Prevalence of Barrett's esophagus and performance of societal screening guidelines in an unreferred primary care population of U.S. veterans.


Journal

Gastrointestinal endoscopy
ISSN: 1097-6779
Titre abrégé: Gastrointest Endosc
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 0010505

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
02 2021
Historique:
received: 20 03 2020
accepted: 05 06 2020
pubmed: 23 6 2020
medline: 1 6 2021
entrez: 23 6 2020
Statut: ppublish

Résumé

Less than 10% of patients diagnosed with esophageal adenocarcinoma have a pre-existing Barrett's esophagus (BE) diagnosis, possibly because of suboptimal performance of guidelines. We examined the prevalence of BE in a previously unscreened primary care population and the potential yield of practice BE screening guidelines. This was a retrospective analysis of a prospective cross-sectional study of consecutively recruited unreferred patients from primary care clinics who underwent study upper endoscopy. We examined the performance of BE screening guidelines of the European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE), British Society of Gastroenterology (BSG), American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ASGE), American College of Gastroenterology (ACG), American Gastroenterological Association (AGA), and our own modification of guidelines. We identified 44 BE cases and 469 control subjects (prevalence, 8.6%). Among 371 patients without GERD symptoms, 25 (6.7%) had BE. The AGA guidelines requiring ≥2 BE risk factors had sensitivity of 100% and specificity of only .2%, whereas ACG, ASGE, ESGE, and BSG guidelines (all requiring GERD first) had low sensitivities (38.6%-43.2%), specificities ranging from 67.4% to 76.5%, and area under the receiver operating curve (AUROC) of .50 to .60. Our 2-pronged approach depending on presence or absence of GERD symptoms but with other risk factors achieved sensitivity of 81.8%, specificity of 51.2%, and AUROC of .66. Over half of BE cases were without frequent GERD symptoms, but virtually all had at least 1 known BE risk factor. Practice guidelines requiring GERD symptoms have low sensitivity, whereas those not requiring GERD have low specificity. We have proposed a screening guideline with better use of known risk factors.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND AND AIMS
Less than 10% of patients diagnosed with esophageal adenocarcinoma have a pre-existing Barrett's esophagus (BE) diagnosis, possibly because of suboptimal performance of guidelines. We examined the prevalence of BE in a previously unscreened primary care population and the potential yield of practice BE screening guidelines.
METHODS
This was a retrospective analysis of a prospective cross-sectional study of consecutively recruited unreferred patients from primary care clinics who underwent study upper endoscopy. We examined the performance of BE screening guidelines of the European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE), British Society of Gastroenterology (BSG), American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ASGE), American College of Gastroenterology (ACG), American Gastroenterological Association (AGA), and our own modification of guidelines.
RESULTS
We identified 44 BE cases and 469 control subjects (prevalence, 8.6%). Among 371 patients without GERD symptoms, 25 (6.7%) had BE. The AGA guidelines requiring ≥2 BE risk factors had sensitivity of 100% and specificity of only .2%, whereas ACG, ASGE, ESGE, and BSG guidelines (all requiring GERD first) had low sensitivities (38.6%-43.2%), specificities ranging from 67.4% to 76.5%, and area under the receiver operating curve (AUROC) of .50 to .60. Our 2-pronged approach depending on presence or absence of GERD symptoms but with other risk factors achieved sensitivity of 81.8%, specificity of 51.2%, and AUROC of .66.
CONCLUSIONS
Over half of BE cases were without frequent GERD symptoms, but virtually all had at least 1 known BE risk factor. Practice guidelines requiring GERD symptoms have low sensitivity, whereas those not requiring GERD have low specificity. We have proposed a screening guideline with better use of known risk factors.

Identifiants

pubmed: 32565183
pii: S0016-5107(20)34457-6
doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2020.06.032
pmc: PMC7749069
mid: NIHMS1605230
pii:
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

409-419.e1

Subventions

Organisme : NIDDK NIH HHS
ID : P30 DK056338
Pays : United States
Organisme : NIDDK NIH HHS
ID : R21 DK067366
Pays : United States
Organisme : NIDDK NIH HHS
ID : T32 DK083266
Pays : United States

Commentaires et corrections

Type : CommentIn

Informations de copyright

Copyright © 2021 American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy. All rights reserved.

