Patient-reported experiences and views on the Cytosponge test: a mixed-methods analysis from the BEST3 trial

'This has given me the peace of mind I needed': ethnographic insights into Barrett's oesophagus screening using the capsule sponge test

In 2021 and 2022, researchers carried out an implementation trial that considered how the capsule sponge test might be used to screen for Barrett's oesophagus using a mobile clinic in East Anglia. This paper offers insights from 15 months of ethnographic fieldwork studying the trial. It aims to highlight the value of the test in offering reassurance to worried patients, particularly to those with a family history of oesophageal adenocarcinoma. It also considers the variety of aims people held for the capsule sponge test, including the hope that it would address their symptoms of acid reflux, and the conflict that sometimes emerged as a result. The second half of the paper uses fieldwork carried out in virtual support groups for people with Barrett's oesophagus to explore experiences postdiagnosis, which sometimes were defined by fear of future cancers. It describes notable differences between the care offered to people with morphological risk conditions like Barrett's oesophagus and the care given to those with genetic risk conditions, including the provision of genetic counselling. More broadly, the paper highlights a tension between patient-centred and risk-centred medicine that is likely to grow as healthcare services continue to shift towards preventative approaches.

Oesophageal cell collection device and biomarker testing to identify high-risk Barrett's patients requiring endoscopic investigation

BACKGROUND

Barrett's oesophagus surveillance places significant burden on endoscopy services yet is vital to detect early cancerous change. Oesophageal cell collection device (OCCD) testing was introduced across Scotland for Barrett's surveillance in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. This national pragmatic retrospective study presents the CytoSCOT programme results and evaluates whether OCCD testing is successfully identifying high-risk Barrett's patients requiring urgent endoscopy.

METHODS

All patients undergoing OCCD testing for Barrett's surveillance across 11 Scottish health boards over a 32-month period were identified. Patients who underwent endoscopy within 12 months of OCCD test were included. Individual patient records were interrogated to record clinical information and OCCD test result to categorize patients into risk groups. Endoscopic histopathology results were analysed according to risk group and segment length. Patients were deemed high risk if the OCCD test demonstrated atypia and/or p53 positivity.

RESULTS

4204 OCCD tests were performed in 3745 patients: 608 patients underwent endoscopy within 12 months and were included in this analysis. Patients with longer Barrett's segments were significantly more likely to have an abnormal OCCD test. 50/608 patients (8.2%) had high-grade dysplasia or cancer on endoscopic biopsies: this equates to 1.3% of the total group (50/3745). 46/50 patients (92.0%) were deemed high risk, triggering urgent endoscopy: this rose to 100% with insufficient tests removed. There were no cancers diagnosed within 12 months post-OCCD in the low-risk group.

CONCLUSION

OCCD testing is an effective triage tool to identify high-risk patients with Barrett's oesophagus requiring further investigation with endoscopy within the real-world setting.

Patient experiences of Cytosponge: a qualitative study

Objective

Cytosponge is a novel technology for oesophageal pathology diagnosis. Uses include diagnosis of Barrett's oesophagus and as a triage tool to prioritise upper gastrointestinal endoscopy. Patient experience is a key component of quality care. Previous work has developed endoscopy patient-reported experience measures. An appropriate tool to measure patient experience of Cytosponge is required. The aim of this work was to describe the patient experience of Cytosponge.

Design/Method

Individuals aged 18 years or over, who had undergone Cytosponge from September 2020 to March 2021, were invited to participate in a semi-structured interview. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed verbatim and anonymised. Thematic analysis was undertaken. Themes were organised into two overarching areas relating to patient experiences and patient perceptions of the test.

Results

19 patients underwent interview (aged 37-80 years, 13 male). In terms of patient experiences of Cytosponge, five themes were identified: emotional reaction; expectations; environment and physical process; sensory experience; communication and information. All themes were present across all procedural phases, aside from sensory experience which was only present during the test. With regard to perception of the test, two major themes were identified: test novelty (encompassing patient awareness of the test and reaction to the new test) and trusting the test results.

Conclusion

Patients must remain central to novel technologies such as Cytosponge. Measuring patient experience is essential to achieve that. This study demonstrates five major themes which describe the patient experience of this procedure. These have been used to adapt the Newcastle ENDOPREM for use in Cytosponge.

Dutch, UK and US professionals' perceptions of screening for Barrett's esophagus and esophageal adenocarcinoma: a concept mapping study

BACKGROUND

Novel, less-invasive technologies to screen for Barrett's esophagus (BE) may enable a paradigm shift in early detection strategies for esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC). Understanding professionals' perspectives on screening is important to determine how to proceed. We aimed to explore and compare professionals' perceptions of screening for BE and EAC screening in three countries.

