Screening for high-grade dysplasia in gastroesophageal reflux disease: is it cost-effective?

Endoscopic diagnosis and surveillance of Barrett's esophagus

There are many questions regarding the screening and surveiliance of BE for which there are currently no answers. Despite the use of models and extrapolations by some authors to suggest that screening and surveiliance for a cancer of such low incidence will never be justified, others argue just as vociferously that given the continued epidemic rise in incidence of this cancer, the uniformly fatal outcome of these cancers if dianosed after symptoms occur, and the enormous pool of patients remaining at risk for future cancer development, a focused and prudent screening and surveillance strategy for Barrett's-related esophageal adenocarcinoma is justified. The data also show that a single screening examination is probably as effective as almost all subsequent surveilance examinations in detecting advanced neoplasia, and much of the current resource use and energy for screening and surveillance in BE should be directed toward screening. Whether screening should be offered or recommended to only older patients (> 50-55 years), whites, and men is unknown, but it is premature to adopt this strategy until better evidence exist supporting a restricted screening policy. Regarding the optimal surveilance frequency and technique, examinations more frequent than every 3 to 5 years are not justifiable, and until proven otherwise, biopsy specimens should be obtained with the largest forceps that can be used with the endoscopic instrument and "saturation" biopsies from the Barrett's obtained. It is unlikely that too many biopsy specimens can be taken. Furthermore, the safety of this approach has been, proven. It is quite likely that the inverse is not true; clinicians likely can do much more harm by taking too few biopsy specimens. It is hoped that the current intense interest in Barrett's neoplasia allows clinicians to address these critical issues in the years to come and resolve this clinical conundrum.

Cost-effectiveness of screening a population with chronic gastroesophageal reflux

BACKGROUND

Persons with chronic esophageal reflux are at increased risk for the development of Barrett's esophagus and adenocarcinoma. Recently developed ultrathin endoscopes are less expensive and better tolerated than standard endoscopes, they can be used without sedation, and are sensitive and specific for Barrett's esophagus. The cost-effectiveness of one-time screening strategies were evaluated for 50-year-old patients with chronic reflux: no screening, standard endoscopy, and screening by an ultrathin endoscope.

METHODS

Markov models were created to simulate the clinical course for patients with chronic reflux. Costs and quality-adjusted life-years were estimated from cancer registry data, published medical data, and expert opinion.

RESULTS

Under baseline assumptions, no screening resulted in average costs of $11,785 per person and 19.3226 quality-adjusted life-years. Ultrathin endoscopy screening resulted in costs of $12,119 per person and 19.3326 quality-adjusted life-years, yielding a marginal cost-effectiveness ratio of $55,764 per quality-adjusted life-year. Using standard endoscopy yielded costs of $12,332 with only slightly greater effectiveness, yielding a marginal cost-effectiveness ratio of $709,260 when compared with ultrathin endoscopy and $86,833 compared with no screening. Results were most sensitive to variation in the incidence of cancer in the population with Barrett's esophagus.

CONCLUSIONS

Screening for Barrett's esophagus with ultrathin endoscopy is more cost-effective than standard endoscopy, and both strategies appear to improve quality-adjusted life-years among patients with chronic reflux at costs that are similar to those of other accepted preventive measures.

Accuracy of esophagoscopy performed by a non-physician endoscopist with a 4-mm diameter battery-powered endoscope

BACKGROUND

A cost-effective technique is needed for screening of a broad population at risk for esophageal cancer. A solution would be to have non-physician endoscopists perform esophagoscopy with small-caliber battery-powered endoscopes.

METHODS

In a prospective blinded study, the diagnostic accuracy of sedated esophagoscopy performed by a trained nurse practitioner with a battery-powered 4-mm diameter endoscope was compared with that for a sedated standard video-endoscopy performed by a gastroenterologist. Patients were recruited to undergo peroral esophagoscopy by the nurse practitioner followed by sedated standard endoscopy by the supervising gastroenterologist, each blinded to the findings of the other. Major esophageal findings of nurse practitioner and gastroenterologist were compared.

