Risk stratification of patients with barrett's esophagus and low-grade dysplasia or indefinite for dysplasia

AGA Clinical Practice Guideline on Endoscopic Eradication Therapy of Barrett's Esophagus and Related Neoplasia

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Barrett's esophagus (BE) is the precursor to esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC). Endoscopic eradication therapy (EET) can be effective in eradicating BE and related neoplasia and has greater risk of harms and resource use than surveillance endoscopy. This clinical practice guideline aims to inform clinicians and patients by providing evidence-based practice recommendations for the use of EET in BE and related neoplasia.

METHODS

The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation framework was used to assess evidence and make recommendations. The panel prioritized clinical questions and outcomes according to their importance for clinicians and patients, conducted an evidence review, and used the Evidence-to-Decision Framework to develop recommendations regarding the use of EET in patients with BE under the following scenarios: presence of (1) high-grade dysplasia, (2) low-grade dysplasia, (3) no dysplasia, and (4) choice of stepwise endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) or focal EMR plus ablation, and (5) endoscopic submucosal dissection vs EMR. Clinical recommendations were based on the balance between desirable and undesirable effects, patient values, costs, and health equity considerations.

RESULTS

The panel agreed on 5 recommendations for the use of EET in BE and related neoplasia. Based on the available evidence, the panel made a strong recommendation in favor of EET in patients with BE high-grade dysplasia and conditional recommendation against EET in BE without dysplasia. The panel made a conditional recommendation in favor of EET in BE low-grade dysplasia; patients with BE low-grade dysplasia who place a higher value on the potential harms and lower value on the benefits (which are uncertain) regarding reduction of esophageal cancer mortality could reasonably select surveillance endoscopy. In patients with visible lesions, a conditional recommendation was made in favor of focal EMR plus ablation over stepwise EMR. In patients with visible neoplastic lesions undergoing resection, the use of either endoscopic mucosal resection or endoscopic submucosal dissection was suggested based on lesion characteristics.

CONCLUSIONS

This document provides a comprehensive outline of the indications for EET in the management of BE and related neoplasia. Guidance is also provided regarding the considerations surrounding implementation of EET. Providers should engage in shared decision making based on patient preferences. Limitations and gaps in the evidence are highlighted to guide future research opportunities.

Diagnosis and Management of Barrett's Esophagus

Barrett's esophagus is a metaplastic change of esophageal mucosa, which can be characterized by its salmon-colored lining and the presence of columnar epithelium with goblet cells. It is a well-established precancerous state of esophageal adenocarcinoma, a tumor with very poor survival rates, which incidence is rapidly growing. Despite numerous research, the debate about its diagnosis and management is still ongoing. This article aims to provide an overview of the current recommendations and new discoveries regarding the subject.

Prediction of neoplastic progression in Barrett's esophagus using nanoscale nuclear architecture mapping: a pilot study

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Nanoscale nuclear architecture mapping (nanoNAM), an optical coherence tomography-derived approach, is capable of detecting with nanoscale sensitivity structural alterations in the chromatin of epithelial cell nuclei at risk for malignant transformation. Because these alterations predate the development of dysplasia, we aimed to use nanoNAM to identify patients with Barrett's esophagus (BE) who might progress to high-grade dysplasia (HGD) or esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC).

METHODS

This is a nested case-control study of 46 BE patients, of which 21 progressed to HGD/EAC over 3.7 ± 2.37 years (cases/progressors) and 25 patients who did not progress over 6.3 ± 3.1 years (control subjects/nonprogressors). The archived formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded tissue blocks collected as part of standard clinical care at the index endoscopy were used. nanoNAM imaging was performed on a 5-μm formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded section, and each nucleus was mapped to a 3-dimensional (3D) depth-resolved optical path difference (drOPD) nuclear representation, quantifying nanoscale-sensitive alterations in the 3D nuclear architecture of the cell. Using 3D-drOPD representation of each nucleus, we computed 12 patient-level nanoNAM features summarizing the alterations in intrinsic nuclear architecture. A risk prediction model was built incorporating nanoNAM features and clinical features.

RESULTS

A statistically significant differential shift was observed in the drOPD cumulative distributions between progressors and nonprogressors. Of the 12 nanoNAM features, 6 (mean-maximum, mean-mean, mean-median, entropy-median, entropy-entropy, entropy-skewness) showed a statistically significant difference between cases and control subjects. NanoNAM features based prediction model identified progression in independent validation sets, with an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 80.8% ± .35% (mean ± standard error), with an increase to 82.54% ± .46% when combined with length of the BE segment.

