Dataset Information

Optimizing Management of Patients With Barrett's Esophagus and Low-Grade or No Dysplasia Based on Comparative Modeling.

ABSTRACT:

Background & aims

Endoscopic treatment is recommended for patients with Barrett's esophagus (BE) with high-grade dysplasia, yet clinical management recommendations are inconsistent for patients with BE without dysplasia (NDBE) or with low-grade dysplasia (LGD). We used a comparative modeling analysis to identify optimal management strategies for these patients.

Methods

We used 3 independent population-based models to simulate cohorts of 60-year-old individuals with BE in the United States. We followed up each cohort until death without surveillance and treatment (natural disease progression), compared with 78 different strategies of management for patients with NDBE or LGD. We determined the optimal strategy using cost-effectiveness analyses, at a willingness-to-pay threshold of $100,000 per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY).

Results

In the 3 models, the average cumulative incidence of esophageal adenocarcinoma was 111 cases, with costs totaling $5.7 million per 1000 men with BE. Surveillance and treatment of men with BE prevented 23% to 75% of cases of esophageal adenocarcinoma, but increased costs to $6.2 to $17.3 million per 1000 men with BE. The optimal strategy was surveillance every 3 years for men with NDBE and treatment of LGD after confirmation by repeat endoscopy (incremental cost-effectiveness ratio, $53,044/QALY). The average results for women were consistent with the results for men for LGD management, but the optimal surveillance interval for women with NDBE was 5 years (incremental cost-effectiveness ratio, $36,045/QALY).

Conclusions

Based on analyses from 3 population-based models, the optimal management strategy for patient with BE and LGD is endoscopic eradication, but only after LGD is confirmed by a repeat endoscopy. The optimal strategy for patients with NDBE is endoscopic surveillance, using a 3-year interval for men and a 5-year interval for women.

SUBMITTER: Omidvari AH

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7447845 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BACKGROUND & AIMS:Barrett's esophagus (BE) is the greatest risk factor for esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC), but only a small proportion of patients with BE develop cancer. Biomarkers might be able to identify patients at highest risk of progression. We investigated genomic differences in surveillance biopsies collected from patients whose BE subsequently progressed compared to patients whose disease did not progress. METHODS:We performed a retrospective case-control study of 24 patients with BE that progressed to high-grade dysplasia (HGD, n = 14) or EAC (n = 10). The control group (n = 73, called non-progressors) comprised patients with BE and at least 5 years of total endoscopic biopsy surveillance without progression to HGD or EAC. From each patient, we selected a single tissue sample obtained more than 1 year before progression (cases) or more than 2 years before the end of follow-up (controls). Pathogenic mutations, gene copy numbers, and ploidy were compared between samples from progressors and non-progressors. RESULTS:TP53 mutations were detected in 46% of samples from progressors and 5% of non-progressors. In this case-control sample set, TP53 mutations in BE tissues increased the adjusted risk of progression 13.8-fold (95% confidence interval, 3.2-61.0) (P < .001). We did not observe significant differences in ploidy or copy-number profile between groups. We identified 147 pathogenic mutations in 57 distinct genes-the average number of pathogenic mutations was higher in samples from progressors (n = 2.5) than non-progressors (n = 1.2) (P < .001). TP53 and other somatic mutations were recurrently detected in samples with limited copy-number changes (aneuploidy). CONCLUSIONS:In genomic analyses of BE tissues from patients with or without later progression to HGD or EAC, we found significantly higher numbers of TP53 mutations in BE from patients with subsequent progression. These mutations were frequently detected before the onset of dysplasia or substantial changes in copy number.

Project description:Background and aimsBarrett's esophagus with low-grade dysplasia (BE-LGD) carries a risk of progression to Barrett's esophagus with high-grade dysplasia (BE-HGD) and esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC). Radiofrequency ablation (RFA) appears to be a safe and efficacious method to eradicate Barrett's esophagus. However, a confirmed consensus regarding treatment of BE-LGD with RFA vs. endoscopic surveillance is lacking. Therefore, this study aimed to elucidate the efficacy and safety for RFA vs. endoscopic surveillance in decreasing the risk of BE-LGD progression to BE-HGD or EAC.MethodsRelevant studies published before May 1, 2021 were identified by searching relevant medical databases. The primary outcome was the rate of progression BE-LGD to HGD and/or EAC after treatment with RFA and endoscopic surveillance. The secondary outcome was the rate of complete eradication of dysplasia (CE-D) and complete eradication of intestinal metaplasia (CE-IM) after treatment with RFA and endoscopic surveillance. Adverse events were also extracted and evaluated.ResultsThree randomized controlled trials were eligible for analysis. The pooled estimate of rate of neoplastic progression of BE-LGD to HGD or EAC was much lower in the RFA group than the endoscopic surveillance group (RR, 0.25; 95% CI, 0.07-0.93; P = 0.04), with moderate heterogeneity (I2 = 55%). Subgroup analysis based on progression grade was performed. The pooled rate of progression of BE-LGD to HGD was much lower in the RFA group than the endoscopic surveillance group (RR, 0.25; 95% CI, 0.07-0.71; P = 0.01), with low heterogeneity (I2 = 15%). Although the pooled risk of progression of BE-LGD to EAC was slightly lower in the RFA group than the endoscopic surveillance group (RR, 0.56; 95% CI, 0.05-6.76), the result was not statistically significant (P = 0.65). RFA also was associated a higher rate of CE-D and CE-IM both at the end of endoscopic treatment and during follow-up. However, the rate of adverse events was slightly higher after RFA treatment.ConclusionRFA decreases the risk of BE-LGD progression to BE-HGD. However, given the uncertain course of LGD and the potential for esophageal stricture after RFA, treatment options should be fully considered and weighed.Systematic review registrationhttps://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42021266128, identifier PROSPERO (CRD42021266128).