RESULTS

Findings in 40 patients were analyzed. In 4 patients both endoscopists could not assess the presence or absence of columnar-lined esophagus because of severe erosive esophagitis (n = 3) or severe candida-esophagitis (n = 1). By using sedated standard endoscopy as the standard, on a per finding basis, esophagoscopy by the nurse practitioner had a sensitivity for columnar-lined esophagus of 89%: 95% CI [75%, 97%] and specificity of 96%: 95% CI [84%, 99%]. The missed columnar epithelium was a 3 x 3-mm island. For all lesions, the sensitivity of endoscopy performed by the nurse practitioner with the battery-powered endoscope was 75%: 95% CI [67%, 82%] and specificity 98%: 95% CI [96%, 99%]. The nurse practitioner missed all of 4 rings (3 considered clinically irrelevant).

CONCLUSION

Esophagoscopy with a battery-powered 4-mm diameter endoscope by a non-physician endoscopist is feasible and accurate in detecting esophageal pathologies. It may be an efficient screening method for the detection of columnar-lined esophagus. There was a distinct underestimate of the presence of esophageal rings.

Esophageal complications of gastroesophageal reflux disease: Presentation, diagnosis, management, and outcomes

The esophageal complications of gastroesophageal reflux disease include peptic esophageal erosion and ulceration, peptic esophageal strictures, and Barrett's esophagus. Endoscopy is the diagnostic procedure of choice for the initial evaluation of lesions. For most patients, symptoms can be controlled with proton pump inhibitor (PPI) therapy. PPIs are also highly effective for healing esophageal erosions and ulcerations and for preventing recurrence of peptic esophageal strictures. Because Barrett's esophagus predisposes individuals to esophageal adenocarcinoma, these patients are advised to have regular endoscopic surveillance to detect early, curable neoplasms.

Barrett's esophagus and esophageal adenocarcinoma: pathogenesis, diagnosis, and therapy

Gastric juice that refluxes into the esophagus can injure esophageal squamous epithelium. When the injury heals through a metaplastic process in which an abnormal columnar epithelium replaces the injured squamous one, the resulting condition is called Barrett's esophagus. Gastroesophageal reflux disease and Barrett's esophagus are the most important risk factors for esophageal adenocarcinoma. This article examines such issues as the treatment, endoscopic surveillance, and chemoprevention of Barrett's esophagus. Also included are published guidelines and recommendations.

Upper endoscopy as a screening and surveillance tool in esophageal adenocarcinoma: a review of the evidence

Esophageal adenocarcinoma is a rare cancer that is increasing rapidly in incidence. Because gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) is a risk factor for the development of this cancer, endoscopic screening of individuals with GERD symptoms and endoscopic surveillance of those who are found to have Barrett's esophagus (BE), the presumed precursor to adenocarcinoma, have been proposed. Although no direct data support endoscopic screening or surveillance, several lines of indirect evidence are available. We apply a set of criteria for the evaluation of screening programs to endoscopic screening of subjects with reflux and endoscopic surveillance of subjects with BE. A critical examination of the data supporting these practices shows that considerable gaps exist in our knowledge regarding endoscopy as a screening test in GERD, making us unable to support this practice based on current evidence. Although no controlled trials exist to substantiate the effectiveness of surveillance programs for subjects with BE, some stronger indirect evidence does support this practice. However, further studies are necessary to substantiate the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of endoscopic surveillance in BE. Based on the currently available data, consideration should be given to expanding the intervals between endoscopic surveillance sessions.

