Radiofrequency Ablation vs Endoscopic Surveillance for Patients With Barrett Esophagus and Low-Grade Dysplasia: A Randomized Clinical Trial

Importance Barrett esophagus containing low-grade dysplasia is associated with an increased risk of developing esophageal adenocarcinoma, a cancer with a rapidly increasing incidence in the western world.Objective To investigate whether endoscopic radiofrequency ablation could decrease the rate of neoplastic progression.Design, Setting, and Participants Multicenter randomized clinical trial that enrolled 136 patients with a confirmed diagnosis of Barrett esophagus containing low-grade dysplasia at 9 European sites between June 2007 and June 2011. Patient follow-up ended May 2013.Interventions Eligible patients were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to either endoscopic treatment with radiofrequency ablation (ablation) or endoscopic surveillance (control). Ablation was performed with the balloon device for circumferential ablation of the esophagus or the focal device for targeted ablation, with a maximum of 5 sessions allowed.Main Outcomes and Measures The primary outcome was neoplastic progression to high-grade dysplasia or adenocarcinoma during a 3-year follow-up since randomization. Secondary outcomes were complete eradication of dysplasia and intestinal metaplasia and adverse events.Results Sixty-eight patients were randomized to receive ablation and 68 to receive control. Ablation reduced the risk of progression to high-grade dysplasia or adenocarcinoma by 25.0% (1.5% for ablation vs 26.5% for control; 95% CI, 14.1%-35.9%; P

Simplified protocol for focal radiofrequency ablation using the HALO90 device: short-term efficacy and safety in patients with dysplastic Barrett's esophagus

The standard protocol for focal radiofrequency ablation (RFA) of Barrett's esophagus comprises two applications of radiofrequency energy, cleaning of the ablated areas and catheter, and two further applications (2 × 15 J/cm(2) - cleaning - 2 × 15 J/cm(2)). A simplified protocol (3 × 15 J/cm(2), no cleaning) proved noninferior to standard protocol for individual islands of Barrett's esophagus, but may be associated with higher stenosis rates when applied circumferentially and sequentially over time. We evaluated the efficacy and safety of the above mentioned simplified protocol. Barrett's esophagus patients undergoing focal RFA using the simplified protocol in four tertiary referral centers were retrospectively included. During each focal ablation, the gastroesophageal junction (GEJ) was ablated circumferentially in addition to Barrett's esophagus islands or tongues. Sessions continued at 8 to 12-week intervals until complete resolution of Barrett's esophagus. Primary outcome parameters comprised complete remission of dysplasia and of intestinal metaplasia, and stenosis requiring dilation. 83 patients with dysplastic Barrett's esophagus (median Prague classification C1M3) were enrolled; 66/83 (80 %) had endoscopic resection of a visible lesion before RFA. Intention-to-treat analysis showed complete remission of dysplasia in 78/83 (94 %) and of intestinal metaplasia in 72/83 (87 %). Stenosis requiring dilation developed in 9/83 (11 %), necessitating a median 2 dilation sessions (range 1 - 9), with ≥ 8 sessions in three patients. A treatment algorithm incorporating the simplified protocol of 3 × 15 J/cm(2), with no cleaning, for all focal RFA sessions, appears effective. The associated number and severity of stenoses, however, raises safety concern

Impact of ablation of Barrett's esophagus with low-grade dysplasia on patients’ illness perception and quality of life: a multicenter randomized trial

Background and Aims: A previous multicenter randomized trial demonstrated that radiofrequency ablation (RFA) significantly reduced the risk of neoplastic progression compared with surveillance (1.5% vs 26.5%) in patients with Barrett's esophagus (BE) and low-grade dysplasia (LGD). In the same population, this study aimed to compare the quality of life (QOL) and illness perception (IP) among patients treated with RFA and patients kept under surveillance. Methods: From June 2007 to June 2011, patients with BE and LGD were randomly assigned to RFA or surveillance. QOL and IP were assessed at baseline, 2, 9, 14, 26, and 38 months. Standardized questionnaires were used (SF-36, EORTC QLQ-C30, EORTC QLQ-OES18, and the brief Illness Perception Questionnaire [IPQ]). Results: Forty-seven patients in the ablation group and 49 patients in the surveillance group completed the questionnaires (median follow-up, 36 months). Marginal differences were observed in the SF-36 and the EORTC-QLQ-C30. Based on the EORTC-QLQ-OES18, the ablation group reported more diarrhea (7.8 vs 4.0; P =.018), whereas the surveillance group reported more reflux (15.1 vs 9.0; P <.001) and more problems with speaking (4.3 vs 2.2; P =.019). The IPQ showed that patients in the ablation group perceived their disease lasted for a shorter period of time (P <.001), experienced fewer symptoms (P <.001), had fewer concerns about their condition (P <.001), and tended to be less emotionally affected by their condition (P =.012) than patients in the surveillance group. As a result, patients who underwent ablation experienced their condition as less threatening compared with patients in the surveillance group (P <.001). Conclusion: Patients treated with ablation for BE with LGD reported a QOL comparable with that of patients undergoing endoscopic surveillance; however, the patients in the ablation group had fewer concerns and a less-threatening view of their condition. (Clinical trial registration number [www.trialregister.nl]: NTR1198; 25-1-2008.

Barrett's oesophagus patients with low-grade dysplasia can be accurately risk-stratified after histological review by an expert pathology panel

Objective Reported malignant progression rates for low-grade dysplasia (LGD) in Barrett's oesophagus (BO) vary widely. Expert histological review of LGD is advised, but limited data are available on its clinical value. This retrospective cohort study aimed to determine the value of an expert pathology panel organised in the Dutch Barrett's Advisory Committee (BAC) by investigating the incidence rates of high-grade dysplasia (HGD) and oesophageal adenocarcinoma (OAC) after expert histological review of LGD. Design We included all BO cases referred to the BAC for histological review of LGD diagnosed between 2000 and 2011. The diagnosis of the expert panel was related to the histological outcome during endoscopic follow-up. Primary endpoint was development of HGD or OAC. Results 293 LGD patients (76% men; mean 63 years +/- 11.9) were included. Following histological review, 73% was downstaged to non-dysplastic BO (NDBO) or indefinite for dysplasia (IND). In 27% the initial LGD diagnosis was confirmed. Endoscopic follow-up was performed in 264 patients (90%) with a median followup of 39 months (IQR 16-72). For confirmed LGD, the risk of HGD/OAC was 9.1% per patient-year. Patients downstaged to NDBO or IND had a malignant progression risk of 0.6% and 0.9% per patient-year, respectively. Conclusions Confirmed LGD in BO has a markedly increased risk of malignant progression. However, the vast majority of patients with community LGD will be downstaged after expert review and have a low progression risk. Therefore, all BO patients with LGD should undergo expert histological review of the diagnosis for adequate risk stratification

Radiofrequency ablation for low-grade dysplasia in Barrett's esophagus: long-term outcome of a randomized trial

Background and Aims: A prior randomized study (Surveillance versus Radiofrequency Ablation study [SURF study]) demonstrated that radiofrequency ablation (RFA) of Barrett's esophagus (BE) with confirmed low-grade dysplasia (LGD) significantly reduces the risk of esophageal adenocarcinoma. Our aim was to report the long-term outcomes of this study. Methods: The SURF study randomized BE patients with confirmed LGD to RFA or surveillance. For this retrospective cohort study, all endoscopic and histologic data acquired at the end of the SURF study in May 2013 until December 2017 were collected. The primary outcome was rate of progression to high-grade dysplasia (HGD)/cancer. All 136 patients randomized to RFA (n = 68) or surveillance (n = 68) in the SURF study were included. After closure of the SURF study, 15 surveillance patients underwent RFA based on patient preference and study outcomes. Results: With 40 additional months (interquartile range, 12-51), the total median follow-up from randomization to last endoscopy was 73 months (interquartile range, 46-85). HGD/cancer was diagnosed in 1 patient in the RFA group (1.5%) and in 23 in the surveillance group (33.8%) (P = .000), resulting in an absolute risk reduction of 32.4% (95% confidence interval [CI], 22.4%-44.2%) with a number needed to treat of 3.1 (95% CI, 2.3-4.5). Seventy-five of 83 patients (90%; 95% CI, 82.1%-95.0%) treated with RFA for BE reached complete clearance of BE and dysplasia. BE recurred in 7 of 75 patients (9%; 95% CI, 4.6%-18.0%), mostly minute islands or tongues, and LGD in 3 of 75 (4%; 95% CI, 1.4%-11.1%). Conclusions: RFA of BE with confirmed LGD significantly reduces the risk of malignant progression, with sustained clearance of BE in 91% and LGD in 96% of patients, after a median follow-up of 73 months. (Clinical trial registration number: NTR1198.

Radiofrequency ablation for low-grade dysplasia in Barrett's esophagus: long-term outcome of a randomized trial

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: A prior randomized study (Surveillance versus Radiofrequency Ablation study [SURF study]) demonstrated that radiofrequency ablation (RFA) of Barrett's esophagus (BE) with confirmed low-grade dysplasia (LGD) significantly reduces the risk of esophageal adenocarcinoma. Our aim was to report the long-term outcomes of this study. METHODS: The SURF study randomized BE patients with confirmed LGD to RFA or surveillance. For this retrospective cohort study, all endoscopic and histologic data acquired at the end of the SURF study in May 2013 until December 2017 were collected. The primary outcome was rate of progression to high-grade dysplasia (HGD)/cancer. All 136 patients randomized to RFA (n = 68) or surveillance (n = 68) in the SURF study were included. After closure of the SURF study, 15 surveillance patients underwent RFA based on patient preference and study outcomes. RESULTS: With 40 additional months (interquartile range, 12-51), the total median follow-up from randomization to last endoscopy was 73 months (interquartile range, 46-85). HGD/cancer was diagnosed in 1 patient in the RFA group (1.5%) and in 23 in the surveillance group (33.8%) (P = .000), resulting in an absolute risk reduction of 32.4% (95% confidence interval [CI], 22.4%-44.2%) with a number needed to treat of 3.1 (95% CI, 2.3-4.5). Seventy-five of 83 patients (90%; 95% CI, 82.1%-95.0%) treated with RFA for BE reached complete clearance of BE and dysplasia. BE recurred in 7 of 75 patients (9%; 95% CI, 4.6%-18.0%), mostly minute islands or tongues, and LGD in 3 of 75 (4%; 95% CI, 1.4%-11.1%). CONCLUSIONS: RFA of BE with confirmed LGD significantly reduces the risk of malignant progression, with sustained clearance of BE in 91% and LGD in 96% of patients, after a median follow-up of 73 months. (Clinical trial registration number: NTR1198.).status: publishe

A simplified regimen for focal radiofrequency ablation of Barrett's mucosa: a randomized multicenter trial comparing two ablation regimens

BACKGROUND: The currently recommended regimen for focal radiofrequency ablation (RFA) of Barrett's esophagus (BE) comprises 2 applications of energy, cleaning of the device and ablation zone, and 2 additional applications of energy. A simplified regimen may be of clinical utility if it is faster, easier, and equally safe and effective. OBJECTIVE: To compare the efficacy of 2 focal RFA regimens. SETTING: Three tertiary referral centers. PATIENTS: Consecutive patients scheduled for focal RFA of BE with flat type BE with at least 2 BE islands or mosaic groups of islands were enrolled. INTERVENTIONS: BE areas were paired: 1 area was randomized to the "standard" regimen (2 × 15 J/cm(2)-clean-2 × 15 J/cm(2)) or to the "simplified" regimen (3 × 15 J/cm(2)-no clean), allocating the second area automatically to the other regimen. The percentage of surface area regression of each area was scored at 2 months by the endoscopist (blinded). OUTCOME MEASURE: Proportion of completely removed BE areas at 2 months. Calculated sample size was 46 pairs of BE areas using a noninferiority design. Noninferiority was defined as <20% difference in the paired proportions. RESULTS: Forty-five equivalent pairs of BE areas were included in 41 patients. The proportion of completely removed BE areas at 2 months after focal RFA was 30 (67%) for standard and 33 (73%) for simplified. Noninferiority was demonstrated by a 7% difference (95% CI, -10.6 to +20.9). LIMITATIONS: Tertiary referral centers. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this multicenter randomized trial suggest that a simplified 3 × 15 J/cm(2) focal ablation regimen is not inferior to the standard regimen, regarding the endoscopic removal of residual Barrett islands

A simplified regimen for focal radiofrequency ablation of Barrett's mucosa: a randomized multicenter trial comparing two ablation regimens

The currently recommended regimen for focal radiofrequency ablation (RFA) of Barrett's esophagus (BE) comprises 2 applications of energy, cleaning of the device and ablation zone, and 2 additional applications of energy. A simplified regimen may be of clinical utility if it is faster, easier, and equally safe and effective. To compare the efficacy of 2 focal RFA regimens. Three tertiary referral centers. Consecutive patients scheduled for focal RFA of BE with flat type BE with at least 2 BE islands or mosaic groups of islands were enrolled. BE areas were paired: 1 area was randomized to the "standard" regimen (2 × 15 J/cm(2)-clean-2 × 15 J/cm(2)) or to the "simplified" regimen (3 × 15 J/cm(2)-no clean), allocating the second area automatically to the other regimen. The percentage of surface area regression of each area was scored at 2 months by the endoscopist (blinded). Proportion of completely removed BE areas at 2 months. Calculated sample size was 46 pairs of BE areas using a noninferiority design. Noninferiority was defined as <20% difference in the paired proportions. Forty-five equivalent pairs of BE areas were included in 41 patients. The proportion of completely removed BE areas at 2 months after focal RFA was 30 (67%) for standard and 33 (73%) for simplified. Noninferiority was demonstrated by a 7% difference (95% CI, -10.6 to +20.9). Tertiary referral centers. The results of this multicenter randomized trial suggest that a simplified 3 × 15 J/cm(2) focal ablation regimen is not inferior to the standard regimen, regarding the endoscopic removal of residual Barrett island

Patients With Barrett's Esophagus and Confirmed Persistent Low-Grade Dysplasia Are at Increased Risk for Progression to Neoplasia

Background & Aims For patients with Barrett's esophagus, the diagnosis of low-grade dysplasia (LGD) is subjective, and reported outcomes vary. We analyzed data from a multicenter study of endoscopic therapy to identify factors associated with progression to high-grade dysplasia (HGD) or esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC) in patients with LGD of the esophagus. Methods We performed a retrospective analysis of data from 255 patients with a primary diagnosis of LGD (78% men; mean age, 63 years) who participated in a randomized controlled trial of surveillance vs radiofrequency ablation in Europe. Three expert pathologists independently reviewed baseline and subsequent LGD specimens. The presence and degree of dysplasia was separately recorded for each biopsy and classified according to the Vienna Classification system. The primary end point was development of HGD or EAC. We performed univariate logistic regression analyses to assess the association between outcomes and factors such as number of pathologists confirming LGD, multifocality of LGD, and persistence of LGD over time. Results Of the 255 patients, 45 (18%) developed HGD or EAC during a median 42-month follow-up period (interquartile range, 25–61 months); patients were examined by a median 4 endoscopies (interquartile range, 3–6 endoscopies). The number of pathologists confirming LGD was strongly associated with progression to neoplasia; risk for progression increased greatly when all 3 pathologists agreed on LGD (odds ratio, 47.14; 95% confidence interval, 13.10–169.70). When LGD was detected at baseline and confirmed by a subsequent endoscopy, the odds for progression to neoplasia also increased greatly (odds ratio, 9.28; 95% confidence interval, 4.39–19.64). Multifocal LGD was not significantly associated with progression to neoplasia. Conclusions The number of pathologists confirming LGD and persistence of LGD over time increase risk for development of HGD or EAC in patients with Barrett's esophagus and LGD. These simple, readily available variables can help stratify risk and select patients for prophylactic ablation therapy