Literature DB >> 26748222

Patients With Barrett's Esophagus and Persistent Low-grade Dysplasia Have an Increased Risk for High-grade Dysplasia and Cancer.

Christine Kestens1, G Johan A Offerhaus2, Jantine W P M van Baal3, Peter D Siersema3.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND & AIMS: In some patients with Barrett's esophagus (BE) and a confirmed diagnosis of low-grade dysplasia (LGD), the LGD is not detected during follow-up examinations. We would like to avoid the unnecessary risks and costs of ablative treatment for these patients. Therefore, we investigated whether persistent LGD increases risk for high-grade dysplasia (HGD) or esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC) and what proportion of patients are no longer found to have dysplasia after an initial diagnosis of LGD.
METHODS: In a retrospective study, we collected information on 1579 patients with BE and LGD from 2005 through 2010 by using a nationwide registry of histopathology diagnoses in the Netherlands (PALGA). Confirmed LGD was defined as a diagnosis of LGD that was confirmed by any other pathologist. Persistent LGD was defined as LGD detected at the first and follow-up endoscopy. Data were collected on patients until treatment for HGD, detection of EAC, or the last endoscopy at which a biopsy was collected (through July 2014). We evaluated whether persistent LGD was a risk factor for malignant progression by using univariable and multivariable Cox regression analyses.
RESULTS: Of individuals with BE and LGD in the database, the diagnosis of LGD was confirmed for 161 patients (10% of total). In these patients, the incidence of HGD and/or EAC was 5.18/100 person-years (95% confidence interval [CI], 4.32-8.10/100 person-years) compared with 1.85/100 person-years (95% CI, 1.52-2.22/100 person-years) in patients for whom LGD was not confirmed at the first endoscopy. The incidence of EAC alone in patients with confirmed LGD was 2.51/100 person-years (95% CI, 1.46-3.99/100 person-years), compared with 1.01/per 100 person-years (95% CI, 0.41-2.10/100 person-years) in patients for whom LGD was not confirmed at the first endoscopy. Of patients in whom LGD was confirmed at the first endoscopic examination, 51% were not found to have dysplasia at the first follow-up endoscopy, and 30% had persistent LGD. In patients with persistent LGD, the incidence of HGD and/or EAC was 7.65/100 person-years (95% CI, 4.45-12.34) and of only EAC was 2.04/100 person-years (95% CI, 0.65-4.92); in patients without persistent LGD, the incidence of HGD and/or EAC was 2.32/100 person-years (95% CI, 1.08-4.40/100 person-years) and of only EAC was 1.45 (95% CI, 0.53-3.21/100 person-years). Persistent LGD was found to be an independent risk factor for the development of HGD and/or EAC, with hazard ratio of 3.5 (95% CI, 1.48-8.28).
CONCLUSIONS: In a large population-based cohort study of patients with BE and LGD, the risk of progression to HGD and/or EAC was higher in patients with confirmed LGD and highest in those with confirmed and persistent LGD.
Copyright © 2016. Published by Elsevier Inc.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Esophageal Cancer; Esophagus; Marker; Prognostic Factor

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 26748222     DOI: 10.1016/j.cgh.2015.12.027

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol        ISSN: 1542-3565            Impact factor:   11.382


  10 in total

Review 1.  Endoscopic therapy for confirmed low-grade dysplasia in Barrett's esophagus.

Authors:  Silvia Pecere; Guido Costamagna
Journal:  Transl Gastroenterol Hepatol       Date:  2018-10-29

2.  Predictors of Progression in Barrett's Esophagus with Low-Grade Dysplasia: Results from a Multicenter Prospective BE Registry.

Authors:  Rajesh Krishnamoorthi; Jason T Lewis; Murli Krishna; Nicholas J Crews; Michele L Johnson; Ross A Dierkhising; Brenda F Ginos; Kenneth K Wang; Herbert C Wolfsen; David E Fleischer; Francisco C Ramirez; Navtej S Buttar; David A Katzka; Prasad G Iyer
Journal:  Am J Gastroenterol       Date:  2017-04-04       Impact factor: 10.864

3.  Barrett's Esophagus With Low-Grade Dysplasia: Ablate or Wait?

Authors:  Sravanthi Parasa; Prateek Sharma
Journal:  Am J Gastroenterol       Date:  2017-01-17       Impact factor: 10.864

4.  Inter-institutional variations regarding Barrett's esophagus diagnosis.

Authors:  Norihisa Ishimura; Mika Yuki; Takafumi Yuki; Yoshinori Komazawa; Yoshinori Kushiyama; Hirofumi Fujishiro; Shunji Ishihara; Yoshikazu Kinoshita
Journal:  Esophagus       Date:  2018-07-28       Impact factor: 4.230

5.  Prevalence and Predictors of Missed Dysplasia on Index Barrett's Esophagus Diagnosing Endoscopy in a Veteran Population.

Authors:  Theresa H Nguyen; Aaron P Thrift; Rollin George; Daniel G Rosen; Hashem B El-Serag; Gyanprakash A Ketwaroo
Journal:  Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol       Date:  2021-04-08       Impact factor: 11.382

Review 6.  Towards screening Barrett's oesophagus: current guidelines, imaging modalities and future developments.

Authors:  Ishaan Maitra; Ravindra Sudhachandra Date; Francis Luke Martin
Journal:  Clin J Gastroenterol       Date:  2020-06-03

Review 7.  A narrative review of Barrett's esophagus in 2020, molecular and clinical update.

Authors:  Aamir N Dam; Jason Klapman
Journal:  Ann Transl Med       Date:  2020-09

8.  Associations between long-term conditions and upper gastrointestinal cancer incidence: A prospective population-based cohort of UK Biobank participants.

Authors:  Jennifer Marley; Barbara I Nicholl; Sara Macdonald; Frances S Mair; Bhautesh D Jani
Journal:  J Multimorb Comorb       Date:  2021-11-17

Review 9.  Epidemiology of Barrett's Esophagus and Esophageal Adenocarcinoma: Implications for Screening and Surveillance.

Authors:  Michael B Cook; Aaron P Thrift
Journal:  Gastrointest Endosc Clin N Am       Date:  2020-10-21

Review 10.  Natural History of Barrett's Esophagus.

Authors:  Ernst J Kuipers; Manon C Spaander
Journal:  Dig Dis Sci       Date:  2018-08       Impact factor: 3.199

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.