CONCLUSIONS

NanoNAM can serve as an adjunct to histopathologic evaluation of BE patients and aid in risk stratification.

External validation of a model determining risk of neoplastic progression of Barrett's esophagus in a cohort of U.S. veterans

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Risk of esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC) in those with Barrett's esophagus (BE) is 11-fold greater than the general population. It remains unclear which BE patients are at highest risk of progression to EAC. We aimed to validate a predictive model risk-stratifying BE patients.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective cohort study at the Houston Veteran Affairs Medical Center of consecutive patients with a new diagnosis of BE from November 1990 to January 2019. Study follow-up was through February 2020. Patients were excluded if they had no follow-up EGD with esophageal biopsy sampling after the initial BE-diagnosing EGD or evidence of high-grade dysplasia (HGD) or EAC on initial EGD. We performed an external validation study of a risk model containing sex, smoking, BE length, and low-grade dysplasia (LGD) status and assessed discriminatory ability using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC).

RESULTS

Among 608 BE patients, 24 progressed to HGD/EAC. The points-based model discriminated well with an AUROC of .72 (95% confidence interval [CI], .63-.82). When categorized into low-, intermediate-, and high-risk groups according to published cutoffs, the AUROC was poor at .57. Restructured into low-risk versus high-risk groups, the AUROC was .72 (95% CI, .64-.80). Excluding baseline LGD did not reduce discriminatory ability (AUROC, .73; 95% CI, .64-.82).

CONCLUSIONS

This external validation provides further evidence that the model including sex, LGD status, smoking status, and BE length may help to risk stratify BE patients. A simplified version excluding LGD status and/or reducing the number of risk groups has increased utility in clinical practice without loss of discriminatory ability.

Barrett's esophagus: The pathomorphological and molecular genetic keystones of neoplastic progression

Barrett's esophagus is a widespread chronically progressing disease of heterogeneous nature. A life threatening complication of this condition is neoplastic transformation, which is often overlooked due to lack of standardized approaches in diagnosis, preventative measures and treatment. In this essay, we aim to stratify existing data to show specific associations between neoplastic transformation and the underlying processes which predate cancerous transition. We discuss pathomorphological, genetic, epigenetic, molecular and immunohistochemical methods related to neoplasia detection on the basis of Barrett's esophagus. Our review sheds light on pathways of such neoplastic progression in the distal esophagus, providing valuable insight into progression assessment, preventative targets and treatment modalities. Our results suggest that molecular, genetic and epigenetic alterations in the esophagus arise earlier than cancerous transformation, meaning the discussed targets can help form preventative strategies in at-risk patient groups.

Neutrophil to lymphocyte ratio and risk of neoplastic progression in patients with Barrett's esophagus

BACKGROUND

Patient's with Barrett's esophagus (BE) are at risk of progression to esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC). Neutrophil to lymphocyte ratio (NLR) was found to be a predictor of poor prognosis in patients with EAC; however, its performance in premalignant esophageal lesions is vague. We aimed to evaluate the utility of NLR as a predictor of histologic progression in patients with BE. METHODS : A prospective cohort of patients with proven BE in a tertiary referral center was retrospectively analyzed. All biopsies were reviewed by an expert gastrointestinal pathologist. The discriminatory capacity of NLR was evaluated by area under the receiver operating characteristic (AUC) curve analysis and Cox regression analysis.

RESULTS

324 patients (mean age 62.3 years, 241 [74.4 %] males) were included in the final analysis. Overall, 13 patients demonstrated histologic progression to neoplasia over a mean follow-up of 3.7 years (progression risk 1.0 % per year). The AUC of NLR for progression to high grade dysplasia (HGD) or EAC was 0.88 (95 % confidence interval [CI] 0.83 - 0.96), and baseline NLR was associated with a 3-fold increase of progression to HGD and EAC during follow-up (hazard ratio [HR] 3.2, 95 %CI 1.5 - 5.8; P < 0.001). Notably, in a subgroup analysis of patients with nondysplastic BE (NDBE) at presentation, NLR was also a risk factor for histologic progression (HR 2.4, 95 %CI 1.7 - 3.4; P < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

NLR predicted histologic progression in patients with BE. Patients with NDBE and NLR above 2.4 can be considered for specific surveillance programs with shorter intervals between sessions.

