» Articles » PMID: 35762703

Esophageal Adenocarcinoma Phenotypes and Risk Factors

Overview
Specialty Gastroenterology
Date 2022 Jun 28
PMID 35762703
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Purpose Of Review: The incidence of esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC) has increased significantly over the last several decades. The majority of EAC patients present without a prior history of Barrett's esophagus (BE). As a result, endoscopic surveillance has made a suboptimal impact on EAC survival. These concerns raise serious question whether the time has come to take a different direction. The aim of this article is to review evolving evidence of EAC phenotypes and risk factors.

Recent Findings: A recent study has identified two phenotypes of EAC based on the presence or absence of intestinal metaplasia (IM) in the background of the tumor (BE/IM and non-BE/IM). The study found that one-half of patients with EAC have the non-BE/IM phenotype, which is associated with more aggressive behavior and worse survival. A retrospective review demonstrates that the proportion of the two phenotypes has been stable over the last decades. Similarly, the increasing incidence of EAC cannot be explained by an increased frequency of new, unique risk factors but rather by a higher prevalence of already known risk factors. Emerging data also demonstrates that, whereas reflux symptoms are an unreliable feature for screening regardless of phenotype, the absence of reflux symptoms is more common for the non-BE/IM. Differences in the degree of genomic methylation and immune response might explain the two phenotypes at a genomic level.

Summary: EAC phenotypes have implications for tumor behavior and phenotypic differences might underlie our suboptimal screening efforts. Future screening efforts should not uniformly rely on reflux symptoms as a prerequisite for screening and should consider alternatives to the current screening strategy.

Citing Articles

Inhibition of Insulin-like Growth Factor 1 Receptor/Insulin Receptor Signaling by Small-Molecule Inhibitor BMS-754807 Leads to Improved Survival in Experimental Esophageal Adenocarcinoma.

Hassan M, Johnson C, Ponna S, Scofield D, Awasthi N, von Holzen U Cancers (Basel). 2024; 16(18).

PMID: 39335147 PMC: 11430189. DOI: 10.3390/cancers16183175.


Multidisciplinary treatment of advanced cervical esophageal adenocarcinoma derived from a gastric inlet patch: A case report.

Okamoto K, Yamaguchi T, Asakawa T, Kaida D, Miyata T, Hayashi T Oncol Lett. 2024; 27(3):120.

PMID: 38348383 PMC: 10859833. DOI: 10.3892/ol.2024.14253.


Alterations in gene expression and microbiome composition upon calcium-sensing receptor deletion in the mouse esophagus.

Abdulnour-Nakhoul S, Kolls J, Flemington E, Ungerleider N, Nakhoul H, Song K Am J Physiol Gastrointest Liver Physiol. 2024; 326(4):G438-G459.

PMID: 38193195 PMC: 11213479. DOI: 10.1152/ajpgi.00066.2023.


Molecular Biology and Clinical Management of Esophageal Adenocarcinoma.

Li S, Hoefnagel S, Krishnadath K Cancers (Basel). 2023; 15(22).

PMID: 38001670 PMC: 10670638. DOI: 10.3390/cancers15225410.


Distance to Health Care Facilities, Lifestyle Risk Factors, and Stage at Diagnosis in relation to Geographic Pattern of Esophageal Cancer in Tanzania, 2006-2016.

Watkins R, Soliman G, Mwaiselage J, Kahesa C, Msami K, Wilson M J Cancer Epidemiol. 2022; 2022:7873588.

PMID: 36046119 PMC: 9423990. DOI: 10.1155/2022/7873588.