Barrett’s Esophagus and Esophageal Carcinoma: Can Biomarkers Guide Clinical Practice?
- 48 Downloads
Purpose of Review
Despite gastrointestinal societal recommendations for endoscopic screening and surveillance of Barrett’s esophagus, the rates of esophageal adenocarcinoma continue to rise. Furthermore, this current practice is costly to patients and the medical system without clear evidence of reduction in cancer mortality. The use of biomarkers to guide screening, surveillance, and treatment strategies might alleviate some of these issues.
Incredible advances in biomarker identification, biomarker assays, and minimally-invasive modalities to acquire biomarkers have shown promising results.
We will highlight recently published, key studies demonstrating where we are with using biomarkers for screening and surveillance in clinical practice, and what is on the horizon regarding novel non-invasive and minimally invasive methods to acquire biomarkers. Proof-of principle studies using in silico models demonstrate that biomarker-guided screening, surveillance, and therapeutic intervention strategies can be cost-effective and can reduce cancer deaths in patients with Barrett’s esophagus.
KeywordsScreening Surveillance Gastroesophageal reflux disease Endoscopic Imaging Tissue
Vani J.A. Konda, M.D. has served as a consultant for and received research support from Pentax/C2 therapeutics and has past received research support from Olympus. Rhonda F. Souza, M.D. has served as a consultant and receives research support from Ironwood Pharmaceuticals.
This work was supported by the National Institutes of Health (R01 DK103598, R01 DK063621, R21 DK111369 to R.F.S.)
Compliance with Ethical Standards
Conflict of Interest
Rhonda Souza reports grants from National Institutes of Health and research support as a consultant from Ironwood Pharmaceuticals, outside the submitted work.
Vani Konda reports grants from Olympus, honoraria for teaching events from Mauna Kea Technologies, and grants from Pentax/C2 Therapeutics, outside the submitted work.
Human and Animal Rights and Informed Consent
This article does not contain any studies with human or animal subjects performed by any of the authors.
Papers of particular interest, published recently, have been highlighted as: • Of importance •• Of major importance
- 6.El-Serag HB, Naik AD, Duan Z, Shakhatreh M, Helm A, Pathak A, et al. Surveillance endoscopy is associated with improved outcomes of oesophageal adenocarcinoma detected in patients with Barrett’s oesophagus. Gut. 2016;65(8):1252–60. https://doi.org/10.1136/gutjnl-2014-308865.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 7.Corley DA, Mehtani K, Quesenberry C, Zhao W, de Boer J, Weiss NS. Impact of endoscopic surveillance on mortality from Barrett's esophagus-associated esophageal adenocarcinoma. Gastroenterology. 2013;145(2):312–9.e1. https://doi.org/10.1053/j.gastro.2013.05.004.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- 13.Phoa KN, van Vilsteren FG, Weusten BL, Bisschops R, Schoon EJ, Ragunath K, et al. Radiofrequency ablation vs endoscopic surveillance for patients with Barrett esophagus and low-grade dysplasia: a randomized clinical trial. JAMA. 2014;311(12):1209–17. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2014.2511.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 15.Eluri S, Brugge WR, Daglilar ES, Jackson SA, Styn MA, Callenberg KM, et al. The presence of genetic mutations at key loci predicts progression to esophageal adenocarcinoma in Barrett’s esophagus. Am J Gastroenterol. 2015;110(6):828–34. https://doi.org/10.1038/ajg.2015.152.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- 16.Critchley-Thorne RJ, Davison JM, Prichard JW, Reese LM, Zhang Y, Repa K, et al. A tissue systems pathology test detects abnormalities associated with prevalent high-grade dysplasia and esophageal Cancer in Barrett’s esophagus. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2017;26(2):240–8. https://doi.org/10.1158/1055-9965.epi-16-0640.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 17.Ek WE, Levine DM, D’Amato M, Pedersen NL, Magnusson PK, Bresso F, et al. Germline genetic contributions to risk for esophageal adenocarcinoma, Barrett's esophagus, and gastroesophageal reflux. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2013;105(22):1711–8. https://doi.org/10.1093/jnci/djt303.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- 22.Dai JY, de Dieu TJ, Buas MF, Onstad LE, Levine DM, Risch HA, et al. A newly identified susceptibility locus near FOXP1 modifies the association of gastroesophageal reflux with Barrett's esophagus. Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology. 2015;24(11):1739–47. https://doi.org/10.1158/1055-9965.epi-15-0507.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 23.• Kunzmann AT, Canadas Garre M, Thrift AP, McMenamin UC, Johnston BT, Cardwell CR, et al. Information on genetic variants does not increase identification of individuals at risk of esophageal adenocarcinoma compared to clinical risk factors. Gastroenterology. 2018. https://doi.org/10.1053/j.gastro.2018.09.038. Assessment of genetic susceptibility markers combined with known clinical risk factors to predict risk of esophageal adenocarcinoma development.
