial (ISRCTN56523019).

BACKGROUND: Over the past 20 years evidence has accumulated confirming the immunomodulatory role of the appendix in ulcerative colitis (UC). This led to the idea that appendectomy might alter the clinical course of established UC. The objective of this body of research is to evaluate the short-term and medium-term efficacy of appendectomy to maintain remission in patients with UC, and to establish the acceptability and cost-effectiveness of the intervention compared to standard treatment. METHODS/DESIGN: These paired phase III multicenter prospective randomised studies will include patients over 18 years of age with an established diagnosis of ulcerative colitis and a disease relapse within 12 months prior to randomisation. Patients need to have been medically treated until complete clinical (Mayo score <3) and endoscopic (Mayo score 0 or 1) remission. Patients will then be randomised 1:1 to a control group (maintenance 5-ASA treatment, no appendectomy) or elective laparoscopic appendectomy plus maintenance treatment. The primary outcome measure is the one year cumulative UC relapse rate - defined both clinically and endoscopically as a total Mayo-score ≥5 with endoscopic subscore of 2 or 3. Secondary outcomes that will be assessed include the number of relapses per patient at 12 months, the time to first relapse, health related quality of life and treatment costs, and number of colectomies in each arm. DISCUSSION: The ACCURE and ACCURE-UK trials will provide evidence on the role and acceptability of appendectomy in the treatment of ulcerative colitis and the effects of appendectomy on the disease course. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NTR2883 ; ISRCTN56523019.

Barrett's oesophagus patients with low-grade dysplasia can be accurately risk-stratified after histological review by an expert pathology panel.

OBJECTIVE: Reported malignant progression rates for low-grade dysplasia (LGD) in Barrett's oesophagus (BO) vary widely. Expert histological review of LGD is advised, but limited data are available on its clinical value. This retrospective cohort study aimed to determine the value of an expert pathology panel organised in the Dutch Barrett's Advisory Committee (BAC) by investigating the incidence rates of high-grade dysplasia (HGD) and oesophageal adenocarcinoma (OAC) after expert histological review of LGD. DESIGN: We included all BO cases referred to the BAC for histological review of LGD diagnosed between 2000 and 2011. The diagnosis of the expert panel was related to the histological outcome during endoscopic follow-up. Primary endpoint was development of HGD or OAC. RESULTS: 293 LGD patients (76% men; mean 63 years±11.9) were included. Following histological review, 73% was downstaged to non-dysplastic BO (NDBO) or indefinite for dysplasia (IND). In 27% the initial LGD diagnosis was confirmed. Endoscopic follow-up was performed in 264 patients (90%) with a median follow-up of 39 months (IQR 16-72). For confirmed LGD, the risk of HGD/OAC was 9.1% per patient-year. Patients downstaged to NDBO or IND had a malignant progression risk of 0.6% and 0.9% per patient-year, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Confirmed LGD in BO has a markedly increased risk of malignant progression. However, the vast majority of patients with community LGD will be downstaged after expert review and have a low progression risk. Therefore, all BO patients with LGD should undergo expert histological review of the diagnosis for adequate risk stratification.

The accuracy of polyp assessment during colonoscopy in FIT-screening is not acceptable on a routine basis.

BACKGROUND: During colonoscopy, correct assessment of polyps is important. Recognition of early carcinomas is needed for tailor-made treatment and avoidance of unnecessary complications. Moreover, accurate diagnosis of diminutive lesions could result in a safe resect and discard strategy. We assessed the accuracy of polyp assessment by general endoscopists without specific training or experience in image-enhanced endoscopy during routine colonoscopies within a fecal immunochemical test (FIT)-based screening program. METHODS: Data were collected in the third round of a FIT-based colorectal cancer screening pilot program. Patients diagnosed as FIT-positive (318) underwent colonoscopy using Olympus (160 and 180 series) endoscopes without magnification or routine use of (virtual) chromoendoscopy. Endoscopists received no special training. They made an on-site evaluation and classified detected polyps as hyperplastic, adenoma, carcinoma. Samples of resected lesions were sent for histopathology. Sensitivity and specificity were calculated. We differentiated for fellows and consultants. RESULTS: In the 318 patients with a positive FIT-screening result, 683 lesions were detected; 564 lesions were included in the analyses. The pathologist classified these lesions as 141 hyperplastic polyps, 349 adenomas, 16 carcinomas, and 58 other. Sensitivity for diagnosis of adenomas was 88 % (95 %CI 84 - 91); specificity 49 % (95 %CI 42 - 55). Of the 16 colorectal carcinomas, endoscopists diagnosed four incorrectly (sensitivity 75 % [95 %CI 44 - 89]; specificity 99 % [95 %CI 98 - 100]), including three stage I cancers and one stage III cancer. There were no differences in accuracy of diagnosis that related to different sizes of lesions or the experience of the endoscopist. CONCLUSION: In a routine FIT-based screening setting and without specific training or routine use of (digital) chromoendoscopy, endoscopic prediction of the histopathology of colonic lesions is inaccurate when the procedure is performed by general endoscopists.

