The Optimal Age to Stop Endoscopic Surveillance of Patients With Barrett's Esophagus Based on Sex and Comorbidity: A Comparative Cost-Effectiveness Analysis.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT: Background and aims
Current guidelines recommend surveillance for patients with nondysplastic Barrett's esophagus (NDBE) but do not include a recommended age for discontinuing surveillance. This study aimed to determine the optimal age for last surveillance of NDBE patients stratified by sex and level of comorbidity.Methods
We used 3 independently developed models to simulate patients diagnosed with NDBE, varying in age, sex, and comorbidity level (no, mild, moderate, and severe). All patients had received regular surveillance until their current age. We calculated incremental costs and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) gained from 1 additional endoscopic surveillance at the current age versus not performing surveillance at that age. We determined the optimal age to end surveillance as the age at which incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of 1 more surveillance was just less than the willingness-to-pay threshold of $100,000/QALY.Results
The benefit of having 1 more surveillance endoscopy strongly depended on age, sex, and comorbidity. For men with NDBE and severe comorbidity, 1 additional surveillance at age 80 years provided 4 more QALYs per 1000 patients with BE at an additional cost of $1.2 million, whereas for women with severe comorbidity the benefit at that age was 7 QALYs at a cost of $1.3 million. For men with no, mild, moderate, and severe comorbidity, the optimal ages of last surveillance were 81, 80, 77, and 73 years, respectively. For women, these ages were younger: 75, 73, 73, and 69 years, respectively.Conclusions
Our comparative modeling analysis illustrates the importance of considering comorbidity status and sex when deciding on the age to discontinue surveillance in patients with NDBE.
SUBMITTER: Omidvari AH
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8495224 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:BackgroundGuidelines suggest that patients with nondysplastic Barrett's esophagus (BE) undergo endoscopic surveillance every 3 to 5 years, but actual use of surveillance endoscopy and the determinants of variation in surveillance intervals are not known.ObjectiveTo measure use of surveillance endoscopy and its variation in patients with nondysplastic BE.DesignMulticenter, cross-sectional study.SettingThree sites in Arizona, Minnesota, and North Carolina.PatientsThis study involved patients who had prevalent BE without a history of high-grade dysplasia or esophageal adenocarcinoma.InterventionParticipants were given validated measures of quality of life, numeracy, and cancer risk perception, and the total number of prior endoscopic surveillance examinations was measured.Main outcome measurementsOversurveillance was defined as >1 surveillance examination per 3-year period.ResultsAmong 235 patients with nondysplastic BE, 76% were male and 94% were white. The average (± standard deviation [SD]) duration of BE was 6.5 ± 5.9 years. The mean (± SD) number of endoscopies per 3-year period was 2.7 ± 2.6. Oversurveillance was present in 65% of participants, resulting in a mean of 2.3 excess endoscopies per patient. Neither numeracy skills nor patient perception of cancer risk were associated with oversurveillance.LimitationsEndoscopies were measured by patient report, which is subject to error. Results may be generalizable only to patients seen in academic centers.ConclusionMost patients with nondysplastic BE had more surveillance endoscopic examinations than is recommended by published guidelines. Patient factors did not predict oversurveillance, indicating that other factors may influence decisions about the interval and frequency of surveillance examinations.
| S-EPMC3961007 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Although patients with Barrett's esophagus commonly undergo endoscopic surveillance, its effectiveness in reducing mortality from esophageal/gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinomas has not been evaluated rigorously.We performed a case-control study in a community-based setting. Among 8272 members with Barrett's esophagus, we identified 351 esophageal adenocarcinoma: 70 in persons who had a prior diagnosis of Barrett's esophagus (who were eligible for surveillance); 51 of these patients died, 38 as a result of the cancers (cases). Surveillance histories were contrasted with a sample of 101 living persons with Barrett's esophagus (controls), matched for age, sex, and duration of follow-up evaluation.Surveillance within 3 years was not associated with a decreased risk of death from esophageal adenocarcinoma (adjusted odds ratio, 0.99; 95% confidence interval, 0.36-2.75). Fatal cases were nearly as likely to have received surveillance (55.3%) as were controls (60.4%). A Barrett's esophagus length longer than 3 cm and prior dysplasia each were associated with subsequent mortality, but adjustment for these did not change the main findings. Although all patients should be included in evaluations of effectiveness, excluding deaths related to cancer treatment and patients who failed to complete treatment, changed the magnitude, but not the significance, of the association (odds ratio, 0.46; 95% confidence interval, 0.13-1.64).Endoscopic surveillance of patients with Barrett's esophagus was not associated with a substantially decreased risk of death from esophageal adenocarcinoma. The results do not exclude a small to moderate benefit. However, if such a benefit exists, our findings indicate that it is substantially smaller than currently estimated. The effectiveness of surveillance was influenced partially by the acceptability of existing treatments and the occurrence of treatment-associated mortality.
| S-EPMC3767470 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) may reduce the risk of esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC) in patients with Barrett's esophagus. PPIs are prescribed for virtually all patients with Barrett's esophagus, irrespective of the presence of reflux symptoms, and represent a de facto chemopreventive agent in this population. However, long-term PPI use has been associated with several adverse effects, and the cost-effectiveness of chemoprevention with PPIs has not been evaluated.The purpose of this study was to assess the cost-effectiveness of PPIs for the prevention of EAC in Barrett's esophagus without reflux.We designed a state-transition Markov microsimulation model of a hypothetical cohort of 50-year-old white men with Barrett's esophagus. We modeled chemoprevention with PPIs or no chemoprevention, with endoscopic surveillance for all treatment arms. Outcome measures were life-years, quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), incident EAC cases and deaths, costs, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios.Assuming 50% reduction in EAC, chemoprevention with PPIs was a cost-effective strategy compared to no chemoprevention. In our model, administration of PPIs cost $23,000 per patient and resulted in a gain of 0.32 QALYs for an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $12,000/QALY. In sensitivity analyses, PPIs would be cost-effective at $50,000/QALY if they reduce EAC risk by at least 19%.Chemoprevention with PPIs in patients with Barrett's esophagus without reflux is cost-effective if PPIs reduce EAC by a minimum of 19%. The identification of subgroups of Barrett's esophagus patients at increased risk for progression would lead to more cost-effective strategies for the prevention of esophageal adenocarcinoma.
| S-EPMC4315516 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND & AIMS:Guidelines recommend endoscopic surveillance of patients with Barrett's esophagus (BE) to identify those with dysplasia (a precursor of carcinoma) or early-stage esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC) who can be treated endoscopically. However, it is unclear whether surveillance increases survival times of patients with BE. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to qualitatively and quantitatively examine evidence for the association of endoscopic surveillance in patients with BE with survival and other outcomes. METHODS:We searched publication databases for studies reporting the effects of endoscopic surveillance on mortality and other EAC-related outcomes. We reviewed randomized controlled trials, case-control studies, studies comparing patients with BE who received regular surveillance with those who did not receive regular surveillance, and studies comparing outcomes of patients with surveillance-detected EAC vs symptom-detected EACs. We performed a meta-analysis of surveillance studies to generate summary estimates using a random effects model. The primary aim was to examine the association of BE surveillance on EAC-related mortality. Secondary aims were to examine the association of BE surveillance with all-cause mortality and EAC stage at time of diagnosis. RESULTS:A single case-control study did not show any association between surveillance and EAC-related mortality. A meta-analysis of 4 cohort studies found that lower EAC-related and all-cause mortality were associated with regular surveillance (relative risk, 0.60; 95% CI, 0.50-0.71; hazard ratio, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.59-0.94). Meta-analysis of 12 cohort studies showed lower EAC-related and all-cause mortality among patients with surveillance-detected EAC vs symptom-detected EAC (relative risk, 0.73; 95% CI, 0.57-0.94; hazard ratio, 0.59; 95% CI, 0.45-0.76). Lead- and length-time bias adjustment substantially attenuated/eliminated the observed benefits. Surveillance was associated with detection of EAC at earlier stages. A randomized trial is underway to evaluate the effects of endoscopic surveillance on mortality in patients with BE. CONCLUSIONS:In a systematic review and meta-analysis of the effects of surveillance in patients with BE, surveillance as currently performed was associated with detection of earlier-stage EAC and may provide a small survival benefit. However, the effects of confounding biases on these estimates are not fully defined and may completely or partially explain the observed differences between surveyed and unsurveyed patients.
| S-EPMC5985204 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundRecently, several new endoscopic treatments have been used to treat patients with Barrett's esophagus with high grade dysplasia. This systematic review aimed to determine the safety and effectiveness of these treatments compared with esophagectomy.MethodsA comprehensive literature search was undertaken to identify studies of endoscopic treatments for Barrett's esophagus or early stage esophageal cancer. Information from the selected studies was extracted by two independent reviewers. Study quality was assessed and information was tabulated to identify trends or patterns. Results were pooled across studies for each outcome. Safety (occurrence of adverse events) and effectiveness (complete eradication of dysplasia) were compared across different treatments.ResultsThe 101 studies that met the selection criteria included 8 endoscopic techniques and esophagectomy; only 12 were comparative studies. The quality of evidence was generally low. Methods and outcomes were inconsistently reported. Protocols, outcomes measured, follow-up times and numbers of treatment sessions varied, making it difficult to calculate pooled estimates.The surgical mortality rate was 1.2%, compared to 0.04% in 2831 patients treated endoscopically (1 death). Adverse events were more severe and frequent with esophagectomy, and included anastomotic leaks (9.4%), wound infections (4.1%) and pulmonary complications (4.1%). Four patients (0.1%) treated endoscopically experienced bleeding requiring transfusions. The stricture rate with esophagectomy (5.3%) was lower than with porfimer sodium photodynamic therapy (18.5%), but higher than aminolevulinic acid (ALA) 60 mg/kg PDT (1.4%). Dysphagia and odynophagia varied in frequency across modalities, with the highest rates reported for multipolar electrocoagulation (MPEC). Photosensitivity, an adverse event that occurs only with photodynamic therapy, was experienced by 26.4% of patients who received porfimer sodium.Some radiofrequency ablation (RFA) or argon plasma coagulation (APC) studies (used in multiple sessions) reported rates of almost 100% for complete eradication of dysplasia. But the study methods and findings were not adequately described. The other studies of endoscopic treatments reported similarly high rates of complete eradication.ConclusionsEndoscopic treatments offer safe and effective alternatives to esophagectomy for patients with Barrett's esophagus and high grade dysplasia. Unfortunately, shortcomings in the published studies make it impossible to determine the comparative effectiveness of each of the endoscopic treatments.
| S-EPMC2955687 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionMinimally 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.MethodsMarkov 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.ResultsIn 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.DiscussionMinimally invasive nonendoscopic tests may make GERD-independent BE screening cost effective. Participation rates for these strategies need to be studied.
| S-EPMC8315187 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC7729848 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The objective of this study was to compare participation rates and clinical effectiveness of sedated esophagogastroduodenoscopy (sEGD) and unsedated transnasal endoscopy (uTNE) for esophageal assessment and Barrett's esophagus (BE) screening in a population-based cohort.This was a prospective, randomized, controlled trial in a community population. Subjects ?50 years of age who previously completed validated gastrointestinal symptom questionnaires were randomized (stratified by age, sex, and reflux symptoms) to one of three screening techniques (either sEGD or uTNE in a mobile research van (muTNE) or uTNE in a hospital outpatient endoscopy suite (huTNE)) and invited to participate.Of the 459 subjects, 209 (46%) agreed to participate (muTNE n=76, huTNE n=72, and sEGD n=61). Participation rates were numerically higher in the unsedated arms of muTNE (47.5%) and huTNE (45.7%) compared with the sEGD arm (40.7%), but were not statistically different (P=0.27). Complete evaluation of the esophagus was similar using muTNE (99%), huTNE (96%), and sEGD (100%) techniques (P=0.08). Mean recovery times (min) were longer for sEGD (67.3) compared with muTNE (15.5) and huTNE (18.5) (P<0.001). Approximately 80% of uTNE subjects were willing to undergo the procedure again in future. Respectively, 29% and 7.8% of participating subjects had esophagitis and BE.Mobile van and clinic uTNE screening had comparable clinical effectiveness with similar participation rates and safety profile to sEGD. Evaluation time with uTNE was significantly shorter. Prevalence of BE and esophagitis in community subjects ?50 years of age was substantial. Mobile and outpatient unsedated techniques may provide an effective alternative strategy to sEGD for esophageal assessment and BE screening.