- 25.Davelaar AL, Calpe S, Lau L, Timmer MR, Visser M, Ten Kate FJ, et al. Aberrant TP53 detected by combining immunohistochemistry and DNA-FISH improves Barrett’s esophagus progression prediction: a prospective follow-up study. Genes Chromosomes Cancer. 2015;54(2):82–90. https://doi.org/10.1002/gcc.22220.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 26.•• Stachler MD, Camarda ND, Deitrick C, Kim A, Agoston AT, Odze RD, et al. Detection of mutations in Barrett’s esophagus before progression to high-grade dysplasia or adenocarcinoma. Gastroenterology. 2018;155(1):156–67. https://doi.org/10.1053/j.gastro.2018.03.047. Case-control study demonstrating that abnormalities in p53 dectected by IHC in patients with non-dysplastic Barrett’s esophagus can predict neoplastic progression. This study also demonstrated a strong, but not perfect, correlation between p53 mutations dected by gene sequencing and p53 overexpression by IHC.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 29.•• Choi WT, Tsai JH, Rabinovitch PS, Small T, Huang D, Mattis AN, et al. Diagnosis and risk stratification of Barrett’s dysplasia by flow cytometric DNA analysis of paraffin-embedded tissue. Gut. 2018;67(7):1229–38. https://doi.org/10.1136/gutjnl-2017-313815. DNA content abnormalities were tested in paraffin-embedded tissues of Barrett’s patients with high grade, low grade or indefinite for dysplasia and negative for dysplasia. DNA content abnormality correlated with increasing levels of dysplasia and could identify patients with indefinite or negative for dysplasia who are at high risk for subsequent progression to high grade dysplasia or cancer.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 32.•• Januszewicz W, Tan WK, Lehovsky K, Debiram-Beecham I, Nuckcheddy T, Moist S, et al. Safety and acceptability of a nonendoscopic esophageal sampling device - cytosponge: a systematic review of multicenter data. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2018. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cgh.2018.07.043. This multicenter experience reports the safety and acceptability using the string on a sponge test for sampling of esophageal cells without endoscopy.
- 34.Ross-Innes CS, Debiram-Beecham I, O'Donovan M, Walker E, Varghese S, Lao-Sirieix P, et al. Evaluation of a minimally invasive cell sampling device coupled with assessment of trefoil factor 3 expression for diagnosing Barrett’s esophagus: a multi-center case-control study. PLoS Med. 2015;12(1):e1001780. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1001780.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- 36.Ross-Innes CS, Chettouh H, Achilleos A, Galeano-Dalmau N, Debiram-Beecham I, MacRae S, et al. Risk stratification of Barrett's oesophagus using a non-endoscopic sampling method coupled with a biomarker panel: a cohort study. Lancet Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2017;2(1):23–31. https://doi.org/10.1016/s2468-1253(16)30118-2.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 37.Richardson C, Colavita P, Dunst C, Bagnato J, Billing P, Birkenhagen K, et al. Real-time diagnosis of Barrett’s esophagus: a prospective, multicenter study comparing confocal laser endomicroscopy with conventional histology for the identification of intestinal metaplasia in new users. Surg Endosc. 2018. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-018-6420-9.