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.

Patients' perception of colonoscopy: patients with inflammatory bowel disease and irritable bowel syndrome experience the largest burden.

BACKGROUND: Colonoscopy is a frequently performed procedure worldwide with a negative perception, leading to reluctance to undergo the procedure. Perceptions could differ depending on the specific indication for the colonoscopy. AIMS: To compare patient satisfaction with the colonoscopy procedure between five different patient groups: inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), familial predisposition for cancer, adenoma/carcinoma surveillance, symptoms suggestive of cancer, and irritable bowel syndrome (IBS). METHODS: A prospective questionnaire study was carried out in two regional hospitals and two tertiary teaching hospitals in the Netherlands. A total of 797 consecutive patients scheduled for colonoscopy between October 2009 and June 2010, 146 (18%) IBD, 153 (19%) adenoma or carcinoma surveillance, 104 (13%) familial predisposition, 280 (35%) symptoms suggestive of cancer, and 114 (14%) IBS-like symptoms, were included. Two questionnaires were administered: one on the day of the procedure and another 6 weeks after the procedure. The main outcome measurements were embarrassment, pain, burden, most burdensome aspect, and overall level of satisfaction. RESULTS: Patients with IBD and IBS reported significantly more embarrassment and burden from the bowel preparation phase (P=0.040 and 0.018, respectively) and more pain during the colonoscopy procedure (P=0.018). This difference in pain was also observed when adjusting for volume of sedation administered, familiarity with the endoscopist, duration of the colonoscopy, or whether or not an intervention was performed. All patient groups were less satisfied with the procedure at 6 weeks than directly after the colonoscopy; they recalled more embarrassment and burden, but less pain. CONCLUSION: Patient groups, defined by indication for colonoscopy, experience the colonoscopy procedure differently.

Remission of Barrett's esophagus with early neoplasia 5 years after radiofrequency ablation with endoscopic resection: a Netherlands cohort study.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Radiofrequency ablation (RFA), with or without endoscopic resection effectively eradicates Barrett's esophagus (BE) containing high-grade intraepithelial neoplasia and/or early-stage cancer. We followed patients who received RFA for BE containing high-grade intraepithelial neoplasia and/or early-stage cancer for 5 years to determine the durability of treatment response. METHODS: We followed 54 patients with BE (2-12 cm), previously enrolled in 4 consecutive cohort studies in which they underwent focal endoscopic resection in case of visible lesions (n = 40 [72%]), followed by serial RFA every 3 months. Patients underwent high-resolution endoscopy with narrow-band imaging at 6 and 12 months after treatment and then annually for 5 years (median, 61 months; interquartile range, 53-65 months); random biopsy samples were collected from neosquamous epithelium and gastric cardia. After 5 years, endoscopic ultrasound and endoscopic resection of neosquamous epithelium were performed. Outcomes included sustained complete remission of neoplasia or intestinal metaplasia (IM), IM in gastric cardia, or buried glands in neosquamous epithelium. RESULTS: After 5 years, Kaplan-Meier analysis showed sustained complete remission of neoplasia and intestinal metaplasia in 90% of patients; neoplasia recurred in 3 patients and was managed endoscopically. Focal IM in the cardia was found in 19 of 54 patients (35%), in 53 of 1143 gastric cardia biopsies (4.6%). The incidence of IM of the cardia did not increase over time; and IM was diagnosed based on only a single biopsy in 89% of patients. Buried glands were detected in 3 of 3543 neosquamous epithelium biopsies (0.08%, from 3 patients). No endoscopic resection samples had buried glands. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients who have undergone RFA with or without endoscopic resection for neoplastic BE, 90% remain in remission at 5-year follow-up, with all recurrences managed endoscopically. This treatment approach is therefore an effective and durable alternative to esophagectomy; www.trialregister.nl number, NTR2938.