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 & aimsBarrett'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.MethodsWe 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.ResultsTP53 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).ConclusionsIn 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:IntroductionEndoscopic eradication therapy with radiofrequency ablation (RFA) and endoscopic mucosal resection is a safe and effective treatment for Barrett's esophagus. Although the outcomes of surveillance endoscopy after successful endoscopic eradication therapy have been described, no previous studies have modeled the natural history or the effect of surveillance endoscopy after successful ablation to prevent progression to invasive esophageal adenocarcinoma.MethodsThe US RFA Registry is a multicenter registry consisting of patients treated with RFA for Barrett's esophagus at 148 institutions (113 community-based and 35 academic-affiliated). The authors fit models to impute the natural history of recurrence and neoplastic progression after any recurrence or retreatment. Natural history estimates of invasive adenocarcinoma after ablation therapy were compared with as-treated estimates at 5 years to derive the preventive risk difference for surveillance.ResultsNatural history estimates for the postablation progression of high-grade dysplasia (HGD) or intramucosal adenocarcinoma to invasive adenocarcinoma after treatment were 6.3% at 5 years compared with 1.3% for low-grade dysplasia (LGD). The natural history model found a much higher preventative risk difference for surveillance for HGD/intramucosal adenocarcinoma (-4.8%), compared with LGD (-1.1%). The numbers needed to surveil at 5 years were 21 and 90 for these groups, respectively, to prevent one case of invasive esophageal adenocarcinoma, making surveillance after successful ablation of baseline HGD more than 4 times as effective at preventing invasive cancer than after successful ablation of baseline LGD.DiscussionEndoscopic surveillance after successful ablation of baseline HGD or intramucosal cancer is much more effective than surveillance after successful treatment of baseline LGD in averting invasive adenocarcinoma. Although the modest benefits of surveillance for treated LGD may be greater than the risks for patients at average risk for adverse effects of endoscopy, clinicians should concentrate on retaining patients with baseline HGD or cancer in endoscopic surveillance programs.