Références

MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2004 Nov 12;53(44):1044-7
pubmed: 15538320
Dig Dis Sci. 2018 Aug;63(8):1988-1996
pubmed: 29671158
Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2013 Apr;11(4):373-381.e1
pubmed: 23220167
Gastrointest Endosc. 2019 Sep;90(3):335-359.e2
pubmed: 31439127
Dig Dis Sci. 2018 Nov;63(11):3112-3119
pubmed: 30109579
J Clin Gastroenterol. 2020 Feb;54(2):136-143
pubmed: 31851107
Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2004 Oct;2(10):868-79
pubmed: 15476150
Gastroenterology. 2004 Jun;126(7):1692-9
pubmed: 15188164
Gut. 2014 Jan;63(1):7-42
pubmed: 24165758
Cancer. 2006 Nov 1;107(9):2160-6
pubmed: 17019737
CA Cancer J Clin. 2018 Nov;68(6):394-424
pubmed: 30207593
Gut. 2007 May;56(5):631-6
pubmed: 17142647
Mayo Clin Proc. 1994 Jun;69(6):539-47
pubmed: 8189759
Ann Intern Med. 2003 Feb 4;138(3):176-86
pubmed: 12558356
Am J Gastroenterol. 2006 Aug;101(8):1900-20; quiz 1943
pubmed: 16928254
Gastrointest Endosc. 2011 Sep;74(3):610-624.e2
pubmed: 21741639
Gastroenterology. 2011 Mar;140(3):1084-91
pubmed: 21376940
Gastrointest Endosc. 2019 Nov;90(5):707-717.e1
pubmed: 31152737
Gastrointest Endosc. 2003 Mar;57(3):311-8
pubmed: 12612508
Gut. 2015 Jan;64(1):20-5
pubmed: 24700439
Gastroenterology. 2002 Aug;123(2):461-7
pubmed: 12145799
Am J Gastroenterol. 2016 Jan;111(1):30-50; quiz 51
pubmed: 26526079
Ann Oncol. 2012 Dec;23(12):3155-3162
pubmed: 22847812
Gastroenterology. 2006 Nov;131(5):1392-9
pubmed: 17101315
Endoscopy. 2017 Feb;49(2):191-198
pubmed: 28122386
Dig Dis Sci. 2019 Feb;64(2):367-372
pubmed: 30370493
Dig Dis Sci. 2018 Aug;63(8):2094-2104
pubmed: 29948571
Am J Gastroenterol. 2013 Jun;108(6):915-22
pubmed: 23567358
Gastroenterology. 2003 Dec;125(6):1670-7
pubmed: 14724819
Health Expect. 2014 Dec;17(6):818-25
pubmed: 22889133
Gastroenterology. 2005 Dec;129(6):1825-31
pubmed: 16344051
N Engl J Med. 2011 Oct 13;365(15):1375-83
pubmed: 21995385
Endoscopy. 2020 Jul;52(7):537-547
pubmed: 32325514
Med Clin North Am. 2002 Nov;86(6):1423-45, vii
pubmed: 12510459

Auteurs

Theresa H Nguyen (TH)

Section of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Department of Medicine, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Texas, USA; Center for Innovations in Quality, Effectiveness and Safety (IQuESt), Michael E. DeBakey Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Houston, Texas, USA.

Aaron P Thrift (AP)

Section of Epidemiology and Population Sciences, Department of Medicine, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Texas, USA; Dan L. Duncan Comprehensive Cancer Center, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Texas, USA.

Massimo Rugge (M)

Department of Diagnostic Sciences, University of Padova, Padova, Italy.

Hashem B El-Serag (HB)

Section of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Department of Medicine, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Texas, USA; Center for Innovations in Quality, Effectiveness and Safety (IQuESt), Michael E. DeBakey Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Houston, Texas, USA.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH