Sex Differences in Neoplastic Progression in Barrett's Esophagus:A Multicenter Prospective Cohort Study

Recommendations in Barrett’s esophagus (BE) guidelines are mainly based on male patients. We aimed to evaluate sex differences in BE patients in (1) probability of and (2) time to neoplastic progression, and (3) differences in the stage distribution of neoplasia. We conducted a multicenter prospective cohort study including 868 BE patients. Cox regression modeling and accelerated failure time modeling were used to estimate the sex differences. Neoplastic progression was defined as highgrade dysplasia (HGD) and/or esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC). Among the 639 (74%) males and 229 females that were included (median follow-up 7.1 years), 61 (7.0%) developed HGD/EAC. Neoplastic progression risk was estimated to be twice as high among males (HR 2.26, 95% CI 1.11–4.62) than females. The risk of HGD was found to be higher in males (HR 3.76, 95% CI 1.33–10.6). Time to HGD/EAC (AR 0.52, 95% CI 0.29–0.95) and HGD (AR 0.40, 95% CI 0.19–0.86) was shorter in males. Females had proportionally more EAC than HGD and tended to have higher stages of neoplasia at diagnosis. In conclusion, both the risk of and time to neoplastic progression were higher in males. However, females were proportionally more often diagnosed with (advanced) EAC. We should strive for improved neoplastic risk stratification per individual BE patient, incorporating sex disparities into new prediction models

Long-Term Esophageal Cancer Risk in Patients With Primary Achalasia: A Prospective Study

OBJECTIVES: Achalasia patients are considered at increased risk for esophageal cancer, but the reported relative risks vary. Identification of this risk is relevant for patient management. We performed a prospective evaluation of the esophageal cancer risk in a large cohort of achalasia patients with long-term follow-up. METHODS: Between 1975 and 2006, all patients diagnosed with primary achalasia in our hospital were treated and followed by the same protocol. After graded pneumatic dilatation, all patients were offered a fixed surveillance protocol including gastrointestinal endoscopy with esophageal biopsy sampling. RESULTS: We surveyed a cohort of 448 achalasia patients (218 men, mean age 51 years at diagnosis, range 4-92 years) for a mean follow-up of 9.6 years (range 0.1-32). Overall, 15 (3.3%) patients (10 men) developed esophageal cancer (annual incidence 0.34 (95% confidence interval 0.20-0.56)). The mean age at cancer diagnosis was 71 years (range 36-90) after a mean of 11 years (range 2-23) following initial presentation, and a mean of 24 years (range 10-43) after symptom onset. The relative hazard rate of esophageal cancer was 28 (confidence interval 17-46) compared with an age-and sex-identical population in the same timeframe. Five patients received a potential curative treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Although the gastro-esophageal cancer risk in patients with longstanding achalasia is much higher than in the general population, the absolute risk is rather low. Despite structured endoscopical surveillance, most neoplastic lesions remain undetected until an advanced stage. Efforts should be made to identify high-risk groups and develop adequate surveillance strategies

Cost Efficacy of Metal Stents for Palliation of Extrahepatic Bile Duct Obstruction in a Randomized Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Endoscopic stents are placed for palliation of extrahepatic bile duct obstruction. Although self-expandable metal stents (SEMS) remain patent longer than plastic stents, they are more expensive. We aimed to evaluate which type of stent (plastic, uncovered SEMS [uSEMS], or partially covered SEMS [pcSEMS]) is the most effective and we assessed costs. METHODS: We performed a multicenter randomized trial in 219 patients at 18 hospitals in The Netherlands from February 2008 through February 2013. Patients were assigned randomly for placement of a plastic stent (n = 73), uSEMS (n = 75), or pcSEMS (n = 71) during endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography. Patients were followed up for up to 1 year. Researchers were not blinded to groups. The main study end points included functional stent time and costs. RESULTS: The mean functional stent times were 172 days for plastic stents, 288 days for uSEMS, and 299 days for pcSEMS (P < .005 for uSEMS and pcSEMS vs plastic). The initial placement of plastic stents (€1042 or $1106) cost significantly less than placement of SEMS (€1973 or$2094) (P = .001). However, the total cost per patient at the end of the follow-up period did not differ significantly between plastic stents (€7320 or $7770) and SEMS (€6932 or$7356) (P = .61). Furthermore, in patients with short survival times (≤3 mo) or metastatic disease, the total cost per patient did not differ between plastic stents and SEMS. No differences in costs were found between pcSEMS and uSEMS. CONCLUSIONS: Although placement of SEMS (uncovered or partially covered) for palliation of extrahepatic bile duct obstruction initially is more expensive than placement of plastic stents, SEMS have longer functional time. The total costs after 1 year do not differ significantly with stent type. Dutch Clinical Trial Registration no: NTR1361.publisher: Elsevier articletitle: Cost Efficacy of Metal Stents for Palliation of Extrahepatic Bile Duct Obstruction in a Randomized Controlled Trial journaltitle: Gastroenterology articlelink: http://dx.doi.org/10.1053/j.gastro.2015.03.012 content_type: article copyright: Copyright © 2015 AGA Institute. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.status: publishe