METHODS

In this study, 29 Dutch, 20 British and 18 American health care professionals (clinicians, researchers and policy makers) participated in concept mapping: a mixed-methods consensus building methodology. Statements on perceived barriers, facilitators, advantages, disadvantages, implications or worries associated with screening for BE and EAC were collected in asynchronous digital brainstorm sessions. Subsequently, participants sorted the statements into groups according to thematic similarity and assessed the relevance of each statement in evaluating the acceptability of BE and EAC screening. Multidimensional scaling and cluster analysis were used to map the associations between generated statements.

RESULTS

Professionals across three countries identified eight consistent themes that relate to their perceptions of screening for BE and EAC: (1) Benefits, (2) Harms, (3) Clinical effectiveness concerns, (4) Screening population, (5) Screening modality, (6) Resources, (7) Ownership, and (8) Public communication. Dutch and American professionals prioritized the potential health benefits of screening but also questioned clinical impact. In contrast, British participants prioritized identification of the screening population and suitable test.

CONCLUSIONS

Most professionals see potential in less-invasive screening tests for BE and EAC but underline the need to define the target screening population and determine benefits and harms before widely employing them. Successful implementation will require thoughtful consideration of the involvement of general practitioners, readiness of endoscopy and pathology services, balanced public communication, and country-specific regulations.

Dutch individuals' views of screening for oesophageal cancer: a focus group study

OBJECTIVE

Screening for early oesophageal adenocarcinoma (OAC), including its precursor Barrett's oesophagus (BO), can potentially reduce OAC-related morbidity and mortality. This study explores Dutch at-risk individuals' views of screening an at-risk population for BO/OAC.

DESIGN

We invited 372 individuals with risk factors for OAC from primary care practices, 73 individuals with surveillance experience, and 221 participants of previous studies (BO/OAC screening trial or survey) to participate in focus groups. Transcripts were inductively and thematically analysed by two independent researchers.

RESULTS

A total of 50 individuals (42% with gastro-oesophageal reflux symptoms) of 50-75 years participated. Themes that were raised included: theme 1 'screening intentions' describing participants' motivation to be screened (eg, early diagnosis, potential reassurance, physician recommendation, and knowing someone with cancer) or decline screening (eg, anticipated discomfort or suboptimal accuracy of the test); theme 2 'risk-based eligibility' describing the tension between effectiveness (eg, targeting high-risk individuals) and inclusivity (eg, making screening available for everyone); theme 3 'distributive justice', in which the pressure of a potential new screening programme on healthcare resources was discussed; and theme 4 'information needs' describing the perceived lack of information access and individuals' preference to discuss screening with their general practitioner.

CONCLUSION

Individuals not only expressed high willingness to be screened but also voiced the concern that a new screening programme may pressure limited healthcare resources. If implemented, it is crucial to develop educational materials that meet the public's information needs and explain the test procedures and eligibility criteria while avoiding stigmatising language.

Diagnosis and Management of Barrett's Esophagus

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

Predictors of the experience of a Cytosponge test: analysis of patient survey data from the BEST3 trial

BACKGROUND

The Cytosponge is a cell-collection device, which, coupled with a test for trefoil factor 3 (TFF3), can be used to diagnose Barrett's oesophagus, a precursor condition to oesophageal adenocarcinoma. BEST3, a large pragmatic, randomised, controlled trial, investigated whether offering the Cytosponge-TFF3 test would increase detection of Barrett's. Overall, participants reported mostly positive experiences. This study reports the factors associated with the least positive experience.

METHODS

Patient experience was assessed using the Inventory to Assess Patient Satisfaction (IAPS), a 22-item questionnaire, completed 7-14 days after the Cytosponge test.

STUDY COHORT

All BEST3 participants who answered ≥ 15 items of the IAPS (N = 1458).

STATISTICAL ANALYSIS

A mean IAPS score between 1 and 5 (5 indicates most negative experience) was calculated for each individual. 'Least positive' experience was defined according to the 90th percentile. 167 (11.4%) individuals with a mean IAPS score of ≥ 2.32 were included in the 'least positive' category and compared with the rest of the cohort. Eleven patient characteristics and one procedure-specific factor were assessed as potential predictors of the least positive experience. Multivariable logistic regression analysis using backwards selection was conducted to identify factors independently associated with the least positive experience and with failed swallow at first attempt, one of the strongest predictors of least positive experience.

RESULTS

The majority of responders had a positive experience, with an overall median IAPS score of 1.7 (IQR 1.5-2.1). High (OR = 3.01, 95% CI 2.03-4.46, p < 0.001) or very high (OR = 4.56, 95% CI 2.71-7.66, p < 0.001) anxiety (relative to low/normal anxiety) and a failed swallow at the first attempt (OR = 3.37, 95% CI 2.14-5.30, p < 0.001) were highly significant predictors of the least positive patient experience in multivariable analyses. Additionally, sex (p = 0.036), height (p = 0.032), alcohol intake (p = 0.011) and education level (p = 0.036) were identified as statistically significant predictors.

CONCLUSION

We have identified factors which predict patient experience. Identifying anxiety ahead of the procedure and discussing particular concerns with patients or giving them tips to help with swallowing the capsule might help improve their experience. Trial registration ISRCTN68382401.