Barrett's oesophagus and oesophageal adenocarcinoma.

Oesophageal adenocarcinoma (OAC) has increased dramatically in Western countries, including the UK, over the past 30 years. It usually presents de novo, but is often preceded by Barrett's oesophagus (BO), a premalignant condition whereby the normal squamous epithelium is replaced by columnar lined epithelium with intestinal metaplasia. The main risk factors for BO include male sex, obesity and chronic gastro-oesophageal reflux of acid and bile. The estimated annual risk of BO progression is 0.3%, increasing substantially, up to 30%, when dysplasia is present. Endoscopic surveillance is recommended to detect neoplastic changes at an early stage and considerable evidence supports endoscopic treatment for confirmed low- and high-grade dysplasia, and intramucosal adenocarcinoma. Most OACs are diagnosed at a more advanced stage requiring CT-PET assessment and multi-modal treatment. Surgical treatment is performed in specialist centres, increasingly combined with cytotoxic chemotherapy and radiotherapy, involving close liaison between members of the multidisciplinary team. Molecular targeted therapies, such as HER2 and VEGFR-inhibitors, are beginning to penetrate clinical practice, but high molecular heterogeneity has impeded progress. In view of the overall dismal survival (<20%) for advanced OAC, there is renewed interest in screening techniques for early detection and intervention of dysplastic BO

Early detection and therapeutics.

Early detection, including cancer screening and surveillance, is emerging as one of the most important topics in modern oncology. Because symptomatic presentation remains the predominant route to cancer diagnosis, there is a growing interest in developing techniques to detect the disease at an early, curative stage. Moreover, growing understanding of cancer biology has paved the way for prevention studies with the focus on therapeutic interventions for premalignant conditions. Where there is a recognisable precursor stage, such as a colorectal adenoma or Barrett's metaplasia, the removal of abnormal tissue prevents the development of cancer and enables stratification of the patient to a high-risk group requiring further surveillance. Here, we provide a review of the available technologies for early diagnosis and minimally-invasive treatment

Endoscopist biopsy rate as a quality indicator for outpatient gastroscopy: a multicenter cohort study with validation.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: The diagnosis of gastric premalignant conditions (GPCs) relies on endoscopy with mucosal sampling. We hypothesized that the endoscopist biopsy rate (EBR) might constitute a quality indicator for EGD, and we have analyzed its association with GPC detection and the rate of missed gastric cancers (GCs). METHODS: We analyzed EGD databases from 2 high-volume outpatient units. EBR values, defined as the proportion of EGDs with ≥1 biopsy to all examinations were calculated for each endoscopist in Unit A (derivation cohort) and divided by the quartile values into 4 groups. Detection of GPC was calculated for each group and compared using multivariate clustered logistic regression models. Unit B database was used for validation. All patients were followed in the Cancer Registry for missed GCs diagnosed between 1 month and 3 years after EGDs with negative results. RESULTS: Sixteen endoscopists in Unit A performed 17,490 EGDs of which 15,340 (87.7%) were analyzed. EBR quartile values were 22.4% to 36.7% (low EBR), 36.8% to 43.7% (moderate), 43.8% to 51.6% (high), and 51.7% and 65.8% (very-high); median value 43.8%. The odds ratios for the moderate, high, and very-high EBR groups of detecting GPC were 1.6 (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.3-1.9), 2.0 (95% CI, 1.7-2.4), and 2.5 (95% CI, 2.1-2.9), respectively, compared with the low EBR group (P < .001). This association was confirmed with the same thresholds in the validation cohort. Endoscopists with higher EBR (≥43.8%) had a lower risk of missed cancer compared with those in the lower EBR group (odds ratio, 0.44; 95% CI, 0.20-1.00; P = .049). CONCLUSIONS: The EBR parameter is highly variable among endoscopists and is associated with efficacy in GPC detection and the rate of missed GCs

A sinister black finding in the stomach.

A 68-year-old woman undergoing a routine surveillance endoscopy—part of her follow-up for a Barrett's oesophagus—was found to have a solitary, black lesion, approximately 4 mm in diameter, in the gastric body (figure)

A clinically translatable hyperspectral endoscopy (HySE) system for imaging the gastrointestinal tract.