Higher quality of life after metal stent placement compared with plastic stent placement for malignant extrahepatic bile duct obstruction: a randomized controlled trial

OBJECTIVE: For palliation of extrahepatic bile duct obstruction, self-expandable metal stents (SEMS) are superior to plastic stents in terms of stent patency and occurrence of stent dysfunction. We assessed health-related quality of life (HRQoL) after stent placement to investigate whether this also results in a difference in HRQoL between patients treated with a plastic stent or SEMS. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This randomized multicenter trial included 219 patients who were randomized to receive plastic stent (n=73) or SEMS [uncovered (n=75) and covered (n=71); n=146] placement. HRQoL was assessed with two general questionnaires (EQ-5D-3L and QLQ-C30) and one disease-specific questionnaire (PAN-26). Scores were analyzed using linear mixed model regression and included all patients with baseline and at least one follow-up measurement. RESULTS: HRQoL data were available in 140 of 219 patients (64%); 71 patients (32%) declined participation and in eight patients (4%) only baseline questionnaires were available. On the QLQ-C30, the interaction between follow-up time and type of stent was significantly different on two of five functional scales [physical functioning (P=0.004) and emotional functioning (P=0.01)] in favor of patients with a SEMS. In addition, patients with SEMS reported significantly less frequent symptoms of fatigue (P=0.01), loss of appetite (P=0.02), and nausea and vomiting (0.04) over time. The EQ-VAS score decreased with time in both treatment groups, indicating a statistically significant decrease in HRQoL over time. CONCLUSION: In patients with inoperable malignant extrahepatic bile duct obstruction, SEMS placement results in better scores for general and disease-specific HRQoL over time compared with plastic stent placement.status: publishe

Cost Efficacy of Metal Stents for Palliation of Extrahepatic Bile Duct Obstruction in a Randomized Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Endoscopic stents are placed for palliation of extrahepatic bile duct obstruction. Although self-expandable metal stents (SEMS) remain patent longer than plastic stents, they are more expensive. We aimed to evaluate which type of stent (plastic, uncovered SEMS [uSEMS], or partially covered SEMS [pcSEMS]) is the most effective and we assessed costs. METHODS: We performed a multicenter randomized trial in 219 patients at 18 hospitals in The Netherlands from February 2008 through February 2013. Patients were assigned randomly for placement of a plastic stent (n = 73), uSEMS (n = 75), or pcSEMS (n = 71) during endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography. Patients were followed up for up to 1 year. Researchers were not blinded to groups. The main study end points included functional stent time and costs. RESULTS: The mean functional stent times were 172 days for plastic stents, 288 days for uSEMS, and 299 days for pcSEMS (P < .005 for uSEMS and pcSEMS vs plastic). The initial placement of plastic stents (€1042 or $1106) cost significantly less than placement of SEMS (€1973 or$2094) (P = .001). However, the total cost per patient at the end of the follow-up period did not differ significantly between plastic stents (€7320 or $7770) and SEMS (€6932 or$7356) (P = .61). Furthermore, in patients with short survival times (≤3 mo) or metastatic disease, the total cost per patient did not differ between plastic stents and SEMS. No differences in costs were found between pcSEMS and uSEMS. CONCLUSIONS: Although placement of SEMS (uncovered or partially covered) for palliation of extrahepatic bile duct obstruction initially is more expensive than placement of plastic stents, SEMS have longer functional time. The total costs after 1 year do not differ significantly with stent type. Dutch Clinical Trial Registration no: NTR1361

Higher quality of life after metal stent placement compared with plastic stent placement for malignant extrahepatic bile duct obstruction:A randomized controlled trial

Objective For palliation of extrahepatic bile duct obstruction, self-expandable metal stents (SEMS) are superior to plastic stents in terms of stent patency and occurrence of stent dysfunction. We assessed health-related quality of life (HRQoL) after stent placement to investigate whether this also results in a difference in HRQoL between patients treated with a plastic stent or SEMS. Patients and methods This randomized multicenter trial included 219 patients who were randomized to receive plastic stent (n = 73) or SEMS [uncovered (n = 75) and covered (n = 71); n = 146] placement. HRQoL was assessed with two general questionnaires (EQ-5D-3L and QLQ-C30) and one disease-specific questionnaire (PAN-26). Scores were analyzed using linear mixed model regression and included all patients with baseline and at least one follow-up measurement. Results HRQoL data were available in 140 of 219 patients (64%); 71 patients (32%) declined participation and in eight patients (4%) only baseline questionnaires were available. On the QLQ-C30, the interaction between follow-up time and type of stent was significantly different on two of five functional scales [physical functioning (P = 0.004) and emotional functioning (P = 0.01)] in favor of patients with a SEMS. In addition, patients with SEMS reported significantly less frequent symptoms of fatigue (P = 0.01), loss of appetite (P = 0.02), and nausea and vomiting (0.04) over time. The EQ-VAS score decreased with time in both treatment groups, indicating a statistically significant decrease in HRQoL over time. Conclusion In patients with inoperable malignant extrahepatic bile duct obstruction, SEMS placement results in better scores for general and disease-specific HRQoL over time compared with plastic stent placement. Copyright (C) 2017 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved