The changing role of the pathologist in the management of Barrett's oesophagus

The indications for biopsy in routine upper gastrointestinal endoscopy

This review describes the indications and contraindications for endoscopic biopsy, in routine practice, of the upper gastrointestinal (GI) tract. We accept that this review provides grounds for controversy, as our stance in certain situations is counter to some national guidelines. Nevertheless, we provide evidence to support our viewpoints, especially on efficiency and economic grounds. We describe the particular controversies concerning the biopsy assessment of Barrett's oesophagus, chronic gastritis and the duodenum in the investigation of coeliac disease. We accept that there are indications for more extensive upper GI biopsy protocols in children than in adults; the latter constitute our main focus in this article. We would encourage detailed discussion between pathologists and their endoscopy colleagues about the indications, or lack of them, for routine upper GI endoscopic biopsy, as studies have shown that adherence to agreed guidelines has resulted in a very considerable diminution in the biopsy workload without compromising patient management. Furthermore, where biopsy is indicated, we emphasise the importance of accompanying clinical information provided to the pathologist, in particular regarding biopsy site(s), and regular feedback to endoscopists to improve and maintain the quality of such information. Finally, local dialogue is also advised, when necessary, to indicate to endoscopists the need to appropriately segregate biopsies into separate, individually labelled specimens, to maximise the information that can be derived by pathological evaluation and thereby improve the quality of the final pathology report.

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.

Dysplasia in Barrett's oesophagus: p53 immunostaining is more reproducible than haematoxylin and eosin diagnosis and improves overall reliability, while grading is poorly reproducible

AIMS

p53 immunostaining in Barrett's oesophagus (BO) has been shown to be predictive of progression, but data regarding its generalizability to routine practice are lacking. This study compared the reliability of p53 and dysplasia interpretation and grading.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Seventy-two cases encompassing the full spectrum of BO were circulated to 10 pathologists from four institutions after a brief training session in p53 interpretation. Each pathologist classified cases on haematoxylin and eosin (H&E) alone using the Vienna classification and assessed the p53 staining using a qualitative system. Agreement was assessed using kappa statistics. For the four-tier Vienna system, the average unweighted kappa was 0.30. Weighted kappa values varied from 0.27 to 0.69 with an average of 0.47. When grouped into definite dysplasia versus no definite dysplasia the average kappa was 0.55, but the kappa for low-grade dysplasia (LGD) versus high-grade dysplasia (HGD) was only 0.31. For p53, using the three recognized patterns, the unweighted kappa was 0.6 (confidence interval 0.58-0.63). When cases were evaluated with both H&E and p53 the average kappa was 0.61 for definite dysplasia versus the rest.

CONCLUSIONS

p53 immunohistochemistry interpretation is more reliable than dysplasia diagnosis, even with limited training. As it is predictive of prognosis and improves diagnostic reproducibility, it is suitable for routine use by pathologists as an adjunct to dysplasia diagnosis. The distinction of LGD versus HGD was poor. This study supports simplifying dysplasia diagnosis into 'present', 'indefinite' or 'absent', and the use of p53 as an ancillary marker in difficult cases. This should help to prevent overdiagnosis of dysplasia and inappropriate treatment.