Barrett's esophagus

Barrett's esophagus is an acquired condition resulting from severe esophageal mucosal injury. It still remains unclear why some patients with gastroesophageal reflux disease develop Barrett's esophagus whereas others do not. The diagnosis of Barrett's esophagus is established if the squamocolumnar junction is displaced proximal to the gastroesophageal junction and if intestinal metaplasia is detected by biopsy. Despite this seemingly simple definition, diagnostic inconsistencies remain a problem, especially in distinguishing short segment Barrett's esophagus from intestinal metaplasia of the gastric cardia. Barrett's esophagus would be of little importance were it not for its well-recognized association with adenocarcinoma of the esophagus. The incidence of esophageal adenocarcinoma continues to increase and the 5-year survival rate for this cancer remains dismal. However, cancer risk for a given patient with Barrett's esophagus is lower than previously estimated. Current strategies for improved survival in patients with esophageal adenocarcinoma focus on cancer detection at an early and potentially curable stage. This can be accomplished either by screening more patients for Barrett's esophagus or with endoscopic surveillance of patients with known Barrett's esophagus. Current screening and surveillance strategies are inherently expensive and inefficient. New techniques to improve the efficiency of cancer surveillance are evolving rapidly and hold the promise to change clinical practice in the future. Treatment options include aggressive acid suppression, antireflux surgery, chemoprevention, and ablation therapy, but there is still no clear consensus on the optimal treatment for these patients.

Endoscopy in Barrett's esophagus. Surveillance during reflux management and new advances in the diagnosis and early detection of dysplasia

Given the alarming rise in the incidence of esophageal cancer and the fact that Barrett's esophagus is clearly a precursor to this disease, effective surveillance is desirable. Endoscopic surveillance is recommended by major endoscopic and gastrointestinal societies based on the available data and hypothetic models suggest that the costs of endoscopic surveillance for Barrett's esophagus may be reasonable when compared with other commonly applied cancer screening strategies. Although, however, most implicated physicians agree that surveillance is warranted, recommended guidelines often are not followed. This occurrence may reflect the importance of some of the practical limitations inherent to carrying out intensive endoscopic biopsy protocols in large numbers of eligible patients. In an effort to improve the surveillance process, several new techniques have been tested and are in development. These techniques are aimed at facilitating the histologic sampling of larger areas of metaplastic epithelium, at better targeting sites more likely to harbor dysplasia and cancer, and at replacing endoscopic biopsies with nonhistologic tissue analysis. Although many of these newer techniques are promising, however, none are currently close to widespread clinical application. The current standard for surveillance remains the use of systematic endoscopic biopsies, with the frequency of surveillance endoscopies determined by the severity of any dysplastic changes that are found. Given the large number of patients that are likely to be eligible for screening and the current constraints in terms of physician availability and health-care resources, endoscopic biopsy will remain the cornerstone of Barrett's esophagus surveillance strategies unless newer alternatives are clearly advantageous in terms of accuracy, cost, availability, and ease of application. In the future, however, advances in techniques for minimally invasive ablation of Barrett's epithelium may make endoscopic surveillance obsolete altogether.

Medical decision analysis of endoscopic surveillance of Barrett's oesophagus to prevent oesophageal adenocarcinoma

BACKGROUND

Barrett's oesophagus is associated with an increased risk of the development of oesophageal adenocarcinoma. Endoscopic surveillance every 2-5 years has been recommended to prevent death from adenocarcinoma.

AIM

To assess the cost-effectiveness of this strategy.

METHODS

The incremental cost-effectiveness of surveillance (as compared to no surveillance) was analysed with a computer model of a Markov process.

RESULTS

Compared to no surveillance, the incremental cost-effectiveness of bi-annual endoscopy is 16,695 dollars per life-year saved. Surveillance is less cost-effective if the incidence rate of oesophageal adenocarcinoma is low and the 5-year survival rate is high. For surveillance to be cost-effective, there should be little reduction in health-related quality of life following surgical oesophagectomy to prevent death. Moreover, endoscopic surveillance and oesophagectomy need to be efficacious in reliably diagnosing high-grade dysplasia and preventing deaths from cancer. If such ideal conditions of surveillance are not met, the cost per life-year saved could rise five-fold.

CONCLUSIONS

Endoscopic surveillance of patients with Barrett's oesophagus may be a cost-effective means to prevent death from oesophageal adenocarcinoma.

Long-term survival after esophagectomy for Barrett's adenocarcinoma in endoscopically surveyed and nonsurveyed patients

There is growing controversy over the cost-effectiveness of surveillance endoscopy for patients with Barrett's esophagus. A retrospective review was performed of 80 patients who underwent resection for Barrett's adenocarcinoma to assess the influence of endoscopic surveillance on long-term survival. Twelve patients initially were diagnosed with benign Barrett's esophagus and were followed with endoscopic surveillance. The remaining 68 patients had the diagnosis of Barrett's esophagus made at the time of their cancer diagnosis or resection. Patients in surveillance programs were younger (53 vs. 64 years; P = 0.008), had better performance status (8.9 vs. 8.2; P = 0.04), had less weight loss (0.3 vs. 5.5 kg; P < 0.001), had a similar incidence of gastroesophageal reflux disease symptoms (75% vs. 60%), and were less likely to undergo preoperative chemotherapy and/or radiation therapy (8% vs. 28%). Pathologic stage was 0 or I in 9 (75%) of 12 patients in the surveillance group compared to 12 (18%) of 68 of those in the no surveillance group (P < 0.001). Median survival for patients in the surveillance group was 107 months compared to 12 months for those in the no surveillance group (P < 0.001). Stratifying for stage, surveillance (hazard ratio = 3.05; confidence interval = 1.09 to 8.57; P = 0.034) was the only predictor of survival. Surveillance endoscopy permits early diagnosis of adenocarcinoma in patients with Barrett's esophagus and contributes substantially to long-term survival.

Barrett's oesophagus: better left alone?

The risk of oesophageal adenocarcinoma in patients with Barrett's oesophagus is overrated in most publications, including meta-analyses. The upper limit of the overall risk is currently estimated at 0.5 per 100 patients per year. This means that one cancer may occur out of 200 patients followed for one year. Furthermore, a large fraction of patients with Barrett's oesophagus have a precarious health status, either from advanced age or from a chronic severe disease. Management is based upon a careful index endoscopy; accordingly, patients positive for dysplasia must be strictly observed or treated. Endoscopic surveillance protocols aiming at early detection of neoplasia--and treatment--in patients without dysplasia are unjustified in most cases. On the other hand, a minority of male patients--providing a good performance status--should enter into surveillance protocols when high-risk factors such as a long history of reflux symptoms and smoking habits are present.

Barrett's oesophagus: a review of costs of the illness

Barrett's oesophagus is a premalignant complication that occurs in approximately 10% of patients with gastro-oesophageal reflux disease (GORD). In patients with Barrett's oesophagus, the risk of adenocarcinoma of the oesophagus approaches 0.5% per patient-years. Therefore, practice guidelines have been developed that suggest screening patients with GORD, particularly those with long-standing symptoms and those aged > or =50 years for the presence of Barrett's metaplasia. These guidelines also suggest performing surveillance endoscopy for the development of dysplasia and/or cancer in patients found to harbour Barrett's oesophagus at initial screening with the frequency of subsequent endoscopies dictated by the presence and grade of dysplasia. In patients with high-grade dysplasia and/or early adenocarcinoma, oesophagectomy is curative. Given the important clinical and economic implications of GORD complicated by Barrett's oesophagus, we review the costs associated with screening, surveillance and treatment for this condition. Although the majority of physicians recommend and/or perform surveillance for dysplasia in the setting of Barrett's oesophagus, differences in endoscopic technique, surveillance intervals and cancer perception among practitioners influence total costs. In the US, it is estimated that a population-wide surveillance program could potentially result in a total cost of 289.9 million US dollars. The outpatient management of Barrett's oesophagus is estimated to cost 1241 US dollars per year with medication use alone accounting for over half of the total costs. Cost-effectiveness analyses have been performed to evaluate the economic impact and benefit of surveillance for dysplasia and/or cancer. Studies to date have utilised several outcome measures such as life-years gained, quality-adjusted life-years and cases of cancer detected. Therefore, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratios reported have varied greatly and are particularly sensitive to the prevalence of Barrett's oesophagus in patients with GORD and the incidence of adenocarcinoma. Further epidemiological and clinical studies are likely to further define the economic impact of Barrett's oesophagus as a complication of GORD.