Independent Validation of a Tissue Systems Pathology Assay to Predict Future Progression in Nondysplastic Barrett's Esophagus: A Spatial-Temporal Analysis

An automated risk prediction assay has previously been shown to objectively identify patients with nondysplastic Barrett's esophagus (NDBE) who are at increased risk of malignant progression. To evaluate the predictive performance of the assay in 76 patients with NDBE of which 38 progressed to high-grade dysplasia/esophageal adenocarcinoma (progressors) and 38 did not (nonprogressors) and to determine whether assessment of additional (spatial) levels per endoscopy and/or multiple (temporal) time points improves assay performance.

Tissue Systems Pathology Test Objectively Risk Stratifies Barrett's Esophagus Patients With Low-Grade Dysplasia

INTRODUCTION

Low-grade dysplasia (LGD) is the best predictor of neoplastic progression in Barrett's esophagus (BE). Most LGD cases are downstaged to nondysplastic (ND) BE on expert pathologist review, which is prone to interobserver variation and not widely available. Recent studies indicate that a risk prediction assay (TissueCypher) risk stratifies patients with NDBE for neoplastic progression. We aimed to investigate whether this risk prediction assay predicts neoplastic progression in BE patients with LGD.

METHODS

A blinded, retrospective cohort study was derived from the screening cohort of a randomized controlled trial of SURveillance vs RadioFrequency ablation for BE patients with LGD. Hematoxylin and eosin and p53 immunohistochemistry slides from the first endoscopy with LGD were independently reviewed by 3 expert pathologists and tested by the risk prediction assay. Revision diagnoses of NDBE were considered low risk, although indefinite for dysplasia, and LGD were considered high risk for progression.

RESULTS

A total of 155 BE patients (123 men), mean age 61 ± 10 years, were analyzed. Thirty-four patients (22%) progressed to high-grade dysplasia/esophageal adenocarcinoma (median time 2.4 years) and 121 did not progress (median high-grade dysplasia/esophageal adenocarcinoma-free surveillance 7.9 years). The risk prediction assay sensitivity was 68% vs 76% for the 3 pathologists, and specificity was 79% vs 64%-77.0% for the pathologists. The assay detected 50%-56% of progressors that were downstaged to NDBE by the pathologists.

DISCUSSION

The risk prediction assay provided significant risk stratification in BE patients with LGD and identified progressors that the experts downstaged to NDBE. This objective assay provides an effective solution to the lack of standardization of expert pathology review of LGD.

Differential MicroRNA Signatures in the Pathogenesis of Barrett's Esophagus

OBJECTIVES:

Barrett's esophagus (BE) is the precursor lesion and a major risk factor for esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC). Although patients with BE undergo routine endoscopic surveillance, current screening methodologies have proven ineffective at identifying individuals at risk of EAC. Since microRNAs (miRNAs) have potential diagnostic and prognostic value as disease biomarkers, we sought to identify an miRNA signature of BE and EAC.

METHODS:

High-throughput sequencing of miRNAs was performed on serum and tissue biopsies from 31 patients identified either as normal, gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD), BE, BE with low-grade dysplasia (LGD), or EAC. Logistic regression modeling of miRNA profiles with Lasso regularization was used to identify discriminating miRNA. Quantitative reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction was used to validate changes in miRNA expression using 46 formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded specimens obtained from normal, GERD, BE, BE with LGD or HGD, and EAC subjects.

RESULTS:

A 3-class predictive model was able to classify tissue samples into normal, GERD/BE, or LGD/EAC classes with an accuracy of 80%. Sixteen miRNAs were identified that predicted 1 of the 3 classes. Our analysis confirmed previous reports indicating that miR-29c-3p and miR-193b-5p expressions are altered in BE and EAC and identified miR-4485-5p as a novel biomarker of esophageal dysplasia. Quantitative reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction validated 11 of 16 discriminating miRNAs.

DISCUSSION:

Our data provide an miRNA signature of normal, precancerous, and cancerous tissue that may stratify patients at risk of progressing to EAC. We found that serum miRNAs have a limited ability to distinguish between disease states, thus limiting their potential utility in early disease detection.

Management of Barrett's esophagus with low-grade dysplasia

Barrett's esophagus progresses to esophageal adenocarcinoma in a stepwise histological fashion of no dysplasia, low grade dysplasia, high grade dysplasia and cancer. Hence the progression to cancer from various histological stages is different. Progression to cancer from low grade dysplasia is highly variable in the literature due to high inter-observer variability between pathologists in diagnosing it. Studies have shown the utility of having confirmation of low grade dysplasia by expert pathologists or documenting its persistence on two subsequent endoscopies in order to unify the diagnosis. The treatment of low grade dysplasia is variable. In this article we summarize the diagnosis, evaluation and management of low grade dysplasia in Barrett's Esophagus.

