Avi Rosenfeld1,2, David G Graham2,3, Sarah Jevons2, Jose Ariza2,3, Daryl Hagan2, Ash Wilson2, Samuel J Lovat2, Sarmed S Sami2,3, Omer F Ahmad2,3, Marco Novelli4, Manuel Rodriguez Justo4, Alison Winstanley4, Eliyahu M Heifetz5, Mordehy Ben-Zecharia5, Uria Noiman5, Rebecca C Fitzgerald6, Peter Sasieni7,8, Laurence B Lovat2,3. 1. Department of Industrial Engineering Jerusalem College of Technology (JCT), Jerusalem, Israel. 2. GENIE GastroENterological IntervEntion Group, Department for Targeted Intervention, University College London (UCL), London, United Kingdom. 3. Gastrointestinal Services, University College London Hospital (UCLH), London, United Kingdom. 4. Dept of Pathology, University College London Hospital (UCLH), London, United Kingdom. 5. Department of Health Informatics, Jerusalem College of Technology (JCT), Jerusalem, Israel. 6. MRC Cancer Unit, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom. 7. Cancer Prevention Trials Unit, Queen Mary University of London, London, United Kingdom. 8. School of Cancer & Pharmaceutical Sciences, King's College London, London, United Kingdom.
Abstract
Background: Screening for Barrett's Oesophagus (BE) relies on endoscopy which is invasive and has a low yield. This study aimed to develop and externally validate a simple symptom and risk-factor questionnaire to screen for patients with BE. Methods: Questionnaires from 1299 patients in the BEST2 case-controlled study were analysed: 880 had BE including 40 with invasive oesophageal adenocarcinoma (OAC) and 419 were controls. This was randomly split into a training cohort of 776 patients and an internal validation cohort of 523 patients. External validation included 398 patients from the BOOST case-controlled study: 198 with BE (23 with OAC) and 200 controls. Identification of independently important diagnostic features was undertaken using machine learning techniques information gain (IG) and correlation based feature selection (CFS). Multiple classification tools were assessed to create a multi-variable risk prediction model. Internal validation was followed by external validation in the independent dataset. Findings: The BEST2 study included 40 features. Of these, 24 added IG but following CFS, only 8 demonstrated independent diagnostic value including age, gender, smoking, waist circumference, frequency of stomach pain, duration of heartburn and acid taste and taking of acid suppression medicines. Logistic regression offered the highest prediction quality with AUC (area under the receiver operator curve) of 0.87. In the internal validation set, AUC was 0.86. In the BOOST external validation set, AUC was 0.81. Interpretation: The diagnostic model offers valid predictions of diagnosis of BE in patients with symptomatic gastroesophageal reflux, assisting in identifying who should go forward to invasive testing. Overweight men who have been taking stomach medicines for a long time may merit particular consideration for further testing. The risk prediction tool is quick and simple to administer but will need further calibration and validation in a prospective study in primary care. Funding: Charles Wolfson Trust and Guts UK.
Background: Screening for Barrett's Oesophagus (BE) relies on endoscopy which is invasive and has a low yield. This study aimed to develop and externally validate a simple symptom and risk-factor questionnaire to screen for patients with BE. Methods: Questionnaires from 1299 patients in the BEST2 case-controlled study were analysed: 880 had BE including 40 with invasive oesophageal adenocarcinoma (OAC) and 419 were controls. This was randomly split into a training cohort of 776 patients and an internal validation cohort of 523 patients. External validation included 398 patients from the BOOST case-controlled study: 198 with BE (23 with OAC) and 200 controls. Identification of independently important diagnostic features was undertaken using machine learning techniques information gain (IG) and correlation based feature selection (CFS). Multiple classification tools were assessed to create a multi-variable risk prediction model. Internal validation was followed by external validation in the independent dataset. Findings: The BEST2 study included 40 features. Of these, 24 added IG but following CFS, only 8 demonstrated independent diagnostic value including age, gender, smoking, waist circumference, frequency of stomach pain, duration of heartburn and acid taste and taking of acid suppression medicines. Logistic regression offered the highest prediction quality with AUC (area under the receiver operator curve) of 0.87. In the internal validation set, AUC was 0.86. In the BOOST external validation set, AUC was 0.81. Interpretation: The diagnostic model offers valid predictions of diagnosis of BE in patients with symptomatic gastroesophageal reflux, assisting in identifying who should go forward to invasive testing. Overweight men who have been taking stomach medicines for a long time may merit particular consideration for further testing. The risk prediction tool is quick and simple to administer but will need further calibration and validation in a prospective study in primary care. Funding: Charles Wolfson Trust and Guts UK.
Authors: Jessie Steevens; Leo J Schouten; Ann L C Driessen; Clément J R Huysentruyt; Yolande C A Keulemans; R Alexandra Goldbohm; Piet A van den Brandt Journal: Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev Date: 2010-12-20 Impact factor: 4.254
Authors: Lesley A Anderson; R G Peter Watson; Seamus J Murphy; Brian T Johnston; Harry Comber; Jim Mc Guigan; John V Reynolds; Liam J Murray Journal: World J Gastroenterol Date: 2007-03-14 Impact factor: 5.742
Authors: Ai Kubo; Michael Blaise Cook; Nicholas J Shaheen; Thomas L Vaughan; David C Whiteman; Liam Murray; Douglas A Corley Journal: Gut Date: 2013-01-26 Impact factor: 23.059
Authors: Rebecca C Fitzgerald; Massimiliano di Pietro; Krish Ragunath; Yeng Ang; Jin-Yong Kang; Peter Watson; Nigel Trudgill; Praful Patel; Philip V Kaye; Scott Sanders; Maria O'Donovan; Elizabeth Bird-Lieberman; Pradeep Bhandari; Janusz A Jankowski; Stephen Attwood; Simon L Parsons; Duncan Loft; Jesper Lagergren; Paul Moayyedi; Georgios Lyratzopoulos; John de Caestecker Journal: Gut Date: 2013-10-28 Impact factor: 23.059
Authors: Bobbie-Jo M Webb-Robertson; Ernesto S Nakayasu; Brigitte I Frohnert; Lisa M Bramer; Sarah M Akers; Jill M Norris; Kendra Vehik; Anette-G Ziegler; Thomas O Metz; Stephen S Rich; Marian J Rewers Journal: J Clin Endocrinol Metab Date: 2022-07-14 Impact factor: 6.134
Authors: Julie A Webster; Alain Wuethrich; Karthik B Shanmugasundaram; Renee S Richards; Wioleta M Zelek; Alok K Shah; Louisa G Gordon; Bradley J Kendall; Gunter Hartel; B Paul Morgan; Matt Trau; Michelle M Hill Journal: Cancers (Basel) Date: 2021-06-08 Impact factor: 6.575