Hyperspectral imaging (HSI) enables visualisation of morphological and biochemical information, which could improve disease diagnostic accuracy. Unfortunately, the wide range of image distortions that arise during flexible endoscopy in the clinic have made integration of HSI challenging. To address this challenge, we demonstrate a hyperspectral endoscope (HySE) that simultaneously records intrinsically co-registered hyperspectral and standard-of-care white light images, which allows image distortions to be compensated computationally and an accurate hyperspectral data cube to be reconstructed as the endoscope moves in the lumen. Evaluation of HySE performance shows excellent spatial, spectral and temporal resolution and high colour fidelity. Application of HySE enables: quantification of blood oxygenation levels in tissue mimicking phantoms; differentiation of spectral profiles from normal and pathological ex vivo human tissues; and recording of hyperspectral data under freehand motion within an intact ex vivo pig oesophagus model. HySE therefore shows potential for enabling HSI in clinical endoscopy

Image enhanced endoscopy and molecular biomarkers vs Seattle protocol to diagnose dysplasia in Barrett's esophagus

BACKGROUND: Dysplasia in Barrett's esophagus (BE) is often invisible on high-resolution white-light endoscopy (HRWLE). We compared the diagnostic accuracy for inconspicuous dysplasia of the combination of autofluorescence (AFI)-guided probe-based confocal laser endomicroscopy (pCLE) and molecular biomarkers versus HRWLE with Seattle protocol biopsies. METHODS: BE patients with no dysplastic lesions were block randomized to standard endoscopy (HRWLE with Seattle protocol) or AFI-guided pCLE with targeted biopsies for molecular biomarkers (p53 and cyclin A by immunohistochemistry; aneuploidy by image cytometry), with crossover to the other arm after 6-12 weeks. Histological endpoint was diagnosis from all study biopsies (trial histology). Sensitivity analysis was performed for overall histology, which included diagnoses within 12 months from first study endoscopy. Endoscopists were blinded to the referral endoscopy and histology results. Primary outcome was diagnostic accuracy for dysplasia by real-time pCLE versus HRWLE biopsies. RESULTS: Of 154 patients recruited, 134 completed both arms. In the primary outcome analysis (trial histology analysis), AFI-guided pCLE had similar sensitivity for dysplasia compared to standard endoscopy [74.3% (95%CI, 56.7-87.5) vs 80.0% (95%CI 63.1-91.6), p=0.48]. Multivariate logistic regression showed pCLE optical dysplasia, aberrant p53 and aneuploidy had strongest correlation with dysplasia (secondary outcome). This 3-biomarker panel had higher sensitivity for any grade of dysplasia than Seattle protocol (81.5% vs 51.9%, p<0.001) in the overall histology analysis, but not in the trial histology analysis (91.4% vs 80.0%; p=0.16) with an area under receiver operating curve of 0.83. CONCLUSIONS: Seattle protocol biopsies miss dysplasia in approximately half of patients with inconspicuous neoplasia. AFI-guided pCLE has similar accuracy to the current gold standard. Addition of molecular biomarkers could improve diagnostic accuracy

Safety and Acceptability of Esophageal Cytosponge Cell Collection Device in a Pooled Analysis of Data From Individual Patients.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Diagnosis and surveillance of Barrett's esophagus (BE) and eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) have become emerging public health issues. Cytosponge is a novel, minimally invasive esophageal cell collection device. We aimed to assess the data on safety and acceptability of this device. METHODS: We performed a patient-level review of 5 prospective trials assessing Cytosponge performance in patients with reflux disease, BE and EoE in primary and secondary care. Acceptability of Cytosponge and subsequent endoscopy were recorded with visual analogue scale (VAS), wherein 0 and 10 denoted lowest and highest acceptability. Median VAS scores were compared using a Mann-Whitney test. The number of attempts, failures in swallowing the device and occurrence of adverse events were analyzed. Risk factors for failure in swallowing were analyzed using a multivariate regression model. RESULTS: In total, 2672 Cytosponge procedures were performed, in 2418 individuals from 2008 through 2017. There were 2 adverse events related to the device: a minor pharyngeal bleed and a case of detachment (<1:2000). The median acceptability score for the Cytosponge was 6.0 (interquartile range [IQR], 5.0-8.0), which was higher than the score for endoscopy without sedation (median 5.0; IQR, 3.0-7.0; P < .001) and lower than the score for endoscopy with sedation (median 8.0; IQR, 5.0-9.0; P < .001). Nearly all patients (91.1%) successfully swallowed the Cytosponge, most on the first attempt (90.1%). Failure to swallow the device was more likely to occur in secondary care (odds ratio, 5.13; 95% CI, 1.48-17.79; P < .01). CONCLUSIONS: The Cytosponge test is a safe procedure with good acceptability ratings in a variety of health care settings