A case of esophageal actinomycosis with a unique morphology presenting as a refractory ulcer

A 60-year-old man presented with odynophagia after bronchial artery infusion chemotherapy for pulmonary metastasis of hepatocellular carcinoma. Esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) revealed an esophageal ulcer in the middle thoracic esophagus. An esophageal biopsy demonstrated no malignancy. However, the symptoms had not improved after a month. EGD was performed again and showed a white cord lump at the bottom of the same esophageal ulcer identified before, showing no improving tendency. A repeated biopsy of the lump revealed actinomycosis, and the symptoms were improved by the oral administration of ampicillin. We herein report a case in which esophageal actinomycosis with a unique morphology of refractory esophageal ulcer was rapidly improved by the administration of antibiotics.

Predictors of Progression in Barrett's Esophagus with Low-Grade Dysplasia: Results from a Multicenter Prospective BE Registry

OBJECTIVES

Low-grade dysplasia (LGD) is a risk factor for progression in Barrett's esophagus (BE). Progression estimates however vary and predictors of progression are not well established. We aimed to assess predictors of progression in a multicenter BE-LGD cohort.

METHODS

All subjects with LGD (diagnosed by a GI pathologist) in a prospective BE registry were identified. Progression was defined development of HGD/EAC more than 12 months after index date of LGD diagnosis. Clinical, endoscopic factors and impact of histologic review by an independent panel of two GI pathologists were assessed as predictors of progression. Cox proportional hazard models were used to assess their association with risk of progression.

RESULTS

244 BE-LGD subjects met inclusion criteria. Their mean age was 63.2 years. 205 (84%) were males. The median follow up was 4.8 years. Fifty six patients were diagnosed with HGD/EAC in less than 12 months, while 14 progressed to HGD/EAC after 12 months, with an overall annual risk of progression of 1.2%. 29% of LGD subjects were downgraded to non-dysplastic and the remaining re-confirmed as LGD or indefinite dysplasia. The risk of progression in the reconfirmed LGD group was eight fold higher (hazards ratio: 7.6, 95% CI: 1.5-139.4) in a propensity score stratified model.

CONCLUSIONS

In this large BE-LGD cohort, progression risk increased substantially when an additional panel of two expert GI pathologists re-confirmed a LGD diagnosis. These BE subjects may be candidates for endoscopic therapy. LGD was a marker of prevalent HGD/EAC in 18% of patients.

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.

Diagnosis and Management of Low-Grade Dysplasia in Barrett's Esophagus: Expert Review From the Clinical Practice Updates Committee of the American Gastroenterological Association

The purpose of this clinical practice update expert review is to define the key principles in the diagnosis and management of low-grade dysplasia (LGD) in Barrett's esophagus patients. The best practices outlined in this review are based on relevant publications, including systematic reviews and expert opinion (when applicable). Practice Advice 1: The extent of Barrett's esophagus should be defined using a standardized grading system documenting the circumferential and maximal extent of the columnar lined esophagus (Prague classification) with a clear description of landmarks and visible lesions (nodularity, ulceration) when present. Practice Advice 2: Given the significant interobserver variability among pathologists, the diagnosis of Barrett's esophagus with LGD should be confirmed by an expert gastrointestinal pathologist (defined as a pathologist with a special interest in Barrett's esophagus-related neoplasia who is recognized as an expert in this field by his/her peers). Practice Advice 3: Expert pathologists should report audits of their diagnosed cases of LGD, such as the frequency of LGD diagnosed among surveillance patients and/or the difference in incidence of neoplastic progression among patients diagnosed with LGD vs nondysplastic Barrett's esophagus. Practice Advice 4: Patients in whom the diagnosis of LGD is downgraded to nondysplastic Barrett's esophagus should be managed as nondysplastic Barrett's esophagus. Practice Advice 5: In Barrett's esophagus patients with confirmed LGD (based on expert gastrointestinal pathology review), repeat upper endoscopy using high-definition/high-resolution white-light endoscopy should be performed under maximal acid suppression (twice daily dosing of proton pump inhibitor therapy) in 8-12 weeks. Practice Advice 6: Under ideal circumstances, surveillance biopsies should not be performed in the presence of active inflammation (erosive esophagitis, Los Angeles grade C and D). Pathologists should be informed if biopsies are obtained in the setting of erosive esophagitis and if pathology findings suggest LGD, or if no biopsies are obtained, surveillance biopsies should be repeated after the anti-reflux regimen has been further intensified. Practice Advice 7: Surveillance biopsies should be performed in a four-quadrant fashion every 1-2 cm with target biopsies obtained from visible lesions taken first. Practice Advice 8: Patients with a confirmed histologic diagnosis of LGD should be referred to an endoscopist with expertise in managing Barrett's esophagus-related neoplasia practicing at centers equipped with high-definition endoscopy and capable of performing endoscopic resection and ablation. Practice Advice 9: Endoscopic resection should be performed in Barrett's esophagus patients with LGD with endoscopically visible abnormalities (no matter how subtle) in order to accurately assess the grade of dysplasia. Practice Advice 10: In patients with confirmed Barrett's esophagus with LGD by expert GI pathology review that persists on a second endoscopy, despite intensification of acid-suppressive therapy, risks and benefits of management options of endoscopic eradication therapy (specifically adverse events associated with endoscopic resection and ablation), and ongoing surveillance should be discussed and documented. Practice Advice 11: Endoscopic eradication therapy should be considered in patients with confirmed and persistent LGD with the goal of achieving complete eradication of intestinal metaplasia. Practice Advice 12: Patients with LGD undergoing surveillance rather than endoscopic eradication therapy should undergo surveillance every 6 months times 2, then annually unless there is reversion to nondysplastic Barrett's esophagus. Biopsies should be obtained in 4-quadrants every 1-2 cm and of any visible lesions. Practice Advice 13: In patients with Barrett's esophagus-related LGD undergoing ablative therapy, radiofrequency ablation should be used. Practice Advice 14: Patients completing endoscopic eradication therapy should be enrolled in an endoscopic surveillance program. Patients who have achieved complete eradication of intestinal metaplasia should undergo surveillance every year for 2 years and then every 3 years thereafter to detect recurrent intestinal metaplasia and dysplasia. Patients who have not achieved complete eradication of intestinal metaplasia should undergo surveillance every 6 months for 1 year after the last endoscopy, then annually for 2 years, then every 3 years thereafter. Practice Advice 15: Following endoscopic eradication therapy, the biopsy protocol of obtaining biopsies in 4 quadrants every 2 cm throughout the length of the original Barrett's esophagus segment and any visible columnar mucosa is suggested. Practice Advice 16: Endoscopists performing endoscopic eradication therapy should report audits of their rates of complete eradication of dysplasia and intestinal metaplasia and adverse events in clinical practice.

Barrett's esophagus: lessons from recent clinical trials

Data from recent studies cast doubt on former recommendations on diagnosis and management of Barrett’s esophagus. Based on latest research findings several Gastroenterological Associations actualized their guidelines and international experts compiled consensus statements as practical help for clinicians. In this review we discuss recent trials and their impact on clinical practice, current recommendations and persisting controversies in Barrett’s esophagus.

Clinical significance and management of Barrett’s esophagus with epithelial changes indefinite for dysplasia

Barrett’s esophagus (BE) is defined as the extension of salmon-colored mucosa into the tubular esophagus ≥ 1 cm proximal to the gastroesophageal junction with biopsy confirmation of intestinal metaplasia. Patients with BE are at increased risk of esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC), and undergo endoscopic surveillance biopsies to detect dysplasia or early EAC. Dysplasia in BE is classified as no dysplasia, indefinite for dysplasia (IND), low grade dysplasia (LGD) or high grade dysplasia (HGD). Biopsies are diagnosed as IND when the epithelial abnormalities are not sufficient to diagnose dysplasia or the nature of the epithelial abnormalities is uncertain due to inflammation or technical issues. Specific diagnostic criteria for IND are not well established and its clinical significance and management has not been well studied. Previous studies have focused on HGD in BE and led to changes and improvement in the management of BE with HGD and early EAC. Only recently, IND and LGD in BE have become focus of intense study. This review summarizes the definition, neoplastic risk and clinical management of BE IND.

Radiofrequency ablation for low-grade dysplasia in Barrett's esophagus

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The diagnosis and management of low-grade dysplasia (LGD) in Barrett's esophagus continue to evolve and vary in practice. Radiofrequency ablation (RFA) is now an acceptable option for the treatment of LGD. Therefore, the purpose of this review article is to present current literature on the diagnosis and management of LGD, and to explore when to optimally pursue RFA for the treatment of LGD.

RECENT FINDINGS

The challenge of the management of LGD begins with its diagnosis. Because of high interobserver variability among pathologists in the diagnosis of dysplasia, it is recommended that an expert gastrointestinal pathologist confirms the diagnosis of LGD. Endoscopic mucosal resection is indicated to remove visible lesions in the setting of dysplasia to obtain an accurate diagnosis, especially regarding T staging. Management options include intense surveillance and endoscopic eradication therapy. RFA provides a reasonable method to eradicate flat Barrett's mucosa. Endoscopic eradication of confirmed LGD has been demonstrated to reduce the risk of progression to esophageal cancer. Additional data about the risk factors associated with progression, and the benefits and risks of treatment are discussed, and can be incorporated in patient counseling and decision making.

SUMMARY

Endoscopic eradication therapy with RFA may be an appropriate treatment option for LGD in Barrett's esophagus after the benefits and risks have been discussed in detail with the patient.

Patients With Barrett's Esophagus and Persistent Low-grade Dysplasia Have an Increased Risk for High-grade Dysplasia and Cancer

BACKGROUND & AIMS

In some patients with Barrett's esophagus (BE) and a confirmed diagnosis of low-grade dysplasia (LGD), the LGD is not detected during follow-up examinations. We would like to avoid the unnecessary risks and costs of ablative treatment for these patients. Therefore, we investigated whether persistent LGD increases risk for high-grade dysplasia (HGD) or esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC) and what proportion of patients are no longer found to have dysplasia after an initial diagnosis of LGD.

METHODS

In a retrospective study, we collected information on 1579 patients with BE and LGD from 2005 through 2010 by using a nationwide registry of histopathology diagnoses in the Netherlands (PALGA). Confirmed LGD was defined as a diagnosis of LGD that was confirmed by any other pathologist. Persistent LGD was defined as LGD detected at the first and follow-up endoscopy. Data were collected on patients until treatment for HGD, detection of EAC, or the last endoscopy at which a biopsy was collected (through July 2014). We evaluated whether persistent LGD was a risk factor for malignant progression by using univariable and multivariable Cox regression analyses.

RESULTS

Of individuals with BE and LGD in the database, the diagnosis of LGD was confirmed for 161 patients (10% of total). In these patients, the incidence of HGD and/or EAC was 5.18/100 person-years (95% confidence interval [CI], 4.32-8.10/100 person-years) compared with 1.85/100 person-years (95% CI, 1.52-2.22/100 person-years) in patients for whom LGD was not confirmed at the first endoscopy. The incidence of EAC alone in patients with confirmed LGD was 2.51/100 person-years (95% CI, 1.46-3.99/100 person-years), compared with 1.01/per 100 person-years (95% CI, 0.41-2.10/100 person-years) in patients for whom LGD was not confirmed at the first endoscopy. Of patients in whom LGD was confirmed at the first endoscopic examination, 51% were not found to have dysplasia at the first follow-up endoscopy, and 30% had persistent LGD. In patients with persistent LGD, the incidence of HGD and/or EAC was 7.65/100 person-years (95% CI, 4.45-12.34) and of only EAC was 2.04/100 person-years (95% CI, 0.65-4.92); in patients without persistent LGD, the incidence of HGD and/or EAC was 2.32/100 person-years (95% CI, 1.08-4.40/100 person-years) and of only EAC was 1.45 (95% CI, 0.53-3.21/100 person-years). Persistent LGD was found to be an independent risk factor for the development of HGD and/or EAC, with hazard ratio of 3.5 (95% CI, 1.48-8.28).

CONCLUSIONS

In a large population-based cohort study of patients with BE and LGD, the risk of progression to HGD and/or EAC was higher in patients with confirmed LGD and highest in those with confirmed and persistent LGD.

A Tissue Systems Pathology Assay for High-Risk Barrett's Esophagus

BACKGROUND

Better methods are needed to predict risk of progression for Barrett's esophagus. We aimed to determine whether a tissue systems pathology approach could predict progression in patients with nondysplastic Barrett's esophagus, indefinite for dysplasia, or low-grade dysplasia.

METHODS

We performed a nested case-control study to develop and validate a test that predicts progression of Barrett's esophagus to high-grade dysplasia (HGD) or esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC), based upon quantification of epithelial and stromal variables in baseline biopsies. Data were collected from Barrett's esophagus patients at four institutions. Patients who progressed to HGD or EAC in ≥1 year (n = 79) were matched with patients who did not progress (n = 287). Biopsies were assigned randomly to training or validation sets. Immunofluorescence analyses were performed for 14 biomarkers and quantitative biomarker and morphometric features were analyzed. Prognostic features were selected in the training set and combined into classifiers. The top-performing classifier was assessed in the validation set.

