Risk of Esophageal Cancer in Achalasia: A Matched Cohort Study Using the Nationwide Veterans Affairs Achalasia Cohort.

INTRODUCTION: Achalasia is a postulated risk factor of esophageal cancer (EC); however, EC-associated risk in achalasia is understudied. We aimed to evaluate EC risk among individuals within the nationwide Veterans Affairs Achalasia Cohort. METHODS: We conducted a matched cohort study among US veterans aged 18 years or older from 1999 to 2019. Individuals with achalasia were age matched and sex matched 1:4 to individuals without achalasia. Follow-up continued from study entry until diagnosis with incident/fatal EC (primary outcome), death from non-EC-related causes, or end of the study follow-up (December 31, 2019). Association between achalasia and EC risk was examined using Cox regression models. RESULTS: We included 9,315 individuals in the analytic cohort (median age 55 years; 92% male): 1,863 with achalasia matched to 7,452 without achalasia. During a median 5.5 years of follow-up, 17 EC occurred (3 esophageal adenocarcinoma, 12 squamous cell carcinoma, and 2 unknown type) among individuals with achalasia, compared with 15 EC (11 esophageal adenocarcinoma, 1 squamous cell carcinoma, and 3 unknown type) among those without achalasia. EC incidence for those with achalasia was 1.4 per 1,000 person-years, and the median time from achalasia diagnosis to EC development was 3.0 years (Q1-Q3: 1.3-9.1). Individuals with achalasia had higher cumulative EC incidence at 5, 10, and 15 years of follow-up compared with individuals without achalasia, and EC risk was 5-fold higher (hazard ratio 4.6, 95% confidence interval: 2.3-9.2). DISCUSSION: Based on substantial EC risk, individuals with achalasia may benefit from a high index of suspicion and endoscopic surveillance for EC.

An attribution of value framework for combination treatments.

OBJECTIVE: The use of cost-effectiveness methods to support policy decisions has become well established but difficulties can arise when evaluating a new treatment which is indicated to be used in combination with an established "backbone treatment." If the latter has been priced close to the decision maker's willingness to pay threshold, this may mean that there is no headroom for the new treatment to demonstrate value, at any price, even if the combination is clinically effective. Without a mechanism for attributing value to component treatments within a combination therapy, the health system risks generating negative funding decisions for combinations of proven clinical benefit to patients. The aim of this work was to define a value attribution methodology which could be used to allocate value between the components of any combination treatment. METHODS: The framework is grounded in the standard decision rules of cost-effectiveness analysis and provides solutions according to key features of the problem: perfect/imperfect information about component treatment monotherapy effects and balanced/unbalanced market power between their manufacturers. RESULTS: The share of incremental value varies depending on whether there is perfect/imperfect information and balance/imbalance of market power, with some scenarios requiring the manufacturers to negotiate a share of the incremental value within a range defined by the framework. CONCLUSIONS: It is possible to define a framework that is independent of price and focuses on benefits expressed as Quality-Adjusted Life-Year (QALY) gains (and/or QALY equivalents for cost-savings), a standard metric used by many HTA agencies to evaluate novel treatments.

Development and Validation of a National US Achalasia Cohort: The Veterans Affairs Achalasia Cohort (VA-AC).

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Achalasia is an esophageal motility disorder associated with significant morbidity, yet achalasia-associated risk factors and outcomes are not well-characterized. Our aim was to establish a national cohort of individuals with achalasia, utilizing Veterans Health Administration (VHA) data. METHODS: We iteratively developed combinations of International Classification of Diseases and Current Procedural Terminology code algorithms to validate an approach for identifying achalasia cases. We assessed algorithm accuracy for achalasia diagnosis through manual chart review of candidate achalasia cases and candidate non-achalasia controls. The prespecified end point chosen to establish algorithm performance success was achieving a 1-sided 95% confidence lower bound for a positive predictive value >85% for a random sample of 100 candidate achalasia cases. Once adequate performance was validated, we queried national VHA data to establish and characterize a cohort of individuals diagnosed with achalasia between 1999 and 2020. RESULTS: Three rounds of algorithm modification and validation were conducted to achieve the prespecified performance endpoint. In the final round, a combination of 3 or more International Classification of Diseases codes for achalasia in the subject's lifetime and a Current Procedural Terminology code for esophageal manometry achieved an observed 94% positive predictive value (1-sided 95% confidence lower bound of 88.5%) for identifying achalasia. Applying the algorithm to national VHA data identified a cohort of 2100 individuals with achalasia, with a median age 65 years and who were 93% male. CONCLUSIONS: Using a rigorous validation approach, we established a national cohort of 2100 individuals with achalasia within the VHA, one of the largest established to date. This cohort can be utilized to study risk factors for achalasia and outcomes over time.