Early detection and therapeutics

Early detection, including cancer screening and surveillance, is emerging as one of the most important topics in modern oncology. Because symptomatic presentation remains the predominant route to cancer diagnosis, there is a growing interest in developing techniques to detect the disease at an early, curative stage. Moreover, growing understanding of cancer biology has paved the way for prevention studies with the focus on therapeutic interventions for premalignant conditions. Where there is a recognisable precursor stage, such as a colorectal adenoma or Barrett's metaplasia, the removal of abnormal tissue prevents the development of cancer and enables stratification of the patient to a high‐risk group requiring further surveillance. Here, we provide a review of the available technologies for early diagnosis and minimally‐invasive treatment

A Global Perspective on Gastric Cancer Screening: Which Concepts Are Feasible, and When?

Background: Gastric cancer (GC) remains the fifth most common cancer and the third most common cause of cancer-related death globally. In 2022, GC fell into the scope of the updated EU recommendations for targeted cancer screening. Given the growing awareness of the GC burden, we aimed to review the existing screening strategies for GC in high-risk regions and discuss potentially applicable modalities in countries with low-to-intermediate incidence. Methods: The references for this Review article were identified through searches of PubMed with the search terms “gastric cancer”, “stomach cancer”, “Helicobacter pylori”, and “screening” over the period from 1995 until August 2022. Results: As Helicobacter pylori (H. pylori)-induced gastritis is the primary step in the development of GC, the focus on GC prevention may be directed toward testing for and treating this infection. Such a strategy may be appealing in countries with low- and intermediate- GC incidence. Other biomarker-based approaches to identify at-risk individuals in such regions are being evaluated. Within high-incidence areas, both primary endoscopic screening and population-based H. pylori “test-and-treat” strategies represent cost-effective models. Conclusions: Given the significant variations in GC incidence and healthcare resources around the globe, screening strategies for GC should be adjusted to the actual conditions in each region. While several proven tools exist for accurate GC diagnosis, a universal modality for the screening of GC populations remains elusive

A Global Perspective on Gastric Cancer Screening: Which Concepts Are Feasible, and When?

Background: Gastric cancer (GC) remains the fifth most common cancer and the third most common cause of cancer-related death globally. In 2022, GC fell into the scope of the updated EU recommendations for targeted cancer screening. Given the growing awareness of the GC burden, we aimed to review the existing screening strategies for GC in high-risk regions and discuss potentially applicable modalities in countries with low-to-intermediate incidence. Methods: The references for this Review article were identified through searches of PubMed with the search terms &ldquo;gastric cancer&rdquo;, &ldquo;stomach cancer&rdquo;, &ldquo;Helicobacter pylori&rdquo;, and &ldquo;screening&rdquo; over the period from 1995 until August 2022. Results: As Helicobacter pylori (H. pylori)-induced gastritis is the primary step in the development of GC, the focus on GC prevention may be directed toward testing for and treating this infection. Such a strategy may be appealing in countries with low- and intermediate- GC incidence. Other biomarker-based approaches to identify at-risk individuals in such regions are being evaluated. Within high-incidence areas, both primary endoscopic screening and population-based H. pylori &ldquo;test-and-treat&rdquo; strategies represent cost-effective models. Conclusions: Given the significant variations in GC incidence and healthcare resources around the globe, screening strategies for GC should be adjusted to the actual conditions in each region. While several proven tools exist for accurate GC diagnosis, a universal modality for the screening of GC populations remains elusive