Sarmed S Sami1, Prasad G Iyer2. 1. Barrett's Esophagus Unit, Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Mayo Clinic, 200 1st St SW, Rochester, MN, 55905, USA. 2. Barrett's Esophagus Unit, Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Mayo Clinic, 200 1st St SW, Rochester, MN, 55905, USA. iyer.prasad@mayo.edu.
Abstract
OPINION STATEMENT: PURPOSE OF REVIEW: There is a pressing need for effective strategies to halt the increase in both the incidence and mortality of esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC). Screening for Barrett's esophagus, which is the only known precursor of EAC, remains a ripe area for research, particularly with regard to identifying the target population, screening tools, and management of screen-detected populations. This review aims to explore in depth the rationale for screening for Barrett's esophagus, recent biotechnological advances which may have the potential of making screening feasible, and also highlight the challenges which will have to be overcome in order make screening for BE a realistic prospect. RECENT FINDINGS: Imaging techniques such as portable transnasal endoscopy have the advantage of providing an immediate diagnosis of Barrett's esophagus as well as other significant pathologies such as reflux esophagitis and cancer; however, larger studies in non-enriched community screening populations are required to evaluate their feasibility. The capsule sponge is a cell-sampling device coupled with a biomarker, which has been most extensively evaluated with very promising results as regards feasibility, acceptability, accuracy, and cost-effectiveness. Its effectiveness in increasing the detection of Barrett's esophagus in primary care is currently being evaluated. Several Barrett's esophagus risk prediction scores have been developed with variable degrees of accuracy. Several minimally and non-invasive screening techniques have been studied including imaging and cell-sampling devices. Barrett's risk assessment models need to be further validated in independent, relevant screening populations with clear cut-offs for recommending screening to be defined.
OPINION STATEMENT: PURPOSE OF REVIEW: There is a pressing need for effective strategies to halt the increase in both the incidence and mortality of esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC). Screening for Barrett's esophagus, which is the only known precursor of EAC, remains a ripe area for research, particularly with regard to identifying the target population, screening tools, and management of screen-detected populations. This review aims to explore in depth the rationale for screening for Barrett's esophagus, recent biotechnological advances which may have the potential of making screening feasible, and also highlight the challenges which will have to be overcome in order make screening for BE a realistic prospect. RECENT FINDINGS: Imaging techniques such as portable transnasal endoscopy have the advantage of providing an immediate diagnosis of Barrett's esophagus as well as other significant pathologies such as reflux esophagitis and cancer; however, larger studies in non-enriched community screening populations are required to evaluate their feasibility. The capsule sponge is a cell-sampling device coupled with a biomarker, which has been most extensively evaluated with very promising results as regards feasibility, acceptability, accuracy, and cost-effectiveness. Its effectiveness in increasing the detection of Barrett's esophagus in primary care is currently being evaluated. Several Barrett's esophagus risk prediction scores have been developed with variable degrees of accuracy. Several minimally and non-invasive screening techniques have been studied including imaging and cell-sampling devices. Barrett's risk assessment models need to be further validated in independent, relevant screening populations with clear cut-offs for recommending screening to be defined.
Authors: Blair A Jobe; John G Hunter; Eugene Y Chang; Charles Y Kim; Glenn M Eisen; Jedediah D Robinson; Brian S Diggs; Robert W O'Rourke; Anne E Rader; Paul Schipper; David A Sauer; Jeffrey H Peters; David A Lieberman; Cynthia D Morris Journal: Am J Gastroenterol Date: 2006-12 Impact factor: 10.864
Authors: Rami Eliakim; Virender K Sharma; Kamel Yassin; Samuel N Adler; Harold Jacob; David R Cave; Ritu Sachdev; Roger D Mitty; Dirk Hartmann; Dieter Schilling; Jurgen F Riemann; Simon Bar-Meir; Eytan Bardan; Brian Fennerty; Glenn Eisen; Douglas Faigel; Blair S Lewis; David E Fleischer Journal: J Clin Gastroenterol Date: 2005-08 Impact factor: 3.062
Authors: Frederik Hvid-Jensen; Lars Pedersen; Asbjørn Mohr Drewes; Henrik Toft Sørensen; Peter Funch-Jensen Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2011-10-13 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: John M Inadomi; Ma Somsouk; Ryan D Madanick; Jennifer P Thomas; Nicholas J Shaheen Journal: Gastroenterology Date: 2009-03-06 Impact factor: 22.682
Authors: Ana C P Correia; Silvia Calpe; Nahid Mostafavi; Sanne Johanna Maria Hoefnagel; Maria Del Carmen Sancho-Serra; Patricia S de Koning; Kausilia K Krishnadath Journal: Sci Rep Date: 2020-09-23 Impact factor: 4.379
Authors: Sarmed S Sami; James P Moriarty; Jordan K Rosedahl; Bijan J Borah; David A Katzka; Kenneth K Wang; John B Kisiel; Krish Ragunath; Joel H Rubenstein; Prasad G Iyer Journal: Am J Gastroenterol Date: 2021-08-01 Impact factor: 12.045