Development and Validation of the Veterans Affairs Eosinophilic Esophagitis Cohort.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Gaps remain in understanding the epidemiology of eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE). Our aim was to identify and validate a national cohort of individuals with EoE using Veterans Health Administration (VHA) data. METHODS: We used 2 validation strategies to develop algorithms that identified adults with EoE between 1999 and 2020. The first validation strategy applied International Classification of Diseases (ICD) code algorithms to a base cohort of individuals who underwent esophagogastroduodenoscopy with esophageal biopsy specimens. The second applied ICD code algorithms to a base cohort of all individuals in the VHA. For each ICD algorithm applied, a random sample of candidate EoE cases and non-EoE controls were selected and the charts were reviewed manually by a blinded reviewer. Each algorithm was modified iteratively until the prespecified diagnostic accuracy end point (95% confidence lower bound for a positive predictive value [PPV], >88%) was achieved. We compiled individuals from each strategy's maximum performance algorithm to construct the Veterans Affairs Eosinophilic Esophagitis Cohort. RESULTS: The maximum performance algorithm from the first validation strategy included 2 or more ICD code encounters for EoE separated by more than 30 days and achieved a 93.3% PPV (lower bound, 88.1%) for identifying true EoE cases. The maximum performance algorithm from the second validation strategy included 4 or more ICD code encounters for EoE in which 2 codes were separated by at least 30 days, and similarly achieved a 93.3% PPV (lower bound, 88.1%). Combining both strategies yielded 6637 individuals, which comprised the Veterans Affairs Eosinophilic Esophagitis Cohort. CONCLUSIONS: We developed and validated 2 highly accurate coding algorithms for EoE and established a nationwide VHA cohort of adults with EoE for future studies.

A Roadmap for Increasing the Usefulness and Impact of Patient-Preference Studies in Decision Making in Health: A Good Practices Report of an ISPOR Task Force.

Many qualitative and quantitative methods are readily available to study patient preferences in health. These methods are now being used to inform a wide variety of decisions, and there is a growing body of evidence showing studies of patient preferences can be used for decision making in a wide variety of contexts. This ISPOR Task Force report synthesizes current good practices for increasing the usefulness and impact of patient-preference studies in decision making. We provide the ISPOR Roadmap for Patient Preferences in Decision Making that invites patient-preference researchers to work with decision makers, patients and patient groups, and other stakeholders to ensure that studies are useful and impactful. The ISPOR Roadmap consists of 5 key elements: (1) context, (2) purpose, (3) population, (4) method, and (5) impact. In this report, we define these 5 elements and provide good practices on how patient-preference researchers and others can actively contribute to increasing the usefulness and impact of patient-preference studies in decision making. We also present a set of key questions that can support researchers and other stakeholders (eg, funders, reviewers, readers) to assess efforts that promote the ongoing impact (both intended and unintended) of a particular preference study and additional studies in the future.

Evaluation of Esophageal Dysphagia in Elderly Patients.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: While guidelines exist for the evaluation and management of esophageal dysphagia in the general population, dysphagia disproportionately affects the elderly. In this article, we reviewed the literature on evaluating esophageal dysphagia in elderly patients and proposed a diagnostic algorithm based on this evidence. RECENT FINDINGS: In older patients, dysphagia is often well compensated for by altered eating habits and physiologic changes, underreported by patients, and missed by healthcare providers. Once identified, dysphagia should be differentiated into oropharyngeal and esophageal dysphagia to guide diagnostic workup. For esophageal dysphagia, this review proposes starting with endoscopy with biopsies, given its relative safety even in older patients and potential for interventional therapy. If endoscopy shows a structural or mechanical cause, then further cross-sectional imaging should be considered to assess for extrinsic compression, and same session endoscopic dilation should be considered for strictures. If biopsies and endoscopy are normal, then esophageal dysmotility is more likely, and high-resolution manometry and additional workup should be performed following the updated Chicago Classification. Even after diagnosis of the root cause, complications including malnutrition and aspiration pneumonia should also be assessed and monitored, as they both result from and can further contribute to dysphagia. The successful evaluation of esophageal dysphagia in elderly patients requires a thorough, standardized approach to collecting a history, selection of appropriate diagnostic workup, and assessment of risk of potential complications, including malnutrition and aspiration.