- 39.•• Gaddam S, Mathur SC, Singh M, Arora J, Wani SB, Gupta N, et al. Novel probe-based confocal laser endomicroscopy criteria and interobserver agreement for the detection of dysplasia in Barrett’s esophagus. Am J Gastroenterol. 2011;106(11):1961–9. https://doi.org/10.1038/ajg.2011.294. Key criteria for confocal laser endomicroscopy to distinguish between dysplastic and non-dysplastic tissue in Barrett’s esophagus.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 40.Sharma P, Meining AR, Coron E, Lightdale CJ, Wolfsen HC, Bansal A, et al. Real-time increased detection of neoplastic tissue in Barrett’s esophagus with probe-based confocal laser endomicroscopy: final results of an international multicenter, prospective, randomized, controlled trial. Gastrointest Endosc. 2011;74(3):465–72. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gie.2011.04.004.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- 42.• Sauk J, Coron E, Kava L, Suter M, Gora M, Gallagher K, et al. Interobserver agreement for the detection of Barrett’s esophagus with optical frequency domain imaging. Dig Dis Sci. 2013;58(8):2261–5. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10620-013-2625-x. Study using volumetrc laser endomicrosopy demonstrating excellent interobserver variability to distinguish between squamous, gastric cardia, and Barrett’s esophagus.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- 45.Leggett CL, Gorospe EC, Chan DK, Muppa P, Owens V, Smyrk TC, et al. Comparative diagnostic performance of volumetric laser endomicroscopy and confocal laser endomicroscopy in the detection of dysplasia associated with Barrett’s esophagus. Gastrointest Endosc. 2016;83(5):880–8.e2. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gie.2015.08.050.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 46.Swager AF, Tearney GJ, Leggett CL, van Oijen MGH, Meijer SL, Weusten BL, et al. Identification of volumetric laser endomicroscopy features predictive for early neoplasia in Barrett’s esophagus using high-quality histological correlation. Gastrointestinal endoscopy. 2017;85(5):918–26.e7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gie.2016.09.012.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 47.Lee HC, Ahsen OO, Liang K, Wang Z, Figueiredo M, Giacomelli MG, et al. Endoscopic optical coherence tomography angiography microvascular features associated with dysplasia in Barrett’s esophagus (with video). Gastrointestinal endoscopy. 2017;86(3):476–84.e3. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gie.2017.01.034.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- 48.Kumar S, Huang J, Abbassi-Ghadi N, Mackenzie HA, Veselkov KA, Hoare JM, et al. Mass spectrometric analysis of exhaled breath for the identification of volatile organic compound biomarkers in esophageal and gastric adenocarcinoma. Ann Surg. 2015;262(6):981–90. https://doi.org/10.1097/sla.0000000000001101.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 49.Chan DK, Zakko L, Visrodia KH, Leggett CL, Lutzke LS, Clemens MA, et al. Breath testing for Barrett’s esophagus using exhaled volatile organic compound profiling with an electronic nose device. Gastroenterology. 2017;152(1):24–6. https://doi.org/10.1053/j.gastro.2016.11.001.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 50.• Spechler SJ, Katzka DA, Fitzgerald RC. New screening techniques in Barrett’s esophagus: great ideas or great practice? Gastroenterology. 2018;154(6):1594–601. https://doi.org/10.1053/j.gastro.2018.03.031. Commentary on approaches to screening for Barrett’s esophagus, whether they are ready for rountine clinical practice, and the hurdles that still need to be overcome before they are put into clincal practice.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 51.• Heberle CR, Omidvari AH, Ali A, Kroep S, Kong CY, Inadomi JM, et al. Cost effectiveness of screening patients with gastroesophageal reflux disease for Barrett's esophagus with a minimally invasive cell sampling device. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2017;15(9):1397–404.e7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cgh.2017.02.017. Computer modeling study demonstrating that using a biomarker-based sponge on a string screening-surveillance-therapeutic strategy has the potential not only to decrease deaths from esophageal adenocarcinoma but also the associated costs when this strategy is used compared with no screening or conventional endoscopic screening.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- 53.• Das A, Callenberg KM, Styn MA, Jackson SA. Endoscopic ablation is a cost-effective cancer preventative therapy in patients with Barrett’s esophagus who have elevated genomic instability. Endosc Int Open. 2016;4(5):E549–59. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0042-103415. Computer modeling study demonstrating that biomarker-guided RFA for patients with non-dysplastic Barrett’s esophagus yielded the highest number of quality of life years at the lowest cost and the fewest cancers being diagnosed over the lifetime of the cohort compared with no surveillance, current American College of Gastroenterology recommended surveillance, and RFA of all patients with non-dysplastic Barrett’s esophagus.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar