Costs associated with Barrett's esophagus screening in the community: an economic analysis of a prospective randomized controlled trial of sedated versus hospital unsedated versus mobile community unsedated endoscopy

Diagnosis and treatment of patients with gastroesophageal reflux disease - a systematic review of cost-effectiveness and economic burden

BACKGROUND

This study aims to review the existing knowledge on the cost-effectiveness and item costs related to the diagnosis and treatment of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) patients at different stages.

METHODS

The study adhered to the PRISMA guidelines. The systematic search involved several steps: finding and identifying relevant articles, filtering them according to the set criteria, and examining the final number of selected articles to obtain the primary information. The number of articles published between 2013 and September 2024 in the Web of Science and PubMed databases was considered. The CHEERS checklist was used for the risk of bias assessment. Ultimately, 36 studies were included.

RESULTS

Regarding the cost-effectiveness of GERD treatment, Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) appeared to be the dominant solution for non-refractory patients. However, this might change with the adoption of the novel drug vonoprazan, which is more effective and cheaper. With advancements in emerging technologies, new diagnostic and screening approaches such as Endosheath, Cytosponge, and combined multichannel intraluminal impedance and pH monitoring catheters should be considered, with potential implications for optimal GERD management strategies.

DISCUSSION

The new diagnostic methods are reliable, safe, and more comfortable than standard procedures. PPIs are commonly used as the first line of treatment for GERD. Surgery, such as magnetic sphincter augmentation or laparoscopic fundoplication, is only recommended for patients with treatment-resistant GERD or severe symptoms.

OTHER

Advances in emerging technologies for diagnostics and screening may lead to a shift in the entire GERD treatment model, offering less invasive options and potentially improving patients' quality of life.

Cost-effective identification of Barrett's esophagus in the community: A first step towards screening

BACKGROUND AND AIM

The first step towards developing a screening strategy for Barrett's esophagus (BE) is the identification of individuals in the community. Currently available tools include endoscopy, less-invasive non-endoscopic devices, and non-invasive risk stratification models. We evaluated the cost of potential strategies for identification of BE as a first step towards screening.

METHODS

Two hypothetical cohorts of the general population aged ≥ 50 years with BE prevalence rates of 1.9% and 6.8% were modeled. Four potential screening tools were evaluated: (i) risk stratification based on non-weighted clinical factors according to US/European guidelines, (ii) weighted risk stratification using algorithmic models, (iii) less-invasive devices such as Cytosponge + trefoil factor 3 (TFF3), and (iv) endoscopy. Using a decision-analytic model, the cost per BE case identified and the cost-effectiveness were compared for six potential BE screening strategies based on combinations of the four screening tools; (i) + (iv), (ii) + (iv), (iii) + (iv), (i) + (iii) + (iv), (ii) + (iii) + (iv), and only (iv).

RESULTS

The cost per BE case identified was lowest for the weighted risk stratification followed by Cytosponge-TFF3 then endoscopy strategy at both 1.9% and 6.8% BE prevalences (US$9282 and US$3406, respectively) although it was sensitive to the cost of less-invasive devices. This strategy was also most cost-effective for a BE prevalence of 1.9%. At BE prevalence of 6.8%, the Cytosponge-TFF3 followed by endoscopy strategy was most cost-effective.

CONCLUSIONS

Incorporating weighted risk stratification and less-invasive devices such as Cytosponge-TFF3 into BE screening strategies has a potential to cost-effectively identify BE in the community although device cost and the community prevalence of BE will impact the optimal strategy.

Algorithm Training and Testing for a Nonendoscopic Barrett's Esophagus Detection Test in Prospective Multicenter Cohorts

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Endoscopic Barrett's esophagus (BE) and esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC) detection is invasive and expensive. Nonendoscopic BE/EAC detection tools are guideline-endorsed alternatives. We previously described a 5-methylated DNA marker (MDM) panel assayed on encapsulated sponge cell collection device (CCD) specimens. We aimed to train a new algorithm using a 3-MDM panel and test its performance in an independent cohort.

METHODS

Algorithm training and test samples were from 2 prospective multicenter cohorts. All BE cases had esophageal intestinal metaplasia (with or without dysplasia/EAC); control subjects had no endoscopic evidence of BE. The CCD procedure was followed by endoscopy. From CCD cell lysates, DNA was extracted, bisulfite treated, and MDMs were blindly assayed. The algorithm was set and locked using cross-validated logistic regression (training set) and its performance was assessed in an independent test set.

RESULTS

Training (N = 352) and test (N = 125) set clinical characteristics were comparable. The final panel included 3 MDMs (NDRG4, VAV3, ZNF682). Overall sensitivity was 82% (95% CI, 68%-94%) at 90% (79%-98%) specificity and 88% (78%-94%) sensitivity at 84% (70%-93%) specificity in training and test sets, respectively. Sensitivity was 90% and 68% for all long- and short-segment BE, respectively. Sensitivity for BE with high-grade dysplasia and EAC was 100% in training and test sets. Overall sensitivity for nondysplastic BE was 82%. Areas under the receiver operating characteristic curves for BE detection were 0.92 and 0.94 in the training and test sets, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

A locked 3-MDM panel algorithm for BE/EAC detection using a nonendoscopic CCD demonstrated excellent sensitivity for high-risk BE cases in independent validation samples. (Clinical trials.gov: NCT02560623, NCT03060642.).

Improving esophageal cancer screening across the globe: Translating knowledge into action

Esophageal cancer (EC) is a pressing global health concern, ranking as the eighth most common cancer and the sixth leading cause for cancer-related deaths worldwide. Esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC) and esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) are the two major histological types of esophageal cancer associated with distinct risk factors and geographical distributions. Unfortunately, the outcomes for both types of EC remain discouraging, with a five-year survival rate of less than 20% when diagnosed at advanced stages. Advanced endoscopic techniques have the potential to vastly enhance patient outcomes and impede the progression of pre-malignant lesions to cancer. However, low screening rates with endoscopy due to its invasive nature and high cost hinder its effectiveness. Despite extensive research on risk predictors, a significant number of cases still go undiagnosed, highlighting the need for improved screening techniques that can be implemented at the population level. To increase uptake, a shift towards minimally invasive, well-tolerated and cost-effective non-endoscopic technologies is crucial. The implementation of such devices in primary care settings, specifically targeting high-risk populations, can be a promising strategy. With early detection and enrollment in surveillance programs, there is hope for substantial improvement in morbidity and mortality rates through modern minimally invasive endoscopic and surgical techniques.

Prevalence and Predictors of Barrett's Esophagus After Negative Initial Endoscopy: Analysis From Two National Databases

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Guidelines suggest a single screening esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) in patients with multiple risk factors for Barrett's esophagus (BE). We aimed to determine BE prevalence and predictors on repeat EGD after a negative initial EGD, using 2 large national databases (GI Quality Improvement Consortium [GIQuIC] and TriNetX).

METHODS

Patients who underwent at least 2 EGDs were included and those with BE or esophageal adenocarcinoma detected at initial EGD were excluded. Patient demographics and prevalence of BE on repeat EGD were collected. Multivariate logistic regression was performed to assess for independent risk factors for BE detected on the repeat EGD.

RESULTS

In 214,318 and 153,445 patients undergoing at least 2 EGDs over a median follow-up of 28-35 months, the prevalence of BE on repeat EGD was 1.7% in GIQuIC and 3.4% in TriNetX, respectively (26%-45% of baseline BE prevalence). Most (89%) patients had nondysplastic BE. The prevalence of BE remained stable over time (from 1 to >5 years from negative initial EGD) but increased with increasing number of risk factors. BE prevalence in a high-risk population (gastroesophageal reflux disease plus ≥1 risk factor for BE) was 3%-4%.

CONCLUSIONS

In this study of >350,000 patients, rates of BE on repeat EGD ranged from 1.7%-3.4%, and were higher in those with multiple risk factors. Most were likely missed at initial evaluation, underscoring the importance of a high-quality initial endoscopic examination. Although routine repeat endoscopic BE screening after a negative initial examination is not recommended, repeat screening may be considered in carefully selected patients with gastroesophageal reflux disease and ≥2 risk factors for BE, potentially using nonendoscopic tools.

New Techniques to Screen for Barrett Esophagus

Barrett esophagus (BE) is the only known precursor to esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC), a cancer that continues to have a poor 5-year survival rate of 20%. Current BE screening strategies aim to detect BE and EAC at early, curable stages, but the majority of patients with EAC are diagnosed outside of BE screening and surveillance programs. Guidelines around the world suggest screening for BE in patients with gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) and additional demographic and clinical risk factors using high-definition white-light endoscopy (HDWLE). However, current strategies relying on HDWLE are problematic with high direct and indirect costs, procedural risks, and limitations in patient selection owing to the low sensitivity of GERD as a risk factor for detection of BE. In an effort to address these shortcomings, a variety of other screening strategies are under investigation, including risk prediction algorithms, noninvasive cell collection devices, and other new technologies to make screening more efficient and cost-effective. At this time, only cell collection devices have been integrated into professional guidelines, and clinical implementation of alternatives to endoscopy has lagged. In the future, screening may be personalized using a combination of different screening modalities. This article discusses the current state of BE screening and new approaches that may alter the future of screening.

Pediatric Unsedated Transnasal Endoscopy

Unsedated transnasal endoscopy (TNE) is a feasible, safe, and cost-effective procedure for pediatric patients. TNE provides direct visualization of the esophagus and enables acquisition of biopsy samples while eliminating the risks associated with sedation and anesthesia. TNE should be considered in the evaluation and monitoring of disorders of the upper gastrointestinal tract, particularly in diseases such as eosinophilic esophagitis that often require repeated endoscopy. Setting up a TNE program requires a thorough business plan as well as training of staff and endoscopists.

Unsedated transnasal endoscopy for the detection of Barrett's esophagus: systematic review and meta-analysis

Conventional esophagogastroduodenoscopy (cEGD) is currently the gold standard endoscopic procedure for diagnosis and surveillance of Barrett's esophagus (BE). This procedure is however less suitable for widespread screening because of its invasiveness and costs. An alternative endoscopic procedure is unsedated transnasal endoscopy (uTNE). We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy, patient tolerability, technical success rate, and safety of uTNE compared with cEGD for detecting BE and related neoplasia. PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library were searched for studies that reported the diagnostic accuracy of uTNE compared with cEGD for detecting BE and related neoplasia. Eight prospective studies were included, in which 623 patients underwent both uTNE and cEGD. Pooled sensitivity and specificity of uTNE for detecting columnar epithelium were 98% (95% CI 83-100%) and 99% (95% CI 82-100%), respectively. Pooled sensitivity and specificity of uTNE for detecting intestinal metaplasia in biopsies were 89% (95% CI 78-95%) and 93% (95% CI 71-98%), respectively. In three of the six studies that reported patient tolerability, a higher patient tolerability of uTNE compared with cEGD was reported. The technical success rate of uTNE ranged from 89% to 100% and no (serious) adverse events were reported. This systematic review and meta-analysis provides evidence that uTNE is an accurate, safe, and well-tolerated procedure for the detection of columnar epithelium and can be considered as screening modality for BE.

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.

Relief Effect of Carbon Dioxide Insufflation in Transnasal Endoscopy for Health Checks-A Prospective, Double-Blind, Case-Control Trial

CO2 insufflation has proven effective in reducing patients’ pain after colonoscopies but has not been examined in esophagogastroduodenoscopies. Therefore, we examined the effect of CO2 insufflation in examinees who underwent transnasal endoscopies without sedation. This study is a single-center, prospective, double-blind, case-control trial conducted between March 2017 and August 2018. Subjects were assigned weekly to receive insufflation with either CO2 or air. The primary outcome was improvement of abdominal pain and distension at 2 h and 1-day postprocedure. In total, 336 and 338 examinees were assigned to the CO2 and air groups, respectively. Visual analog scale (VAS) scores for abdominal distension (15.4 vs. 25.5; p < 0.001) and distress from flatus (16.0 vs. 28.8; p < 0.001) at 2 h postprocedure were significantly reduced in the CO2 group. VAS scores for pain during the procedure (33.5 vs. 37.1; p = 0.059) and abdominal pain after the procedure (3.9 vs. 5.7; p = 0.052) also tended to be lower at 2 h postprocedure, but all parameters showed no significant difference at 1-day postprocedure. All procedures were safely completed through the planned program, and no apparent adverse events requiring treatment or follow-up occurred. In conclusion, CO2 insufflation may reduce postprocedural abdominal discomfort from transnasal esophagogastroduodenoscopies. (UMIN000028543).

Unsedated Transnasal Endoscopy: A Safe, Well-Tolerated and Accurate Alternative to Standard Diagnostic Peroral Endoscopy

Diagnostic unsedated transnasal endoscopy (uTNE) has been proven to be a safe and well-tolerated procedure. Although its utilization in the United Kingdom (UK) is increasing, it is currently available in only a few centers. Through consideration of recent studies, we aimed to perform an updated review of the technological advances in uTNE, consider their impact on diagnostic accuracy, and to determine the role of uTNE in the COVID-19 era. Current literature has shown that the diagnostic accuracy of uTNE for identification of esophageal pathology is equivalent to conventional esophagogastroduodenoscopy (cEGD). Concerns regarding suction and biopsy size have been addressed by the introduction of TNE scopes with working channels of 2.4 mm. Advances in imaging have improved detection of early gastric cancers. The procedure is associated with less cardiac stress and reduced aerosol production; when combined with no need for sedation and improved rates of patient turnover, uTNE is an efficient and safe alternative to cEGD in the COVID-19 era. We conclude that advances in technology have improved the diagnostic accuracy of uTNE to the point where it could be considered the first line diagnostic endoscopic investigation in the majority of patients. It could also play a central role in the recovery of diagnostic endoscopic services during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Barrett's Esophagus: Diagnosis, Management, and Key Updates

Barrett's esophagus (BE) is the precursor lesion for esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC) development. Unfortunately, BE screening/surveillance has not provided the anticipated EAC reduction benefit. Noninvasive techniques are increasingly available or undergoing testing to screen for BE among those with/without known risk factors, and the use of artificial intelligence platforms to aid endoscopic screening and surveillance will likely become routine, minimizing missed cases or lesions. Management of high-grade dysplasia and intramucosal EAC is clear with endoscopic eradication therapy preferred to surgery. BE with low-grade dysplasia can be managed with removal of visible lesions combined with endoscopic eradication therapy or endoscopic surveillance at present.

Comparative Cost Effectiveness of Reflux-Based and Reflux-Independent Strategies for Barrett's Esophagus Screening

INTRODUCTION

Minimally invasive tests for Barrett's esophagus (BE) detection have raised the prospect of broader nonreflux-based testing. Cost-effectiveness studies have largely studied men aged 50 years with chronic gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) symptoms. We evaluated the comparative cost effectiveness of BE screening tests in GERD-based and GERD-independent testing scenarios.

METHODS

Markov modeling was performed in 3 scenarios in 50 years old individuals: (i) White men with chronic GERD (GERD-based); (ii) GERD-independent (all races, men and women), BE prevalence 1.6%; and (iii) GERD-independent, BE prevalence 5%. The simulation compared multiple screening strategies with no screening: sedated endoscopy (sEGD), transnasal endoscopy, swallowable esophageal cell collection devices with biomarkers, and exhaled volatile organic compounds. A hypothetical cohort of 500,000 individuals followed for 40 years using a willingness to pay threshold of $100,000 per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) was simulated. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) comparing each strategy with no screening and comparing screening strategies with each other were calculated.

RESULTS

In both GERD-independent scenarios, most non-sEGD BE screening tests were cost effective. Swallowable esophageal cell collection devices with biomarkers were cost effective (<$35,000/QALY) and were the optimal screening tests in all scenarios. Exhaled volatile organic compounds had the highest ICERs in all scenarios. ICERs were low (<$25,000/QALY) for all tests in the GERD-based scenario, and all non-sEGD tests dominated no screening. ICERs were sensitive to BE prevalence and test costs.

DISCUSSION

Minimally invasive nonendoscopic tests may make GERD-independent BE screening cost effective. Participation rates for these strategies need to be studied.

Screening for Barrett's Oesophagus: Are We Ready for it?

Purpose of review

The targeted approach adopted for Barrett’s oesophagus (BO) screening is sub-optimal considering the large proportion of BO cases that are currently missed. We reviewed the literature highlighting recent technological advancements in efforts to counteract this challenge. We also provided insights into strategies that can improve the outcomes from current BO screening practises.

Recent findings

The standard method for BO detection, endoscopy, is invasive and expensive and therefore inappropriate for mass screening. On the other hand, endoscopy is more cost-effective for screening a high-risk population. A consensus has however not been reached on who should be screened. Risk prediction algorithms have been tested as an enrichment pre-screening tool reporting modest AUC’s but require more prospective evaluation studies. Less invasive endoscopy methods like trans-nasal endoscopy, oesophageal capsule endsocopy and non-endoscopic cell collection devices like the Cytosponge coupled with biomarker analysis have shown promise in BO detection with randomised clinical trial evidence.

Summary

A three-tier precision cancer programme whereby risk prediction algorithms and non-endoscopic minimally invasive cell collection devices are used to triage test a wider pool of individuals may improve the detection rate of current screening practises with minimal cost implications.

Accurate Nonendoscopic Detection of Barrett's Esophagus by Methylated DNA Markers: A Multisite Case Control Study

INTRODUCTION

Nonendoscopic Barrett's esophagus (BE) screening may help improve esophageal adenocarcinoma outcomes. We previously demonstrated promising accuracy of methylated DNA markers (MDMs) for the nonendoscopic diagnosis of BE using samples obtained from a capsule sponge-on-string (SOS) device. We aimed to assess the accuracy of these MDMs in an independent cohort using a commercial grade assay.

METHODS

BE cases had ≥ 1 cm of circumferential BE with intestinal metaplasia; controls had no endoscopic evidence of BE. The SOS device was withdrawn 8 minutes after swallowing, followed by endoscopy (the criterion standard). Highest performing MDMs from a previous study were blindly assessed on extracted bisulfite-converted DNA by target enrichment long-probe quantitative amplified signal (TELQAS) assays. Optimal MDM combinations were selected and analyzed using random forest modeling with in silico cross-validation.

RESULTS

Of 295 patients consented, 268 (91%) swallowed the SOS device; 112 cases and 89 controls met the pre-established inclusion criteria. The median BE length was 6 cm (interquartile range 4-9), and 50% had no dysplasia. The cross-validated sensitivity and specificity of a 5 MDM random forest model were 92% (95% confidence interval 85%-96%) and 94% (95% confidence interval 87%-98%), respectively. Model performance was not affected by age, gender, or smoking history but was influenced by the BE segment length. SOS administration was well tolerated (median [interquartile range] tolerability 2 [0, 4] on 10 scale grading), and 95% preferred SOS over endoscopy.

DISCUSSION

Using a minimally invasive molecular approach, MDMs assayed from SOS samples show promise as a safe and accurate nonendoscopic test for BE prediction.

Unsedated Transnasal Endoscopy for Preoperative Examination of Bariatric Patients: a Prospective Study

BACKGROUND

Esophagogastroduodenoscopy is a preoperative examination commonly required for candidates to bariatric surgery (BS). Overweight individuals have a greater risk of cardiorespiratory complications during endoscopy under sedation. This study aimed to investigate the feasibility, tolerance, and cardiovascular stress of transnasal endoscopy (TNE) without sedation in obese patients eligible for BS.

METHODS

This prospective study enrolled obese adult patients with indication for BS that consented to undergo unsedated preoperative TNE. All examinations were carried out in an outpatient center. The outcomes assessed were endoscopic findings, procedural success, patients' tolerance according to a visual analogic scale, cardiovascular stress estimated by double product (i.e., systolic blood pressure × heart rate) and adverse events. Statistical analyses were used to compare each patient's double product among different examination periods.

RESULTS

Ninety-four patients (77.6% female) completed the study, with an average body mass index (BMI) of 53 kg/m² (range, 35-73.4 kg/m²). There were 63 super-obese individuals (67%), with BMI > 50 kg/m². In 93 patients (98.9%), unsedated TNE was successfully completed up to the second part of the duodenum. TNE failed in one patient. Tolerance was rated as excellent or good in 95.7%. Minimal cardiovascular stress was noted in obese individuals, whereas the double product remained stable throughout the procedure in super-obese patients. Three patients (3.2%) had self-limited epistaxis.

CONCLUSIONS

Unsedated TNE for preoperative endoscopic evaluation of obese patients is feasible, safe, and well tolerated and should be preferentially considered when examining super-obese patients.

Recent advances in understanding and preventing oesophageal cancer

Oesophageal cancer is a common cancer that continues to have a poor survival. This is largely in part due to its late diagnosis and early metastatic spread. Currently, screening is limited to patients with multiple risk factors via a relatively invasive technique. However, there is a large proportion of patients diagnosed with oesophageal cancer who have not been screened. This has warranted the development of new screening techniques that could be implemented more widely and lead to earlier identification and subsequently improvements in survival rates. This article also explores progress in the surveillance of Barrett’s oesophagus, a pre-malignant condition for the development of oesophageal adenocarcinoma. In recent years, advances in early endoscopic intervention have meant that more patients are considered at an earlier stage for potentially curative treatment.

Miniature gastrointestinal endoscopy: Now and the future

Since its original application, gastrointestinal (GI) endoscopy has undergone many innovative transformations aimed at expanding the scope, safety, accuracy, acceptability and cost-effectiveness of this area of clinical practice. One method of achieving this has been to reduce the caliber of endoscopic devices. We propose the collective term “Miniature GI Endoscopy”. In this Opinion Review, the innovations in this field are explored and discussed. The progress and clinical use of the three main areas of miniature GI endoscopy (ultrathin endoscopy, wireless endoscopy and scanning fiber endoscopy) are described. The opportunities presented by these technologies are set out in a clinical context, as are their current limitations. Many of the positive aspects of miniature endoscopy are clear, in that smaller devices provide access to potentially all of the alimentary canal, while conferring high patient acceptability. This must be balanced with the costs of new technologies and recognition of device specific challenges. Perspectives on future application are also considered and the efforts being made to bring new innovations to a clinical platform are outlined. Current devices demonstrate that miniature GI endoscopy has a valuable place in investigation of symptoms, therapeutic intervention and screening. Newer technologies give promise that the potential for enhancing the investigation and management of GI complaints is significant.

Screening high-risk populations for esophageal and gastric cancer

Cancers of the esophagus and stomach remain important causes of mortality worldwide, in large part because they are most often diagnosed at advanced stages. Thus, it is imperative that we identify and treat these cancers in earlier stages. Due to significant heterogeneity in incidence and risk factors for these cancers, it has been challenging to develop standardized screening recommendations. This review summarizes the current recommendations for screening populations at high risk of developing esophagogastric cancers.

Novel Screening Tests for Barrett's Esophagus

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

There has been an exponential increase in the incidence of esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC) over the last half century. Barrett's esophagus (BE) is the only known precursor lesion of EAC. Screening for BE in high-risk populations has been advocated with the aim of identifying BE, followed by endoscopic surveillance to detect dysplasia and early stage cancer, with the intent that treatment can improve outcomes. We aimed to review BE screening methodologies currently recommended and in development.

RECENT FINDINGS

Unsedated transnasal endoscopy allows for visualization of the distal esophagus, with potential for biopsy acquisition, and can be done in the office setting. Non-endoscopic screening methods being developed couple the use of swallowable esophageal cell sampling devices with BE specific biomarkers, as well as trefoil factor 3, methylated DNA markers, and microRNAs. This approach has promising accuracy. Circulating and exhaled volatile organic compounds and the foregut microbiome are also being explored as means of detecting EAC and BE in a non-invasive manner. Non-invasive diagnostic techniques have shown promise in the detection of BE and may be effective methods of screening high-risk patients.

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.

Barrett's esophagus: novel strategies for screening and surveillance

Barrett’s esophagus is the precursor lesion for esophageal adenocarcinoma. Screening and surveillance of Barrett’s esophagus are undertaken with the goal of earlier detection and lowering the mortality from esophageal adenocarcinoma. The widely used technique is standard esophagogastroduodenoscopy with biopsies per the Seattle protocol for screening and surveillance of Barrett’s esophagus. Surveillance intervals vary depending on the degree of dysplasia with endoscopic eradication therapy confined to patients with Barrett’s esophagus and confirmed dysplasia. In this review, we present various novel techniques for screening of Barrett’s esophagus such as unsedated transnasal endoscopy, cytosponge with trefoil factor-3, balloon cytology, esophageal capsule endoscopy, liquid biopsy, electronic nose, and oral microbiome. In addition, advanced imaging techniques such as narrow band imaging, dye-based chromoendoscopy, confocal laser endomicroscopy, volumetric laser endomicroscopy, and wide-area transepithelial sampling with computer-assisted three-dimensional analysis developed for better detection of dysplasia are also reviewed.

Acceptability, Accuracy, and Safety of Disposable Transnasal Capsule Endoscopy for Barrett's Esophagus Screening

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Screening for Barrett's esophagus (BE) with conventional esophagogastroduodenoscopy (C-EGD) is expensive. We assessed the performance of a clinic-based, single use transnasal capsule endoscope (EG Scan II) for the detection of BE, compared to C-EGD as the reference standard.

METHODS

We performed a prospective multicenter cohort study of patients with and without BE recruited from 3 referral centers (1 in the United States and 2 in the United Kingdom). Of 200 consenting participants, 178 (89%) completed both procedures (11% failed EG Scan due to the inability to intubate the nasopharynx). The mean age of participants was 57.9 years and 67% were male. The prevalence of BE was 53%. All subjects underwent the 2 procedures on the same day, performed by blinded endoscopists. Patients completed preference and validated tolerability (10-point visual analogue scale [VAS]) questionnaires within 14 days of the procedures.

RESULTS

A higher proportion of patients preferred the EG Scan (54.2%) vs the C-EGD (16.7%) (P < .001) and the EG Scan had a higher VAS score (7.2) vs the C-EGD (6.4) (P = .0004). No serious adverse events occurred. The EG Scan identified any length BE with a sensitivity value of 0.90 (95% CI, 0.83-0.96) and a specificity value of 0.91 (95% CI, 0.82-0.96). The EG Scan identified long segment BE with a sensitivity value of 0.95 and short segment BE with a sensitivity values of 0.87.

CONCLUSIONS

In a prospective study, we found the EG Scan to be safe and to detect BE with higher than 90% sensitivity and specificity. A higher proportion of patients preferred the EG Scan to C-EGD. This device might be used as a clinic-based tool to screen populations at risk for BE. ISRCTN registry identifier: 70595405; ClinicalTrials.gov no: NCT02066233.

Point-Counterpoint: Screening and Surveillance for Barrett's Esophagus, Is It Worthwhile?

The exponential rise in incidence of esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC), paired with persistently poor survival, continues to drive efforts to improve and optimize screening and surveillance practices. While advancements in endoscopic therapy have generated a shift in management and significantly improved the outcomes of patients with early-stage EAC, the majority of prevalent EAC continues to be diagnosed at advanced stages, remaining ineligible for curative therapy. Barrett's esophagus (BE) screening, when applied to high-yield target populations, using minimally or noninvasive accurate tests, followed by endoscopic surveillance to detect prevalent or incident dysplasia/EAC (which can then be treated successfully) is the cornerstone of the current BE management paradigm. While supported by some empiric evidence and attractive, this approach faces a number of challenges, which are also balanced by numerous recent advances in these areas. In this manuscript, we review the rationale, supportive evidence, current challenges, and recent progress in BE screening and surveillance.

Emerging optical methods for endoscopic surveillance of Barrett's oesophagus

Barrett's oesophagus is an acquired metaplastic condition that predisposes patients to the development of oesophageal adenocarcinoma, prompting the use of surveillance regimes to detect early malignancy for endoscopic therapy with curative intent. The currently accepted surveillance regime uses white light endoscopy together with random biopsies, but has poor sensitivity and discards information from numerous light-tissue interactions that could be exploited to probe structural, functional, and molecular changes in the tissue. Advanced optical methods are now emerging that are highly sensitive to these changes and hold potential to improve surveillance of Barrett's oesophagus if they can be applied endoscopically. The next decade will see some of these exciting new methods applied to surveillance of Barrett's oesophagus in new device architectures for the first time, potentially leading to a long-awaited improvement in the standard of care.

Recent Advances in Screening for Barrett's Esophagus

OPINION STATEMENT

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: There is a pressing need for effective strategies to halt the increase in both the incidence and mortality of esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC). Screening for Barrett's esophagus, which is the only known precursor of EAC, remains a ripe area for research, particularly with regard to identifying the target population, screening tools, and management of screen-detected populations. This review aims to explore in depth the rationale for screening for Barrett's esophagus, recent biotechnological advances which may have the potential of making screening feasible, and also highlight the challenges which will have to be overcome in order make screening for BE a realistic prospect.

RECENT FINDINGS

Imaging techniques such as portable transnasal endoscopy have the advantage of providing an immediate diagnosis of Barrett's esophagus as well as other significant pathologies such as reflux esophagitis and cancer; however, larger studies in non-enriched community screening populations are required to evaluate their feasibility. The capsule sponge is a cell-sampling device coupled with a biomarker, which has been most extensively evaluated with very promising results as regards feasibility, acceptability, accuracy, and cost-effectiveness. Its effectiveness in increasing the detection of Barrett's esophagus in primary care is currently being evaluated. Several Barrett's esophagus risk prediction scores have been developed with variable degrees of accuracy. Several minimally and non-invasive screening techniques have been studied including imaging and cell-sampling devices. Barrett's risk assessment models need to be further validated in independent, relevant screening populations with clear cut-offs for recommending screening to be defined.

Comparative Assessment of Patient Preferences and Tolerability in Barrett Esophagus Screening: Results From a Randomized Trial

GOALS

To determine patient preference for the Barrett esophagus (BE) screening techniques.

BACKGROUND

Sedated esophagogastroduodenoscopy (sEGD) and unsedated transnasal endoscopy (uTNE) are both potential techniques for BE screening. However, systematic assessment of patient preference for these 2 techniques is lacking. As part of a comparative effectiveness randomized trial of BE screening modalities, we measured short-term patient preferences for the following approaches: in-clinic uTNE (huTNE), mobile-based uTNE (muTNE), and sEGD using a novel assessment instrument.

STUDY

Consenting community patients without known BE were randomly assigned to receive huTNE, muTNE, or sEGD, followed by a telephone administered preference and tolerability assessment instrument 24 hours after study procedures. Patient preference was measured by the waiting trade-off method.

RESULTS

In total, 201 patients completed screening with huTNE (n=71), muTNE (n=71), or sEGD (n=59), and a telephone interview. Patients' preferences for sEGD and uTNE using the waiting trade-off method were comparable (P=0.51). Although tolerability scores were superior for sEGD (P<0.001) compared with uTNE, scores for uTNE examinations were acceptable.

CONCLUSIONS

Patient preference is comparable between sEGD and uTNE for diagnostic examinations conducted in an endoscopy suite or in a mobile setting. Given acceptable tolerability, uTNE may be a viable alternative to sEGD for BE screening.