| S-EPMC4387566 | biostudies-literature
Project description:We report a biomarker-based non-endoscopic method for detecting Barrett's esophagus (BE) based on detecting methylated DNAs retrieved via a swallowable balloon-based esophageal sampling device. BE is the precursor of, and a major recognized risk factor for, developing esophageal adenocarcinoma. Endoscopy, the current standard for BE detection, is not cost-effective for population screening. We performed genome-wide screening to ascertain regions targeted for recurrent aberrant cytosine methylation in BE, identifying high-frequency methylation within the CCNA1 locus. We tested CCNA1 DNA methylation as a BE biomarker in cytology brushings of the distal esophagus from 173 individuals with or without BE. CCNA1 DNA methylation demonstrated an area under the curve of 0.95 for discriminating BE-related metaplasia and neoplasia cases versus normal individuals, performing identically to methylation of VIM DNA, an established BE biomarker. When combined, the resulting two biomarker panel was 95% sensitive and 91% specific. These results were replicated in an independent validation cohort of 149 individuals who were assayed using the same cutoff values for test positivity established in the training population. To progress toward non-endoscopic esophageal screening, we engineered a well-tolerated, swallowable, encapsulated balloon device able to selectively sample the distal esophagus within 5 min. In balloon samples from 86 individuals, tests of CCNA1 plus VIM DNA methylation detected BE metaplasia with 90.3% sensitivity and 91.7% specificity. Combining the balloon sampling device with molecular assays of CCNA1 plus VIM DNA methylation enables an efficient, well-tolerated, sensitive, and specific method of screening at-risk populations for BE.
| S-EPMC5789768 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND & AIMS:Barrett's esophagus (BE) is a precursor to esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC). Guidelines recommend that patients with nondysplastic BE (NDBE) undergo surveillance endoscopy every 3-5 years. We aimed to identify factors associated with surveillance endoscopy of patients with NDBE and identify trends in appropriate surveillance endoscopy of NDBE at a large tertiary care center. METHODS:We performed a retrospective analysis of data from a Barrett's Esophagus Registry, identifying patients with NDBE who underwent endoscopy in 2002 or later. We identified patients with NDBE and collected data on length of BE segment, esophageal lesions, demographic features, medications, histology findings, comorbidities, development of EAC, and dates of follow-up endoscopies. We defined appropriate surveillance as 3-5 years between 2nd and 3rd endoscopies, over-utilizers as patients who had less than 3 years between their 2nd and 3rd endoscopies, under-utilizers as patients who had more than 5 years between their 2nd and 3rd endoscopies; and never-surveilled as patients who never received a 2nd endoscopy. The primary outcomes were effects of patient factors, year, and referring providers on appropriateness of surveillance intervals. RESULTS:We identified 477 patients with NDBE. Only 15.9% had appropriate surveillance; 37.9% were over-utilizers 15.7% were under-utilizers and 30.4% were never surveilled. Patients were less likely to be over-surveilled if their primary care physician referred them for their 3rd endoscopy instead of a gastroenterologist (adjusted odds ratio, 0.51; 95% CI, 0.27-0.95). Male patients or those with an increased number of comorbidities were more likely to be under-surveilled or never-surveilled, whereas patients with long BE segment were more likely to be over-surveilled. CONCLUSIONS:In a retrospective analysis of data from a registry of patients with BE, we found that less than 16% receive appropriate surveillance for NDBE. A primary care provider in the same health system as the endoscopy clinic reduced risk of over-surveillance. This could reflect better coordination of care between specialists and primary care providers.
| S-EPMC5962402 | biostudies-literature