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

Low-grade dysplasia in Barrett's esophagus: A problematic diagnosis

Although low-grade dysplasia (LGD) in Barrett's esophagus (BE) is a histopathological diagnosis based on different histological abnormalities, it is still problematic for different reasons. Patients without confirmed diagnosis of LGD undergo unnecessary and intensified follow-up where the risk of progression is low in the majority of cases. In contrast, the presence of confirmed LGD indicates a high risk of progression. In this article we try to address these reasons focusing on re-confirmation of LGD diagnosis, interobserver agreement, and persistent confirmed LGD. The progression risk of LGD to high-grade dysplasia and esophageal adenocarcinoma will also be reviewed.

A Consensus Diagnosis Utilizing Surface KI-67 Expression as an Ancillary Marker in Low-Grade Dysplasia Helps Identify Patients at High Risk of Progression to High-Grade Dysplasia and Esophaegal Adenocarcinoma

Esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC) develops in a step-wise manner, from low-grade dysplasia (LGD) to high-grade dysplasia (HGD), and ultimately to invasive EAC. However, there remains diagnostic uncertainty about LGD and its risk of progression to HGD/EAC. The aim is to investigate the role of Ki-67, immune-histochemical marker of proliferation, surface expression in patients with confirmed LGD, and risk stratify progression to HGD/EAC. A retrospective cohort study was conducted. Patients with confirmed LGD and indefinite for dysplasia (IND), with a mean follow-up of ≥1 year, were included. Pathology specimens were stained for Ki-67 and analyzed for evidence of surface expression. Our results reveal that 29% of patients with confirmed LGD who stained positive with Ki-67 progressed to HGD/EAC as opposed to none (0%) of the patients who stained negative, a statistically significant result (P = 0.003). Similarly, specimens from patients with IND were stained and analyzed revealing a nonsignificant trend toward a higher rate of progression for Ki-67 positive cases versus Ki-67 negative, 30% versus 21%, respectively. Ki-67 expression by itself can identify patients with LGD at a high risk of progression.

Aberrant p53 expression is associated with neoplastic progression in Barrett oesophagus diagnosed as indefinite for dysplasia

The aim of this study was to investigate the role of immunohistochemical (IHC) expression of p53 and other potential clinical parameters as prognostic markers for predicting neoplastic progression in Barrett oesophagus (BE) patients diagnosed as indefinite for dysplasia (IND). The study included patients with established BE of any extent who had a diagnosis of IND accompanied by concurrent p53 immunohistochemistry (IHC) stain at the index endoscopic procedure and at least one follow-up examination between 2000 and 2021. Correlation between disease progression from IND to higher-grade dysplasia [low-grade dysplasia (LGD), high-grade dysplasia (HGD) and oesophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC)] and clinicopathological parameters were analysed. A total of 149 patients (99 males; mean age 63.3 ± 10.0 years, range = 35-89) were included in the final analysis. Median follow-up was 37.1 months [interquartile range (IQR) = 20.5-59.1 months]. Progression rates from IND to LGD and HGD were 12.1% (18 of 149) and 2.7% (four of 149), respectively. On multivariate analysis, the number of IND diagnoses was significantly associated with progression to both LGD and HGD (P = 0.016 and P < 0.001, respectively). Cox regression analysis showed that aberrant p53 expression was significantly associated with progression to LGD [hazard ratio (HR) = 4.87, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.91-12.45, P = 0.001] and HGD (HR = 21.81, 95% CI = 1.88-253.70, P = 0.014). Kaplan-Meier survival analysis also demonstrated that aberrant p53 expression was significantly associated with progression to LGD (P < 0.001) and HGD (P = 0.001). Our results suggest that frequency of IND diagnoses and status of p53 expression can help to stratify risk of neoplastic progression in BE patients with IND.

Management of Dysplastic Barrett's Esophagus and Early Esophageal Adenocarcinoma

While patients with Barrett's esophagus without dysplasia may benefit from endoscopic surveillance, those with low-grade dysplasia may be managed with either endoscopic surveillance or endoscopic eradication. Patients with Barrett's esophagus with high-grade dysplasia and/or intramucosal adenocarcinoma will generally require endoscopic eradication therapy. The management of Barrett's esophagus with dysplasia and early esophageal adenocarcinoma is predominantly endoscopic, with multiple effective methods available for the resection of raised neoplasia and ablation of flat neoplasia. High-dose proton-pump inhibitor therapy is advised during the treatment of Barrett's esophagus with dysplasia and early esophageal adenocarcinoma. After the endoscopic eradication of Barrett's esophagus and associated neoplasia, surveillance is required for the diagnosis and retreatment of recurrence or progression.

Prevalence and Predictors of Missed Dysplasia on Index Barrett's Esophagus Diagnosing Endoscopy in a Veteran Population

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Limitations of endoscopic sampling may result in missed dysplasia at the diagnosis of Barrett's esophagus (BE). However, the role of close follow-up endoscopy is unclear. The aim was to evaluate the proportion of patients diagnosed with "missed" dysplasia within 18 months of their index nondysplastic BE (NDBE) diagnosis.

METHODS

This was a retrospective analysis of a cohort of BE patients diagnosed during 1990-2019 at the Houston VA. Patients with BE on index esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) were classified as NDBE, indefinite dysplasia, or dysplastic (low- or high-grade dysplasia) based on initial biopsies. We identified NDBE patients who had follow-up EGD within 3-18 months after index EGD. We used logistic regression models to estimate odds ratios and 95% confidence intervals for risk factors of dysplasia on follow-up EGD.