RESULTS

A 3-tier, 15-feature classifier was selected in the training set and tested in the validation set. The classifier stratified patients into low-, intermediate-, and high-risk classes [HR, 9.42; 95% confidence interval, 4.6-19.24 (high-risk vs. low-risk); P < 0.0001]. It also provided independent prognostic information that outperformed predictions based on pathology analysis, segment length, age, sex, or p53 overexpression.

CONCLUSION

We developed a tissue systems pathology test that better predicts risk of progression in Barrett's esophagus than clinicopathologic variables.

IMPACT

The test has the potential to improve upon histologic analysis as an objective method to risk stratify Barrett's esophagus patients. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev; 25(6); 958-68. ©2016 AACR.

Risk of malignant progression in Barrett's esophagus indefinite for dysplasia

Barrett's esophagus is a well-recognized risk factor for esophageal adenocarcinoma. The natural history of Barrett's esophagus classified as ‘indefinite for dysplasia’ (IND) is poorly characterized. The aim of this study is to characterize the natural history of IND by determining the rate of neoplastic progression and identifying risk factors for progression. Patients from the University of Pennsylvania Health System pathology database and Barrett's esophagus registry with a diagnosis of IND between 2000 and 2014 were identified. Exclusion criteria included: (1) prior diagnosis of low-grade dysplasia (LGD), high-grade dysplasia (HGD), or esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC); (2) presence of LGD, HGD, or EAC at the time of diagnosis of IND; and (3) lack of follow-up endoscopy after diagnosis. Patients with neoplastic progression were classified as having either prevalent disease (LGD, HGD, or EAC on surveillance biopsy within 12 months of IND diagnosis) or incident disease (LGD, HGD, or EAC on surveillance biopsy >12 months after IND diagnosis). One hundred six patients were eligible for analysis. Of 87 patients with follow-up endoscopy and biopsies within 1 year of IND diagnosis, 7 (8%) had prevalent disease (2 LGD, 4 HGD, 1 EAC). The prevalence of LGD was 2.3%, HGD was 4.6%, and EAC was 1.1%. Importantly, four of the seven prevalent (2 LGD, 2 HGD) cases were found to have dysplasia within 6 months of IND diagnosis. No demographic or endoscopic characteristics studied were associated with prevalent disease. Of the 106 IND patients, there were 66 patients without prevalent dysplasia with >1-year follow-up. Three (4.5%) progressed (1 to LGD after 12 months, 2 to HGD after 16.5 and 28 months), yielding an incidence rate for any dysplasia of 1.4 cases/100 person-years and HGD/EAC of 0.9/100 person-years. Risk factors for incident disease were smoking (p = 0.02) and Barrett's esophagus segment length (p = 0.03). IND is associated with considerable risk of prevalent dysplasia, especially within the first 6 months after diagnosis. However, the incidence of HGD/EAC is low and similar to previous studies of IND. These data suggest that IND patients should have repeat endoscopy within 6 months with careful surveillance protocols. Longer BE length and smoking history may help predict which patients are more likely to develop dysplasia, and therefore identify patients who may warrant even closer monitoring.

Radiofrequency Ablation Is Associated With Decreased Neoplastic Progression in Patients With Barrett's Esophagus and Confirmed Low-Grade Dysplasia

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Barrett's esophagus (BE) with low-grade dysplasia (LGD) can progress to high-grade dysplasia (HGD) and esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC). Radiofrequency ablation (RFA) has been shown to be an effective treatment for LGD in clinical trials, but its effectiveness in clinical practice is unclear. We compared the rate of progression of LGD after RFA with endoscopic surveillance alone in routine clinical practice.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective study of patients who either underwent RFA (n = 45) or surveillance endoscopy (n = 125) for LGD, confirmed by at least 1 expert pathologist, from October 1992 through December 2013 at 3 medical centers in the United States. Cox regression analysis was used to assess the association between progression and RFA.

RESULTS

Data were collected over median follow-up periods of 889 days (interquartile range, 264-1623 days) after RFA and 848 days (interquartile range, 322-2355 days) after surveillance endoscopy (P = .32). The annual rates of progression to HGD or EAC were 6.6% in the surveillance group and 0.77% in the RFA group. The risk of progression to HGD or EAC was significantly lower among patients who underwent RFA than those who underwent surveillance (adjusted hazard ratio = 0.06; 95% confidence interval: 0.008-0.48).

CONCLUSIONS

Among patients with BE and confirmed LGD, rates of progression to a combined end point of HGD and EAC were lower among those treated with RFA than among untreated patients. Although selection bias cannot be excluded, these findings provide additional evidence for the use of endoscopic ablation therapy for LGD.

TissueCypher(™): A systems biology approach to anatomic pathology

Background:

Current histologic methods for diagnosis are limited by intra- and inter-observer variability. Immunohistochemistry (IHC) methods are frequently used to assess biomarkers to aid diagnoses, however, IHC staining is variable and nonlinear and the manual interpretation is subjective. Furthermore, the biomarkers assessed clinically are typically biomarkers of epithelial cell processes. Tumors and premalignant tissues are not composed only of epithelial cells but are interacting systems of multiple cell types, including various stromal cell types that are involved in cancer development. The complex network of the tissue system highlights the need for a systems biology approach to anatomic pathology, in which quantification of system processes is combined with informatics tools to produce actionable scores to aid clinical decision-making.

Aims:

Here, we describe a quantitative, multiplexed biomarker imaging approach termed TissueCypher™ that applies systems biology to anatomic pathology. Applications of TissueCypher™ in understanding the tissue system of Barrett's esophagus (BE) and the potential use as an adjunctive tool in the diagnosis of BE are described.

Patients and Methods:

The TissueCypher™ Image Analysis Platform was used to assess 14 epithelial and stromal biomarkers with known diagnostic significance in BE in a set of BE biopsies with nondysplastic BE with reactive atypia (RA, n = 22) and Barrett's with high-grade dysplasia (HGD, n = 17). Biomarker and morphology features were extracted and evaluated in the confirmed BE HGD cases versus the nondysplastic BE cases with RA.

Results:

Multiple image analysis features derived from epithelial and stromal biomarkers, including immune biomarkers and morphology, showed significant differences between HGD and RA.

Conclusions:

The assessment of epithelial cell abnormalities combined with an assessment of cellular changes in the lamina propria may serve as an adjunct to conventional pathology in the assessment of BE.

Epidemiology of Barrett's Esophagus and Esophageal Adenocarcinoma

Barrett's esophagus (BE) is the precursor to esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC), a disease with increasing burden in the Western world, especially in white men. Risk factors for BE include obesity, tobacco smoking, and gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). EAC is the most common form of esophageal cancer in the United States. Risk factors include GERD, tobacco smoking, and obesity, whereas nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs and statins may be protective. Factors predicting progression from nondysplastic BE to EAC include dysplastic changes on esophageal histology and length of the involved BE segment. Biomarkers have shown promise, but none are approved for clinical use.

BOB CAT: A Large-Scale Review and Delphi Consensus for Management of Barrett's Esophagus With No Dysplasia, Indefinite for, or Low-Grade Dysplasia

OBJECTIVES

Barrett's esophagus (BE) is a common premalignant lesion for which surveillance is recommended. This strategy is limited by considerable variations in clinical practice. We conducted an international, multidisciplinary, systematic search and evidence-based review of BE and provided consensus recommendations for clinical use in patients with nondysplastic, indefinite, and low-grade dysplasia (LGD).

METHODS

We defined the scope, proposed statements, and searched electronic databases, yielding 20,558 publications that were screened, selected online, and formed the evidence base. We used a Delphi consensus process, with an 80% agreement threshold, using GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) to categorize the quality of evidence and strength of recommendations.

RESULTS

In total, 80% of respondents agreed with 55 of 127 statements in the final voting rounds. Population endoscopic screening is not recommended and screening should target only very high-risk cases of males aged over 60 years with chronic uncontrolled reflux. A new international definition of BE was agreed upon. For any degree of dysplasia, at least two specialist gastrointestinal (GI) pathologists are required. Risk factors for cancer include male gender, length of BE, and central obesity. Endoscopic resection should be used for visible, nodular areas. Surveillance is not recommended for <5 years of life expectancy. Management strategies for indefinite dysplasia (IND) and LGD were identified, including a de-escalation strategy for lower-risk patients and escalation to intervention with follow-up for higher-risk patients.

CONCLUSIONS

In this uniquely large consensus process in gastroenterology, we made key clinical recommendations for the escalation/de-escalation of BE in clinical practice. We made strong recommendations for the prioritization of future research.