Evolution and evidence-based adaptations in techniques for peroral endoscopic myotomy for achalasia.

Achalasia is an esophageal motility disorder characterized by impaired lower esophageal sphincter (LES) relaxation and failed peristalsis. Common clinical manifestations include dysphagia to solid and liquid foods, chest pain, regurgitation, and weight loss, resulting in significant morbidity and healthcare burden. Historically, surgical Heller myotomy and pneumatic dilation were the first-line therapeutic options for achalasia. This convention was shaken in 2009 when Inoue and colleagues introduced an endoscopic approach to dissect the muscle fibers of the LES, known as peroral endoscopic myotomy (POEM). Since incorporation of POEM into standard practice, the overall myotomy technique has remained unchanged; however, adaptations in the thickness and length of myotomy have evolved. Full-thickness myotomy is recognized to have similar clinical success and faster procedure times compared with selective circular muscle myotomy. Although myotomy length for type 1 and type 2 achalasia has classically been >6 cm, recent studies demonstrated similar outcomes with reduction of myotomy length to <3 cm. Length of myotomy for type 3 achalasia has been tailored to treat the entire length of spastic muscle segment, and the modality to gauge the optimal thickness and length of myotomy in this group has yet to be established. In addition to changes in POEM technique, the postoperative management of POEM has also changed, favoring reduced postprocedure imaging, antibiotic use, and hospitalizations.

Diagnostic pathways in multiple myeloma and their relationship to end organ damage: an analysis from the Tackling Early Morbidity and Mortality in Myeloma (TEAMM) trial.

Multiple myeloma is associated with significant early morbidity and mortality, with considerable end organ damage often present at diagnosis. The Tackling EArly Morbidity and Mortality in Multiple Myeloma (TEAMM) trial was used to evaluate routes to diagnosis in patients with myeloma and the relationship between diagnostic pathways, time to diagnosis and disease severity. A total of 915 participants were included in the study. Fifty-one per cent were diagnosed by direct referral from primary care to haematology; 29% were diagnosed via acute services and 20% were referred via other secondary care specialties. Patients diagnosed via other secondary care specialties had a longer diagnostic interval (median 120 days vs. 59 days) without an increase in features of severe disease, suggesting they had a relatively indolent disease. Marked intrahospital delay suggests possible scope for improvement. A quarter of those diagnosed through acute services reported >30 days from initial hospital consultation to haematology assessment. Participants diagnosed through acute services had poorer performance status (P < 0·0001) and higher burden of end organ damage (P < 0·0001) with no difference in the overall length of diagnostic pathway compared to those diagnosed by direct referral (median 59 days). This suggests that advanced disease in patients presenting through acute services predominantly reflects disease aggression.

Risk Factors for Early-Onset Colorectal Cancer.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Colorectal cancer (CRC) incidence and mortality are increasing among persons younger than 50 years old in the United States, but risk factors associated with early-onset CRC (EOCRC) have not been widely studied. METHODS: We conducted a case-control study of US veterans 18 to 49 years old who underwent colonoscopy examinations from 1999 through 2014. EOCRC cases were identified from a national cancer registry; veterans who were free of CRC at their baseline colonoscopy through 3 years of follow-up were identified as controls. We collected data on age, sex, race/ethnicity, body weight, body mass index (BMI), diabetes, smoking status, and aspirin use. Multivariate-adjusted EOCRC odds were estimated for each factor, with corresponding 95% confidence interval (CI) values. RESULTS: Our final analysis included 651 EOCRC cases and 67,416 controls. Median age was 45.3 years, and 82.3% were male. Higher proportions of cases were older, male, current smokers, nonaspirin users, and had lower BMIs, compared with controls (P < .05). In adjusted analyses, increasing age and male sex were significantly associated with increased risk of EOCRC, whereas aspirin use and being overweight or obese (relative to normal BMI) were significantly associated with decreased odds of EOCRC. In post hoc analyses, weight loss of 5 kg or more within the 5-year period preceding colonoscopy was associated with higher odds of EOCRC (odds ratio 2.23; 95% CI 1.76-2.83). CONCLUSIONS: In a case-control study of veterans, we found increasing age and male sex to be significantly associated with increased risk of EOCRC, and aspirin use to be significantly associated with decreased risk; these factors also affect risk for CRC onset after age 50. Weight loss may be an early clinical sign of EOCRC. More intense efforts are required to identify the factors that cause EOCRC and signs that can be used to identify individuals at highest risk.

Levofloxacin prophylaxis in patients with newly diagnosed myeloma (TEAMM): a multicentre, double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomised, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: Myeloma causes profound immunodeficiency and recurrent, serious infections. Around 5500 new cases of myeloma are diagnosed per year in the UK, and a quarter of patients will have a serious infection within 3 months of diagnosis. We aimed to assess whether patients newly diagnosed with myeloma benefit from antibiotic prophylaxis to prevent infection, and to investigate the effect on antibiotic-resistant organism carriage and health care-associated infections in patients with newly diagnosed myeloma. METHODS: TEAMM was a prospective, multicentre, double-blind, placebo-controlled randomised trial in patients aged 21 years and older with newly diagnosed myeloma in 93 UK hospitals. All enrolled patients were within 14 days of starting active myeloma treatment. We randomly assigned patients (1:1) to levofloxacin or placebo with a computerised minimisation algorithm. Allocation was stratified by centre, estimated glomerular filtration rate, and intention to proceed to high-dose chemotherapy with autologous stem cell transplantation. All investigators, patients, laboratory, and trial co-ordination staff were masked to the treatment allocation. Patients were given 500 mg of levofloxacin (two 250 mg tablets), orally once daily for 12 weeks, or placebo tablets (two tablets, orally once daily for 12 weeks), with dose reduction according to estimated glomerular filtration rate every 4 weeks. Follow-up visits occurred every 4 weeks up to week 16, and at 1 year. The primary outcome was time to first febrile episode or death from all causes within the first 12 weeks of trial treatment. All randomised patients were included in an intention-to-treat analysis of the primary endpoint. This study is registered with the ISRCTN registry, number ISRCTN51731976, and the EU Clinical Trials Register, number 2011-000366-35. FINDINGS: Between Aug 15, 2012, and April 29, 2016, we enrolled and randomly assigned 977 patients to receive levofloxacin prophylaxis (489 patients) or placebo (488 patients). Median follow-up was 12 months (IQR 8-13). 95 (19%) first febrile episodes or deaths occurred in 489 patients in the levofloxacin group versus 134 (27%) in 488 patients in the placebo group (hazard ratio 0·66, 95% CI 0·51-0·86; p=0·0018. 597 serious adverse events were reported up to 16 weeks from the start of trial treatment (308 [52%] of which were in the levofloxacin group and 289 [48%] of which were in the placebo group). Serious adverse events were similar between the two groups except for five episodes (1%) of mostly reversible tendonitis in the levofloxacin group. INTERPRETATION: Addition of prophylactic levofloxacin to active myeloma treatment during the first 12 weeks of therapy significantly reduced febrile episodes and deaths compared with placebo without increasing health care-associated infections. These results suggest that prophylactic levofloxacin could be used for patients with newly diagnosed myeloma undergoing anti-myeloma therapy. FUNDING: UK National Institute for Health Research.

Individual Trade-Offs Between Possible Benefits and Risks of Cancer Treatments: Results from a Stated Preference Study with Patients with Multiple Myeloma.

BACKGROUND: The objectives of this study were to elicit the preferences of patients with multiple myeloma regarding the possible benefits and risks of cancer treatments and to illustrate how such data may be used to estimate patients' acceptance of new treatments. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with multiple myeloma from the cancer charity Myeloma UK were invited to participate in an online survey based on multicriteria decision analysis and swing weighting to elicit individual stated preferences for the following attributes: (a) 1-year progression-free survival (PFS, ranging from 50% to 90%), (b) mild or moderate toxicity for 2 months or longer (ranging from 85% to 45%), and (c) severe or life-threatening toxicity (ranging from 80% to 20%). RESULTS: A total of 560 participants completed the survey. The average weight given to PFS was 0.54, followed by 0.32 for severe or life-threatening toxicity and 0.14 for mild or moderate chronic toxicity. Participants who ranked severe or life-threatening toxicity above mild or moderate chronic toxicity (56%) were more frequently younger, working, and looking after dependent family members and had more frequently experienced severe or life-threatening side effects. The amount of weight given to PFS did not depend on any of the collected covariates. The feasibility of using the collected preference data to estimate the patients' acceptance of specific multiple myeloma treatments was demonstrated in a subsequent decision analysis example. CONCLUSION: Stated preference studies provide a systematic approach to gain knowledge about the distribution of preferences in the population and about what this implies for patients' acceptance of specific treatments. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: This study demonstrated how quantitative preference statements from a large group of participants can be collected through an online survey and how such information may be used to explore the acceptability of specific treatments based on the attributes studied. Results from such studies have the potential to become an important new tool for gathering patient views and studying heterogeneity in preferences in a systematic way, along with other methods, such as focus groups and expert opinions.

Guidelines for screening and management of late and long-term consequences of myeloma and its treatment.

A growing population of long-term survivors of myeloma is now accumulating the 'late effects' not only of myeloma itself, but also of several lines of treatment given throughout the course of the disease. It is thus important to recognise the cumulative burden of the disease and treatment-related toxicity in both the stable and active phases of myeloma, some of which is unlikely to be detected by routine monitoring. We summarise here the evidence for the key late effects in long-term survivors of myeloma, including physical and psychosocial consequences (in Parts 1 and 2 respectively), and recommend the use of late-effects screening protocols in detection and intervention. The early recognition of late effects and effective management strategies should lead to an improvement in the management of myeloma patients, although evidence in this area is currently limited and further research is warranted.

WHY PATIENTS SHOULD BE INVOLVED IN HEALTH TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT.

OBJECTIVES: Some countries make considerable effort to involve patients and patient groups in their health technology assessment (HTA) processes; others are only just considering or are yet to consider patient involvement in HTA. METHODS: This commentary offers four arguments why patient involvement should be prioritized by those HTA agencies that do not yet involve patients: (1) from a patients' rights perspective, (2) based on patient and community values, (3) centering on evidentiary contributions, and (4) from a methodological perspective. RESULTS: The first argument builds on the Alma-Ata Declaration, which holds that patients have a right and duty to have a say in the planning and delivery of their health care, individually and collectively. Where HTA is used to determine access to technologies and services, we argue that patients have a right to be heard. The second argues that decisions about treatments and services need to be aligned with the core values and morals of the patients whom the health system serves. The third argues that patients have unique knowledge and insights about living with a health condition and their needs for services and treatments regarding that condition, which can add to the knowledge base and value of the HTA process. The fourth argues that involvement of patients can facilitate methodological advancement of HTA, in areas such as early scientific advice and managed entry with evidence development. CONCLUSIONS: An HTA process that includes patient perspectives can, therefore, provide added value to patients, policy makers and healthcare professionals alike.

Time to redefine Myeloma.

In November 2014 the International Myeloma Working Group (IMWG) revised the definition of multiple myeloma, such that asymptomatic patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma without any of the traditional 'CRAB' (hypercalcaemia, renal impairment, anaemia, bone disease) end organ damage criteria but with one of three new criteria would be recommended to start treatment. Previously, the standard of care for such patients was expectant management. These three new criteria are: greater than 60% clonal plasma cells on bone marrow biopsy, a serum free light chain (sFLC) ratio of >100 (the involved sFLC must be >100 mg/l) and greater than one unequivocal focal lesion on advanced imaging (low dose whole body computerized tomography, magnetic resonance imaging, (18) F fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography). Although this would appear to affect a small number of patients, the impact of these changes are broad, leading to an increased use of advanced imaging, a debate around the management of patients previously diagnosed with smouldering myeloma, changed terminology and clinical trial design and an extension of the use of biomarkers. For the first time the philosophy of treatment in myeloma will change from treatment initiation only being triggered by overt end organ damage to an era where sub clinical risk factors will also be taken into account.