Hypoxia-inducible factor-1α mediates reflux-induced epithelial-mesenchymal plasticity in Barrett's oesophagus patients.

INTRODUCTION: Epithelial-mesenchymal plasticity (EMP), the process through which epithelial cells acquire mesenchymal features, is needed for wound repair but also might contribute to cancer initiation. Earlier, in vitro studies showed that Barrett's cells exposed to acidic bile salt solutions (ABS) develop EMP. Now, we have (1) induced reflux oesophagitis in Barrett's oesophagus (BO) patients by stopping proton pump inhibitors (PPIs), (2) assessed their biopsies for EMP and (3) explored molecular pathways underlying reflux-induced EMP in BO cells and spheroids. METHODS: 15 BO patients had endoscopy with biopsies of Barrett's metaplasia while on PPIs, and 1 and 2 weeks after stopping PPIs; RNA-seq data were assessed for enrichments in hypoxia-inducible factors (HIFs), angiogenesis and EMP pathways. In BO biopsies, cell lines and spheroids, EMP features (motility) and markers (vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF), ZEB1, miR-200a&b) were evaluated by morphology, migration assays, immunostaining and qPCR; HIF-1α was knocked down with siRNA or shRNA. RESULTS: At 1 and/or 2 weeks off PPIs, BO biopsies exhibited EMP features and markers, with significant enrichment for HIF-1α, angiogenesis and EMP pathways. In BO cells, ABS induced HIF-1α activation, which decreased miR-200a&b while increasing VEGF, ZEB1 and motility; HIF-1α knockdown blocked these effects. After ABS treatment, BO spheroids exhibited migratory protrusions showing nuclear HIF-1α, increased VEGF and decreased miR-200a&b. CONCLUSIONS: In BO patients, reflux oesophagitis induces EMP changes associated with increased HIF-1α signalling in Barrett's metaplasia. In Barrett's cells, ABS trigger EMP via HIF-1α signalling. Thus, HIF-1α appears to play a key role in mediating reflux-induced EMP that might contribute to cancer in BO. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT02579460.

An Endoscopic Scoring System for Achalasia: The CARS score.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: The diagnosis of achalasia is associated with an average delay of two years. Endoscopic features may prompt an earlier diagnosis. We aimed to develop and test a novel endoscopic CARS score for the prediction of achalasia. METHODS: Part 1: Twenty endoscopic videos were taken from patients undergoing endoscopy for dysphagia or reflux. A survey with videos and endoscopic criteria options was distributed to 6 esophagologists and 6 general gastroenterologists. Inter-rater reliability (IRR) was measured and logistic regression was used to evaluate predictive performance. Three rounds of review were conducted to select the final score of four components. PART 2: A retrospective review was conducted for consecutive patients who had comprehensive esophageal testing. Each patient had a CARS endoscopic score calculated based on findings reported at endoscopy. RESULTS: From a video review and analysis of score components, IRR ranged from 0.23 to 0.57 for score components. The final CARS score was selected based on the following four components: Contents, Anatomy, Resistance, and Stasis. In a mixed effects model, the mean score across raters was higher for achalasia compared to non-achalasia subjects (4.44 vs. 0.87, p = < 0.01). In part 2 of the study, achalasia patients had a higher mean CARS score compared to those with no / ineffective motility disorder (mean 4.1 vs 1.3, p = < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: We developed a CARS score based on reliability performance in a video-based survey and tested the score in clinical setting. The CARS score performed well in predicting achalasia.

Frequent discrepancies among diagnostic tests for detecting lower esophageal sphincter-related obstruction.

BACKGROUND: There are frequent discrepancies among high-resolution manometry (HRM), functional lumen imaging probe (FLIP), and esophagram in identifying lower esophageal sphincter (LES)-related obstruction. We aimed to determine the frequency of those discrepancies and how they influenced clinical treatment/outcomes. METHODS: We identified patients who had all three tests (HRM, FLIP, and esophagram) and endoscopy performed for evaluation of esophageal symptoms in our Center for Esophageal Diseases. Discrepancies among the tests for the presence of LES obstruction were noted, and the performance of individual tests was compared against a consensus opinion rendered by a panel of esophagologists. Binary logistical regression was performed, and ROC curves were generated for prediction of the consensus clinical diagnosis of LES obstruction. KEY RESULTS: A total of 126 patients (mean age 57.9 ± 17.0 years; 67% female) met inclusion criteria. All three tests agreed on the presence or absence of LES obstruction in only 72 (57%) patients [no LES obstruction in 57 (45%), LES obstruction in 15 (12%)]. Thirteen patients (10%) had a change in management based on additional findings on FLIP +/- esophagram not seen on HRM with 69% having symptomatic improvement after LES-directed intervention. FLIP was the strongest predictor of a consensus diagnosis of LES obstruction by logistic regression and ROC (OR 23.36, AUC 0.796), followed by HRM (OR 15.41, AUC 0.764). CONCLUSIONS & INFERENCE: High-resolution manometry, functional lumen imaging probe, and esophagram each have considerable limitations for identifying LES obstruction, and discrepancies among these tests occur frequently. Multimodal testing is often required for adequate evaluation of LES-related obstruction.