Real-world Implementation of Non-endoscopic Triage Testing for Barrett's Oesophagus During COVID-19
Overview
Affiliations
Background: The Coronavirus pandemic (COVID-19) curtailed endoscopy services, adding to diagnostic backlogs. Building on trial evidence for a non-endoscopic oesophageal cell collection device coupled with biomarkers (Cytosponge), an implementation pilot was launched for patients on waiting lists for reflux and Barrett's oesophagus surveillance.
Aims: (i) To review reflux referral patterns and Barrett's surveillance practices. (ii) To evaluate the range of Cytosponge findings and impact on endoscopy services.
Design And Methods: Cytosponge data from centralized laboratory processing (trefoil factor 3 (TFF3) for intestinal metaplasia (IM), haematoxylin & eosin for cellular atypia and p53 for dysplasia) over a 2-year period were included.
Results: A total of 10 577 procedures were performed in 61 hospitals in England and Scotland, of which 92.5% (N = 9784/10 577) were sufficient for analysis. In the reflux cohort (N = 4074 with gastro-oesophageal junction sampling), 14.7% had one or more positive biomarkers (TFF3: 13.6% (N = 550/4056), p53: 0.5% (21/3974), atypia: 1.5% (N = 63/4071)), requiring endoscopy. Among samples from individuals undergoing Barrett's surveillance (N = 5710 with sufficient gland groups), TFF3-positivity increased with segment length (odds ratio = 1.37 per cm (95% confidence interval: 1.33-1.41, P < 0.001)). Some surveillance referrals (21.5%, N = 1175/5471) had ≤1 cm segment length, of which 65.9% (707/1073) were TFF3 negative. Of all surveillance procedures, 8.3% had dysplastic biomarkers (4.0% (N = 225/5630) for p53 and 7.6% (N = 430/5694) for atypia), increasing to 11.8% (N = 420/3552) in TFF3+ cases with confirmed IM and 19.7% (N = 58/294) in ultra-long segments.
Conclusions: Cytosponge-biomarker tests enabled targeting of endoscopy services to higher-risk individuals, whereas those with TFF3 negative ultra-short segments could be reconsidered regarding their Barrett's oesophagus status and surveillance requirements. Long-term follow-up will be important in these cohorts.
Gourgiotis V, Graham C, Foerster K, Fitzgerald R, Harvey R, Morris D Aliment Pharmacol Ther. 2025; 61(5):876-885.
PMID: 39794909 PMC: 11825927. DOI: 10.1111/apt.18472.
Chien S, Glen P, Bryce G, Cruickshank N, Penman I, Robertson K BMC Gastroenterol. 2024; 24(1):431.
PMID: 39592951 PMC: 11590222. DOI: 10.1186/s12876-024-03503-5.
Chien S, Glen P, Penman I, Cruickshank N, Bryce G, Crumley A Br J Surg. 2024; 111(5).
PMID: 38736137 PMC: 11089076. DOI: 10.1093/bjs/znae117.
Bouzid K, Sharma H, Killcoyne S, Castro D, Schwaighofer A, Ilse M Nat Commun. 2024; 15(1):2026.
PMID: 38467600 PMC: 10928093. DOI: 10.1038/s41467-024-46174-2.
Latest Advances in Endoscopic Detection of Oesophageal and Gastric Neoplasia.
Waddingham W, Graham D, Banks M Diagnostics (Basel). 2024; 14(3.
PMID: 38337817 PMC: 10855581. DOI: 10.3390/diagnostics14030301.