RESULTS

We identified 614 patients who had BE on index EGD. Among those with NDBE and follow-up EGD within 3-18 months (n = 271), 4.1% had definite dysplasia on follow-up, and an additional 14.0% had indefinite dysplasia. Proportions of definite or indefinite dysplasia at follow-up within 3-18 months significantly decreased from 32.6% among patients with index EGD before 2009 to 11.7% among patients with index EGD after 2013 (P for trend = .068). Those with any indefinite or definite dysplastic BE at follow-up within 3-18 months after index EGD (n = 49) were more likely to have BE length ≥3 cm on index EGD (odds ratio, 3.39; 95% confidence interval, 1.63-7.08) than those with persistent NDBE or no BE on follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

The occurrence of missed dysplasia on an index EGD has decreased over time. However, those with long segment BE were more than 3 times as likely to have missed dysplasia, and this group could benefit from dysplasia surveillance within 18 months of BE diagnosis.

Diagnosis and Management of Barrett's Esophagus: An Updated ACG Guideline

Barrett's esophagus (BE) is a common condition associated with chronic gastroesophageal reflux disease. BE is the only known precursor to esophageal adenocarcinoma, a highly lethal cancer with an increasing incidence over the last 5 decades. These revised guidelines implement Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation methodology to propose recommendations for the definition and diagnosis of BE, screening for BE and esophageal adenocarcinoma, surveillance of patients with known BE, and the medical and endoscopic treatment of BE and its associated early neoplasia. Important changes since the previous iteration of this guideline include a broadening of acceptable screening modalities for BE to include nonendoscopic methods, liberalized intervals for surveillance of short-segment BE, and volume criteria for endoscopic therapy centers for BE. We recommend endoscopic eradication therapy for patients with BE and high-grade dysplasia and those with BE and low-grade dysplasia. We propose structured surveillance intervals for patients with dysplastic BE after successful ablation based on the baseline degree of dysplasia. We could not make recommendations regarding chemoprevention or use of biomarkers in routine practice due to insufficient data.

Associations between long-term conditions and upper gastrointestinal cancer incidence: A prospective population-based cohort of UK Biobank participants

Background/Aims

Upper gastrointestinal cancers (oesophageal/stomach) have high mortality rates and are often diagnosed after the disease has progressed, making it important to identify populations at greater risk of upper gastrointestinal (UGI) cancer to promote earlier diagnosis. This study aims to determine if there is an association between a broad range of long-term conditions (LTCs) and incidence of UGI cancers.

Method

A prospective-based cohort of 487,798 UK Biobank participants (age 37-73 years) after excluding previous UGI cancer. Least Absolute Shrinkage and Selection Operator (LASSO) regression used to identify candidate LTCs as predictors for UGI cancer. Strength of association was studied using Cox's regression adjusting for demographics and lifestyle factors.

Results

After median follow-up period of 86 months, 598 participants developed oesophageal cancer; 397 developed stomach cancer. In fully adjusted models, participants with alcohol addiction (Hazard Ratio-HR 4.11, 95% Confidence Interval-CI 2.01-8.43), Barrett's oesophagus (HR 5.68, 95% CI 3.36-9.58), bronchiectasis (HR 2.72, 95% CI 1.01-7.31), diabetes (HR 1.38, 95% CI 1.06-1.81), hiatus hernia (HR 1.69, 95% CI 1.16-2.45), Parkinson's disease (HR 3.86, 95% CI 1.60-9.37) and psoriasis/eczema (HR 1.53, 95% 1.08-2.17) were observed to have a higher risk of oesophageal cancer. Stomach cancer incidence was higher among participants with anorexia/bulimia (HR 8.86, 95% CI 1.20-65.14), Barrett's oesophagus (HR 3.37, 95% 1.39-8.14), chronic fatigue syndrome (HR 3.36, 95% CI 1.25-9.03), glaucoma (HR 2.06, 95% CI 1.16-3.67), multiple sclerosis (HR 4.60, 95% CI 1.71-12.34), oesophageal stricture (HR 1.04, 95% CI 1.46-74.46) and pernicious anaemia (HR 6.93, 95% CI 3.42-14.03).

Conclusion

Previously unrecognised LTCs may have a role in symptom appraisal and risk assessment of UGI cancer in primary care. Further research should explore mechanisms underpinning these findings and determine whether they are replicable in other populations.

The evolution of endoscopic therapy for Barrett's esophagus

Barrett’s esophagus is the condition in which a metaplastic columnar epithelium replaces the stratified squamous epithelium that normally lines the distal esophagus. The condition develops as a consequence of chronic gastroesophageal reflux disease and predisposes the patient to the development of esophageal adenocarcinoma. The diagnosis and management of Barrett’s esophagus have undergone dramatic changes over the years and continue to evolve today. Endoscopic eradication therapy has revolutionized the management of dysplastic Barrett’s esophagus and early esophageal adenocarcinoma by significantly reducing the morbidity and mortality associated with the prior gold standard of therapy, esophagectomy. The purpose of this review is to highlight current principles in the management and endoscopic treatment of this disease.

Not all low grade dysplasia in Barrett's oesophagus is the same: using specific histological criteria in predicting progression to neoplasia

Barrett's oesophagus with low grade dysplasia (LGD) is a risk factor for progression to high grade dysplasia (HGD) and oesophageal adenocarcinoma (OAC); however, only a subgroup of LGD will progress. We used a combination of specific histological criteria to identify patients with LGD who are more likely to progress to HGD or OAC. LGD slides from 38 patients within the progressor group (PG) and 17 patients from the non-progressor group (NPG) were obtained and reviewed by two expert GI pathologists, to be stratified by the same four specific histological variables identified by Ten Kate et al.: loss of surface maturation, mucin depletion, nuclear enlargement, and increase of mitosis. After review of LGD slides by two expert GI pathologists, 27 suitable patients were identified. Of these 27 patients there was a higher proportion of patients from the PG with all four specific criteria reported, compared to the NPG: 14 (78%) vs 3 (33%) p=0.0394. Patients with all four specific criteria were more likely to progress compared to those who had one or less specific criteria reported (OR 7, 95% CI 1.1848-41.3585, p=0.032). A combination of ≥2 or ≥3 specific histological criteria was not prognostic. Patients with a combination of all four specific histological criteria (loss of surface maturation, mucin depletion, nuclear enlargement, and increase of mitosis) were associated with greater progression from LGD to HGD or OAC in Barrett's oesophagus.

Endoscopic radiofrequency ablation or surveillance in patients with Barrett's oesophagus with confirmed low-grade dysplasia: a multicentre randomised trial

OBJECTIVE

Due to an annual progression rate of Barrett's oesophagus (BO) with low-grade dysplasia (LGD) between 9% and 13% per year endoscopic ablation therapy is preferred to surveillance. Since this recommendation is based on only one randomised trial, we aimed at checking these results by another multicentre randomised trial with a similar design.

DESIGN

A prospective randomised study was performed in 14 centres comparing radiofrequency ablation (RFA) (maximum of 4 sessions) to annual endoscopic surveillance, including patients with a confirmed diagnosis of BO with LGD. Primary outcome was the prevalence of LGD at 3 years. Secondary outcomes were the prevalence of LGD at 1 year, the complete eradication of intestinal metaplasia (CE-IM) at 3 years, the rate of neoplastic progression at 3 years and the treatment-related morbidity.

RESULTS

125 patients were initially included, of whom 82 with confirmed LGD (76 men, mean age 62.3 years) were finally randomised, 40 patients in the RFA and 42 in the surveillance group. At 3 years, CE-IM rates were 35% vs 0% in the RFA and surveillance groups, respectively (p<0.001). At the same time, the prevalence LGD was 34.3% (95% CI 18.6 to 50.0) in the RFA group vs 58.1% (95% CI 40.7 to 75.4) in the surveillance group (OR=0.38 (95% CI 0.14 to 1.02), p=0.05). Neoplastic progression was found in 12.5% (RFA) vs 26.2% (surveillance; p=0.15). The complication rate was maximal after the first RFA treatment (16.9%).

CONCLUSION

RFA modestly reduced the prevalence of LGD as well as progression risk at 3 years. The risk-benefit balance of endoscopic ablation therapy should therefore be carefully weighted against surveillance in patients with BO with confirmed LGD.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT01360541.

Fundoplication is superior to medical therapy for Barrett's esophagus disease regression and progression: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Fundoplication and medical management are current mainstays for management of Barrett's esophagus (BE), however our understanding of differences in outcomes between these two treatments is limited. The aim of this study was to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the efficacy of these interventions on BE disease regression and progression.

METHODS AND PROCEDURES

A comprehensive search in MEDLINE, EMBASE, Scopus, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library databases was performed on February 22, 2021. Inclusion criteria were studies with both medical and surgical management comparators, BE diagnosis prior to treatment, patients aged ≥ 18 years, and studies with greater than five patients. Primary outcomes of interest included evaluating changes in histopathologic BE regression and disease progression between interventions. Meta-analysis was performed using a Mantel-Haenszel random-effects model (RevMan 5.4.1).

RESULTS

A total of 7231 studies were retrieved after initial search with nine studies (1 randomized trial, 7 prospective cohorts, 1 retrospective cohort) meeting final inclusion criteria. Of included studies, 890 (65%) patients received medical management while 470 (35%) received surgical management. Medical management included proton pump inhibitors (n = 807, 91%; 6 studies), H2-receptor blockers (n = 40, 4% patients; 3 studies), and combination therapy (n = 43, 5%; 1 study). Nissen fundoplication was the most commonly performed type of fundoplication (n = 265, 93%). Median length of follow-up ranged from 1.5-7 years. Meta-analysis revealed that fundoplication was associated with improved histopathologic regression of metaplasia/low-grade dysplasia (OR 4.38; 95% CI 2.28-8.42; p < 0.00001) and disease progression to dysplasia/adenocarcinoma (OR 0.34; 95% CI 0.12-0.96; p = 0.04) compared to medical therapy.

CONCLUSION

Fundoplication is superior to medical therapy with regards to improved odds of histopathologic BE disease regression and disease progression. Additional randomized trials which directly compare medical management and surgical intervention are required to delineate the optimal delivery and timing of these interventions.

Epidemiology of Barrett's Esophagus and Esophageal Adenocarcinoma: Implications for Screening and Surveillance

In the United States, the incidence of esophageal adenocarcinoma increased markedly since the 1970s with a recent stabilization. Despite evolving screening and surveillance strategies to diagnose, risk triage, and intervene in Barrett's esophagus patients to prevent esophageal adenocarcinoma, most cases present with advanced disease and poor resultant survival. Epidemiologic studies have identified the main risk factors for these conditions, including increasing age, male sex, white race, gastroesophageal reflux disease, abdominal obesity, cigarette smoking, and lack of infection with Helicobacter pylori. This review summarizes the current epidemiologic evidence with implications for screening and surveillance in Barrett's esophagus and esophageal adenocarcinoma.

Optimizing Outcomes with Radiofrequency Ablation of Barrett's Esophagus: Candidates, Efficacy and Durability

The treatment of early Barrett's esophagus (BE) has undergone a paradigm shift from surgical subtotal esophagectomy to organ-saving endoluminal treatment. Over the past 15 years, several high-quality studies were conducted to assess safe oncological outcome of endoscopic resection of mucosal adenocarcinoma and high-grade dysplasia. It became clear that add-on ablative therapy with radiofrequency ablation (RFA) significantly reduces recurrence risk of neoplasia after resection. In this review, we highlight the most essential elements to optimize outcomes of RFA of BE, addressing the correct indication and patient selection in combination with the most efficient and safest treatment protocols to obtain long-term durability.

Reduced Esophageal Contractility Is Associated with Dysplasia Progression in Barrett's Esophagus: A Multicenter Cohort Study

BACKGROUND

The incidence of Barrett's esophagus (BE) and esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC) continues to rise, and risk stratification of patients with BE is needed. Impaired esophageal motility is associated with gastroesophageal reflux disease; however, whether esophageal dysmotility is a risk factor for dysplasia progression in BE is incompletely understood. This study aimed to characterize esophageal motility patterns in patients with BE and identify physiologic factors associated with dysplasia progression in BE.

METHODS

This multicenter retrospective study assessed data from adult patients with histologically confirmed BE who underwent high-resolution esophageal manometry from 1/2014 to 1/2018 at four tertiary care centers. Longitudinal data were collected when available among patients with non-dysplastic BE (NDBE) and separated as: no dysplastic progression or positive dysplastic progression. Multivariable logistic regression assessed for independent predictors of dysplasia progression.

RESULTS

Among 193 patients, histology at index endoscopy identified 152 (79%) NDBE, 23 (12%) low-grade dysplasia, 14 (7%) high-grade dysplasia, and 4 (2%) EAC. Ninety-eight (51%) had abnormal esophageal motor function on manometry. Longitudinal data were available for 84 of 152 patients with initial NDBE. Twelve (14%) exhibited dysplastic progression to low-grade (6) or high-grade (6) dysplasia. Mean esophageal distal contractile integral was lower for patients that progressed [455 mmHg s cm (SD 515)] compared with patients who did not progress [987 mmHg s cm (SD 953); aOR 1.21 (95% CI 1.01, 1.44)].

CONCLUSION

In this retrospective study of 193 BE patients, the majority exhibited abnormal esophageal motor function. Reduced esophageal contractility was independently associated with dysplastic progression in BE. Characterizing esophageal physiology in BE may help to risk stratify patients.

Barrett's Registry Collaboration of academic centers in Ireland reveals high progression rate of low-grade dysplasia and low risk from nondysplastic Barrett's esophagus: report of the RIBBON network

Barrett's esophagus (BE) is the main pathological precursor of esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC). Progression to high-grade dysplasia (HGD) or EAC from nondysplastic BE (NDBE), low-grade dysplasia (LGD) and indefinite for dysplasia (IND) varies widely between population-based studies and specialized centers for many reasons, principally the rigor of the biopsy protocol and the accuracy of pathologic definition. In the Republic of Ireland, a multicenter prospective registry and bioresource (RIBBON) was established in 2011 involving six academic medical centers, and this paper represents the first report from this network. A detailed clinical, endoscopic and pathologic database registered 3,557 patients. BE was defined strictly by both endoscopic evidence of Barrett's epithelium and the presence of specialized intestinal metaplasia (SIM). A prospective web-based database was used to gather information with initial and follow-up data abstracted by a data manager at each site. A total of 2,244 patients, 1,925 with no dysplasia, were included with complete follow-up. The median age at diagnosis was 60.5 with a 2.1:1 male to female ratio and a median follow-up time of 2.7 years (IQR 1.19-4.04), and 6609.25 person years. In this time period, 125 (5.57%) progressed to HGD/EAC, with 74 (3.3%) after 1 year of follow-up and 38 (1.69%) developed EAC, with 20 (0.89%) beyond 1 year. The overall incidence of HGD/EAC was 1.89% per year; 1.16% if the first year is excluded. The risk of progression to EAC alone overall was 0.57% per year, 0.31% excluding the first year, and 0.21% in the 1,925 patients who had SIM alone at diagnosis. Low-grade dysplasia (LGD) progressed to HGD/EAC in 31% of patients, a progression rate of 12.96% per year, 6.71% with the first year excluded. In a national collaboration of academic centers in Ireland, the progression rate for NDBE was similar to recent population studies. Almost one in two who progressed was evident within 1 year. Crucially, LGD diagnosed and confirmed by specialist gastrointestinal pathologists represents truly high-risk disease, highlighting the importance of expertise in diagnosis and management, and providing indirect support for ablative therapies in this context.

Towards screening Barrett's oesophagus: current guidelines, imaging modalities and future developments

Barrett's oesophagus is the only known precursor to oesophageal adenocarcinoma (OAC). Although guidelines on the screening and surveillance exist in Barrett's oesophagus, the current strategies are inadequate. Oesophagogastroduodenoscopy (OGD) is the gold standard method in screening for Barrett's oesophagus. This invasive method is expensive with associated risks negating its use as a current screening tool for Barrett's oesophagus. This review explores current definitions, epidemiology, biomarkers, surveillance, and screening in Barrett's oesophagus. Imaging modalities applicable to this condition are discussed, in addition to future developments. There is an urgent need for an alternative non-invasive method of screening and/or surveillance which could be highly beneficial towards reducing waiting times, alleviating patient fears and reducing future costs in current healthcare services. Vibrational spectroscopy has been shown to be promising in categorising Barrett's oesophagus through to high-grade dysplasia (HGD) and OAC. These techniques need further validation through multicentre trials.

Persistent indefinite for dysplasia in Barrett's esophagus is a risk factor for dysplastic progression to low-grade dysplasia

Patients with Barrett's esophagus (BE) are at increased risk of esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC). The risk is largely based on the degree of dysplasia. Dysplasia cannot always be differentiated from inflammatory changes, and therefore may be classified as indefinite for dysplasia (IND). The risk of progressive dysplasia in patients with IND is unclear. Our aim is to characterize the risk of progression in US veterans with BE-IND. We performed a single-center retrospective cohort study of patients with BE-IND between 2006 and 2016. All IND was diagnosed by consensus conference with an expert gastrointestinal (GI) pathologist or review by an expert GI pathologist and persistence was defined as IND present on subsequent endoscopic biopsy. The primary outcome was the incidence rate of high-grade dysplasia (HGD)/EAC. Secondary outcomes included any progression including incident low-grade dysplasia (LGD), any prevalent dysplasia and risk factors for dysplastic progression, namely persistent IND. Risk factors for progression were assessed using univariate and multivariate analysis with logistic regression. Among 107 patients with BE-IND, there were no incident cases of HGD/EAC. Twenty patients (18.7%) developed incident LGD during a median follow-up of 2.39 years (interquartile range, 1.13-5.17). The annual rate of progression to LGD was 5.95 per 100 patient-years (95% CI, 3.73-9.02). Prevalent dysplasia was common (9.3%). Eight patients had prevalent LGD, one patient had prevalent HGD and one patient had prevalent EAC. Twenty-eight patients (30.1%) were found to have persistent IND. Among those with persistent IND, 10 (36%) patients progressed to LGD (none to HGD/EAC). The progression rate to LGD for patients with persistent IND was 7.86 (95% CI, 3.99-14.02) cases per 100 patient-years versus 4.78 (95% CI, 2.48-8.52) for nonpersistent IND (P = 0.036). The odds ratio for progression to LGD in persistent IND was 3.06 (95% CI, 1.08-8.64). In multivariate analysis adjusting for age, smoking history, presence of hiatal hernia and BMI > 30, persistent IND remained significant (OR 3.23; 95% CI, 1.04-9.98). Regression to nondysplastic BE was very common. Seventy-one (61%) patients developed complete and sustained regression of all dysplastic changes at last follow-up. Persistent IND, present in one-third of patients with IND, is an independent risk factor for progression to LGD. Although no patients in this cohort developed HGD/EAC, prevalent dysplasia was common (9.3%). Taken together, patients with IND should receive close surveillance for both prevalent and incident dysplasia especially if IND is persistent.

A narrative review of Barrett's esophagus in 2020, molecular and clinical update

Barrett’s esophagus (BE) is a condition resulting from an acquired metaplastic epithelial change in the esophagus in response to gastroesophageal reflux. BE is the only known precursor lesion to esophageal adenocarcinoma, and can progress from non-dysplastic BE (NDBE) to low grade dysplasia (LGD) and high grade dysplasia (HGD), and ultimately invasive carcinoma. Although the risk of developing esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC) in NBDE is less than 0.5% per year, there has been a rising incidence of EAC in Western countries, which continue to drive efforts to optimize screening and surveillance methods. The current gold standard for diagnosis is esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD), and there has been significant interest in alternative, minimally invasive methods for screening which would be more readily accessible in the primary care setting. Surveillance endoscopy in 3–5 years is recommended for NDBE given the low progression to EAC. The mainstay of treatment for LGD and HGD is endoscopic eradication therapy (EET). Visible lesions are treated with endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) or endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD). Radiofrequency ablation (RFA) is considered first line therapy for flat dysplastic BE and cryotherapy has shown promising results as an alternate form of treatment for of dysplasia. The molecular progression of BE to EAC is a complex process involving multiple pathways involving genetic and epigenetic modifications. Genomic studies have further led to the understanding of the complex molecular landscape that occurs early and late in the disease process. Promising biomarker panels have been investigated to help with the diagnosis of BE as well as aid in the risk stratification of BE during surveillance. In addition, clinical prediction models have been developed to categorize BE patients in low, intermediate, and high risk for progression to HGD and EAC. Further clinical and translational research is needed to help refine markers and techniques in diagnosis, screening, and surveillance.

Persistent confirmed low-grade dysplasia in Barrett's esophagus is a risk factor for progression to high-grade dysplasia and adenocarcinoma in a US Veterans cohort

Patients with Barrett's esophagus (BE) and low-grade dysplasia (LGD) are at increased risk of esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC), although many regress to nondysplastic BE. This has significant clinical importance for patients being considered for endoscopic eradication therapy. Our aim is to determine the risk for progression in patients with confirmed persistent LGD. We performed a single-center retrospective cohort study of patients with BE and confirmed LGD between 2006 and 2016. Confirmed LGD was defined as LGD diagnosed by consensus conference with an expert GI pathologist or review by an expert GI pathologist and persistence as LGD present on subsequent endoscopic biopsy. The primary outcome was the incidence rate of HGD (high-grade dysplasia)/EAC. Secondary outcomes included risk factors for dysplastic progression. Risk factors for progression were assessed using univariate and multivariate analysis with logistic regression. Of 69 patients (mean age 65.2 years) with confirmed LGD were included. In total, 16 of 69 patients (23.2%) with LGD developed HGD/EAC during a median follow-up of 3.74 years (IQR, 1.24-5.45). For persistent confirmed LGD, the rate was 6.44 (95% confidence interval (CI), 2.61-13.40) compared to 2.61 cases per 100 patient-years (95% CI, 0.83-6.30) for nonpersistent LGD. Persistent LGD was found in only 29% of patients. Persistent LGD was an independent risk factor for the development of HGD/EAC (OR 4.18; [95% CI, 1.03-17.1]). Persistent confirmed LGD, present in only 1/3 of patients, was an independent risk factor for the development of HGD/EAC. Persistence LGD may be useful in decision making regarding the management of BE.

AGA Clinical Practice Update on Endoscopic Treatment of Barrett's Esophagus With Dysplasia and/or Early Cancer: Expert Review

DESCRIPTION

The purpose of this best practice advice article is to describe the role of Barrett's endoscopic therapy (BET) in patients with Barrett's esophagus (BE) with dysplasia and/or early cancer and appropriate follow-up of these patients.

METHODS

The best practice advice provided in this document is based on evidence and relevant publications reviewed by the committee. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 1: In BE patients with confirmed low-grade dysplasia, a repeat examination with high-definition white-light endoscopy should be performed within 3-6 months to rule out the presence of a visible lesion, which should prompt endoscopic resection. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 2: Both BET and continued surveillance are reasonable options for the management of BE patients with confirmed and persistent low-grade dysplasia. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 3: BET is the preferred treatment for BE patients with high-grade dysplasia (HGD). BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 4: BET should be preferred over esophagectomy for BE patients with intramucosal esophageal adenocarcinoma (T1a). BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 5: BET is a reasonable alternative to esophagectomy in patients with submucosal esophageal adenocarcinoma (T1b) with low-risk features (<500-μm invasion in the submucosa [sm1], good to moderate differentiation, and no lymphatic invasion) especially in those who are poor surgical candidates. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 6: In all patients undergoing BET, mucosal ablation should be applied to 1) all visible esophageal columnar mucosa; 2) 5-10 mm proximal to the squamocolumnar junction and 3) 5-10 mm distal to the gastroesophageal junction, as demarcated by the top of the gastric folds (ie, gastric cardia) using focal ablation in a circumferential fashion. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 7: Mucosal ablation therapy should only be performed in the presence of flat BE without signs of inflammation and in the absence of visible abnormalities. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 8: BET should be performed by experts in high-volume centers that perform a minimum of 10 new cases annually. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 9: BET should be continued until there is an absence of columnar epithelium in the tubular esophagus on high-definition white-light endoscopy and preferably optical chromoendoscopy. In case of complete endoscopic eradication, the neosquamous mucosa and the gastric cardia are sampled by 4-quadrant biopsies. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 10: If random biopsies obtained from the neosquamous epithelium demonstrate intestinal metaplasia/dysplasia or subsquamous intestinal metaplasia, a repeat endoscopy should be performed and visible islands or tongues should undergo targeted focal ablation. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 11: Intestinal metaplasia of the gastric cardia (without residual columnar epithelium in the tubular esophagus) should not warrant additional ablation therapy. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 12: When consenting patients for BET, the most common complication of therapy to be quoted is post-procedural stricture formation, occurring in about 6% of cases. Bleeding and perforation occur at rates <1%. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 13: After complete eradication (endoscopic and histologic) of intestinal metaplasia has been achieved with BET, surveillance endoscopy with biopsies should be performed at the following intervals: for baseline diagnosis of HGD/esophageal adenocarcinoma: at 3, 6, and 12 months and annually thereafter; and baseline diagnosis of low-grade dysplasia: at 1 and 3 years. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 14: Endoscopic surveillance post therapy should be performed with high-definition white-light endoscopy, including careful inspection of the neosquamous mucosal and retroflexed inspection of the gastric cardia. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 15: The approach to recurrent disease is similar to that of the initial therapy; visible recurrent nodular lesions require endoscopic resection, whereas flat areas of columnar mucosa in the tubular esophagus can be treated with mucosal ablation. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 16: Patients should be counseled on cancer risk in the absence of BET, as well as after BET, to allow for informed decision-making between the patient and the physician.

Diffuse endoscopically visible, predominantly low grade dysplasia in Barrett's esophagus (with video)

Background  Low grade dysplasia (LGD) in Barrett's esophagus (BE) has generally been considered as undetectable endoscopically. Aim  To describe a phenotype which consists of diffuse, endoscopically visible, predominantly low grade dysplasia in Barrett's esophagus (DEVLB), with often subtle but visible endoscopic changes seen with high definition white light (HDWL) and narrow-band imaging (NBI). Method  A systematic search of a prospectively collected database for patients satisfying predefined criteria for DEVLB and a review of endoscopic and histological features of biopsies and endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) specimens. Results  Out of a total of 419 patients referred to our expert center for assessment of dysplastic Barrett's esophagus during the period January 2009 to March 2018, there were 7 patients (1.7 %) who satisfied the criteria defined for DEVLB, identified on their initial assessment endoscopy. All patients were treated by EMR of visible abnormal mucosa during their assessment endoscopy at our tertiary referral center. There was a total of 47 EMR specimens obtained, with a median of 6 (IQR 5-9) EMR resection pieces per patient, of which 36 (77 %) contained LGD, 8 (17 %) high grade dysplasia (HGD), 2 (4 %) non-dysplastic Barrett's esophagus (NDBE), and 1 (2 %) contained early esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC). Conclusion  DEVLB is a distinct phenotype seen in a small but significant proportion of individuals with dysplastic Barrett's esophagus. Patients with DEVLB have widespread LGD, with many having areas of focal HGD or early cancer within this area. We believe these patients are best treated with extensive EMR of the visibly abnormal area.

Improved Progression Prediction in Barrett's Esophagus With Low-grade Dysplasia Using Specific Histologic Criteria

Risk stratification of patients with Barrett's esophagus (BE) is based on diagnosis of low-grade dysplasia (LGD). LGD has a poor interobserver agreement and a limited value for prediction of progression to high-grade dysplasia or esophageal adenocarcinoma. Specific reproducible histologic criteria may improve the predictive value of LGD. Four gastrointestinal pathologists examined 12 histologic criteria associated with LGD in 84 BE patients with LGD (15 progressors and 69 nonprogressors). The criteria with at least a moderate (kappa, 0.4 to 0.6) interobserver agreement were validated in an independent cohort of 98 BE patients with LGD (30 progressors and 68 nonprogressors). Hazard ratios (HR) were calculated by Cox proportional hazard regression analysis using time-dependent covariates correcting for multiple endoscopies during follow-up. Agreement was moderate or good for 4 criteria, that is, loss of maturation, mucin depletion, nuclear enlargement, and increase of mitosis. Combination of the criteria differentiated high-risk and low-risk group amongst patients with LGD diagnosis (P<0.001). When ≥2 criteria were present, a significantly higher progression rate to high-grade dysplasia or esophageal adenocarcinoma was observed (discovery set: HR, 5.47; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.81-17; P=0.002; validation set: HR, 3.52; 95% CI, 1.56-7.97; P=0.003). Implementation of p53 immunohistochemistry and histologic criteria optimized the prediction of progression (area under the curve, 0.768; 95% CI, 0.656-0.881). We identified and validated a clinically applicable panel of 4 histologic criteria, segregating BE patients with LGD diagnosis into defined prognostic groups. This histologic panel can be used to improve clinical decision making, although additional studies are warranted.

Barrett oesophagus

Barrett oesophagus (BE), the only known histological precursor of oesophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC), is a condition in which the squamous epithelium of the oesophagus is replaced by columnar epithelium as an adaptive response to gastro-oesophageal reflux. EAC has one of the fastest rising incidences of cancers in Western countries and has a dismal prognosis. BE is usually detected during endoscopic examination, and diagnosis is confirmed by the histological presence of intestinal metaplasia. Advances in genomics and transcriptomics have improved our understanding of the pathogenesis and malignant progression of intestinal metaplasia. As the majority of EAC cases are diagnosed in individuals without a known history of BE, screening for BE could potentially decrease disease-related mortality. Owing to the pre-malignant nature of BE, endoscopic surveillance of patients with BE is imperative for early detection and treatment of dysplasia to prevent further progression to invasive EAC. Developments in endoscopic therapy have resulted in a major shift in the treatment of patients with BE who have dysplasia or early EAC, from surgical resection to endoscopic resection and ablation. In addition to symptom control by optimization of lifestyle and pharmacological therapy with proton pump inhibitors, chemopreventive strategies based on NSAIDs and statins are currently being investigated for BE management.

Endosheath ultrathin transnasal endoscopy is a cost-effective method for screening for Barrett's esophagus in patients with GERD symptoms

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Barrett's esophagus (BE) screening is currently not considered to be cost effective in the general population but may be effective in high-risk subgroups, such as 50-year-old white men with chronic reflux disease (GERD). A new modality for screening is unsedated transnasal endoscopy using endosheath technology (uTNE), which has been shown to be safe and effective in clinical practice. In this study, we determined the cost-utility of uTNE in a high-risk subgroup compared with no screening or screening with standard endoscopy.

METHODS

A Markov model was used to simulate screening of 50-year-old white men with symptoms of GERD with either uTNE or standard endoscopy compared with no screening, over a lifetime horizon. Input variables were based on the literature and recent data on uTNE screening for BE. The study was designed from a healthcare payer perspective by using direct costs. Primary outcome measures were costs, quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), and the incremental cost-utility ratio (ICUR) of uTNE and standard endoscopy compared with no screening. Sensitivity analysis was performed for several factors, such as prevalence of BE.

RESULTS

Costs of uTNE, standard endoscopy, and no screening were estimated at, $2495, $2957, and $1436, respectively. Compared with no screening, uTNE screening resulted in an overall QALY increase of 0.039 (95% percentile 0.018; 0.063) and an ICUR of $29,446 per QALY gained (95% confidence interval [CI], 18.516-53.091), whereas standard endoscopy compared with no screening resulted in a QALY increase of 0.034 (95% CI, 0.015-0.056) and an ICUR of $47,563 (95% CI, 31,036-82,970).

CONCLUSION

Both uTNE and standard endoscopy seem to be cost-effective screening methods in a screening cohort of 50-year-old white men with GERD at a willingness-to-pay cutoff of $50,000.

Inter-institutional variations regarding Barrett's esophagus diagnosis

BACKGROUND

Barrett's esophagus (BE) is a known precursor for development of esophageal adenocarcinoma and surveillance of affected patients is necessary when cancer progression risk is considered to be high. However, the accuracy of BE diagnosis may not be homogenous among institutions with endoscopy units. We investigated inter-institutional variability by examining the accuracy of endoscopic diagnosis of BE at 4 different hospitals.

METHODS

The accuracy of BE diagnosis at the 4 hospitals was retrospectively reviewed by 6 expert endoscopists, who independently reviewed endoscopic images of approximately 500 consecutive patients examined at each hospital without information regarding the diagnosis by the on-site endoscopists. When the expert reviewers made different diagnosis, a final diagnosis was made by consensus. That was then compared with the diagnosis of the attending endoscopists at each hospital and their concordance was calculated separately for each endoscopy unit. In addition, the relationship between diagnostic accuracy and endoscopic experience was assessed.

RESULTS

The prevalence of BE diagnosis by the on-site endoscopists was not homogenous and varied widely (17.2-96.8%). In 1 hospital, over-diagnosis was the cause of dissimilarity, while under-diagnosis was the cause in two hospitals. Diagnostic accuracy by the attending endoscopists in all 4 hospitals ranged from 44.6 to 83.1% (P < 0.05). There was no significant association between diagnostic accuracy and endoscopic experience or board licensing status of the on-site endoscopists.

CONCLUSION

Diagnostic accuracy for BE was not homogenous among 4 hospitals, and problems related to over- and under-diagnosis should be considered.

Endoscopic therapy for confirmed low-grade dysplasia in Barrett's esophagus

Barrett's esophagus (BE) is a premalignant condition characterized by replacement of the esophageal lining with metastatic columnar epithelium. To date, the management in case of confirmed low-grade dysplasia (LGD) remains controversial. In this article we summarize the available endoscopic options and their results in terms of efficacy and safety in the treatment of confirmed LGD in BE.

Higher Rate of Barrett's Detection in the First Year After Successful Endoscopic Therapy: Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Endoscopic eradication therapy (EET) is highly effective in treating dysplastic Barrett's esophagus (BE). Current surveillance intervals after complete remission of intestinal metaplasia (CRIM) are based on expert opinion. We performed a meta-analysis to compare BE detection in the first year to the subsequent ones METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, Scopus and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials through 1 August 2017 for studies reporting IM and neoplasia detection after CRIM. Pooled incidence rate (IR) of IM detection was calculated for each year after CRIM. We compared IM, dysplasia, and high grade dysplasia (HGD)/esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC) detection in the first year after CRIM to the years after.

RESULTS

Twenty two studies were included involving 1973 patients with follow-up of 5176 patient-years. IM detection IR per patient-year in the 1st year was 12% (95% CI: 8-17%), in the 2nd year 7% (95% CI: 4-11%), and in the 3rd year 3% (95% CI: 1-7%). IM detection rate in the first year was significantly higher compared to the years after (relative risk (RR) 1.8 (95% CI: 1.29-2.49)). Dysplasia detection IR in the first year after achieving CRIM was 3% per patient-year (95% CI: 2-5%). Dysplasia detection IR after the first year was 1% (95% CI: 1-2%) and significantly higher in the first year compared to the years after (RR: 1.92 (95% CI: 1.32-2.8). HGD/EAC detection was 1 %/patient-year (95% CI: 0-2%) in the first year after CRIM compared to 0%/patient-year (95% CI: 0-1%) in subsequent years. HGD/EAC IR was higher in the first year (RR: 1.58 (95% CI: 0.94-2.65)).

CONCLUSION

Neoplasia detection after successful treatment of BE appears more common within the first year of surveillance. This appears to be due to incompletely treated prevalent rather than recurrent disease. More intensive surveillance in the first year following CRIM is warranted.

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.

Longitudinal outcomes of radiofrequency ablation versus surveillance endoscopy for Barrett's esophagus with low-grade dysplasia

Radiofrequency ablation of Barrett's esophagus with low-grade dysplasia is recommended in recent American College of Gastroenterology guidelines, with endoscopic surveillance considered a reasonable alternative. Few studies have directly compared outcomes of radiofrequency ablation to surveillance and those that have are limited by short duration of follow-up. This study aims to compare the long-term effectiveness of radiofrequency ablation versus endoscopic surveillance in a large, longitudinal cohort of patients with Barrett's esophagus, and low-grade dysplasia.We conducted a retrospective analysis of patients with confirmed low-grade dysplasia at a single academic medical center from 1991 to 2014. Patients progressing to high-grade dysplasia or esophageal adenocarcinoma within one year of index LGD endoscopy were defined as missed dysplasia and excluded. Risk factors for progression were assessed via Cox proportional hazards model. Comparison of progression risk was conducted using a Kaplan-Meier analysis. Subset analyses were conducted to examine the effect of reintroducing early progressors and excluding patients diagnosed prior to the advent of ablative therapy. Of 173 total patients, 79 (45.7%) underwent radiofrequency ablation while 94 (54.3%) were untreated, with median follow up of 90 months. Seven (8.9%) patients progressed to high-grade dysplasia or adenocarcinoma despite ablation, compared with 14 (14.9%) undergoing surveillance (P = 0.44). This effect was preserved when patients diagnosed prior to the introduction of radiofrequency ablation were excluded (8.9% vs 13%, P = 0.68). Reintroduction of patients progressing within the first year of follow-up resulted in a trend toward significance for ablation versus surveillance (11.1% vs 23.8%, P = 0.053).In conclusion, progression to high-grade dysplasia or adenocarcinoma was not significantly reduced in the radiofrequency ablation cohort when compared to surveillance. Despite recent studies suggesting the superiority of radiofrequency ablation in reducing progression, diligent endoscopic surveillance may provide similar long-term outcomes.

Natural History of Barrett's Esophagus

Barrett's esophagus (BE) is a very common condition. We have obtained fairly profound knowledge of the natural history of this condition. This results from many cross-sectional and cohort studies, many describing patients undergoing long-term surveillance. Their consent to use their clinical data has improved our knowledge to the benefit of these same and other patients. The prevalence of BE increases with age both in men and in women. This increase starts at a younger age in men than in women. The incidence of high-grade dysplasia and cancer in BE depends on segment length, gender, and age. The latter two likely indicate the duration of the presence of BE in an individual patient. Other factors that influence the incidence of dysplasia and cancer are smoking behavior and use of certain medications such as PPIs, statins, and NSAIDs. Surveillance of BE and treatment of dysplasia can impact the incidence of and mortality due to esophageal adenocarcinoma. This is of major benefit to a subgroup of BE patients. The epidemiology and burden of disease ask for further efforts to develop targeted screening, surveillance, and intervention techniques in coming years.

Feasibility of liquid nitrogen cryotherapy after failed radiofrequency ablation for Barrett's esophagus

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Radiofrequency ablation (RFA) for dysplastic Barrett's esophagus (BE) is highly effective. RFA failures are infrequent but can be a challenging cohort to manage. There are limited data on the feasibility of liquid nitrogen cryospray ablation for complete eradication of dysplasia (CE-D) and/or intestinal metaplasia (CE-IM) after RFA has failed to achieve CE-IM in patients with dysplastic BE.

METHODS

This is a retrospective review from two medical centers of prospectively maintained databases looking at patients that underwent liquid nitrogen cryospray ablation for refractory intestinal metaplasia post failed RFA.

RESULTS

Eighteen patients were identified that met inclusion criteria. Eleven patients had persistent dysplasia and IM following RFA and seven had persistent non-dysplastic IM. More than 80% of patients were male with long-segment BE (median length 8 cm). Seventy two percent of patients with dysplasia achieved CE-D after cryotherapy. Fifty percent (9/18) of all RFA failures achieved CE-IM with cryotherapy. In comparison, RFA has a CE-IM of 78% in a less challenging treatment naïve cohort from a large-scale meta-analysis of 3802 patients. No adverse events occurred in our cohort.

CONCLUSION

Cryospray ablation is feasible and safe for achieving CE-D and CE-IM after RFA failure. The CE-D rates are high with cryotherapy in this population. CE-IM with cryotherapy is acceptable in this difficult-to-treat cohort when compared to CE-IM rates with RFA in dysplastic BE treatment naïve patients (50% vs 78%).

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.