BACKGROUND:Esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC) represents one of the most increasing malignancies in Western countries. The disease is multifactorial, involving modifiable risk factors and genetic susceptibility variants. These variants can be aggregated to a polygenic risk score (PRS) that reflects individual genetic risk. Investigation of the effects of lifestyle factors, PRS, and co-medication on EAC age at onset (AAO) is critical for shaping prevention strategies. METHODS:A detailed questionnaire was used to assess pre-diagnostic exposure to lifestyle factors and clinical information from a large German EAC cohort. Linear regression analysis was performed to identify factors associated with EAC AAO in 1742 EAC patients. PRS was available for 1190 patients. Subgroup analyses were conducted to estimate the effects of the analyzed factors on AAO according to age group (early vs. late onset), sex, and prior diagnosis of Barrett's esophagus (BE). RESULTS:Earlier AAO was significantly associated with gastroesophageal reflux (GER), smoking and a higher PRS, whereas later AAO was associated with physical activity and higher consumption of fish and fruits. Among co-medication, combined use of proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) and acetylsalicylic acid (ASA) showed the most significant effect on AAO, whereas the use of PPIs and ASA alone showed weaker effects. DISCUSSION:This study represents the largest questionnaire-based analysis to date investigating factors influencing EAC development. Our findings show that the combined use of PPIs and ASA, both cost-effective medications, is associated with delayed EAC onset. In addition, lifestyle and genetics contribute to EAC AAO.

Supplementary Figure from eQTL Set–Based Association Analysis Identifies Novel Susceptibility Loci for Barrett Esophagus and Esophageal Adenocarcinoma

Background/Aims Deep enteroscopy is a challenging and time-consuming procedure. Two devices have become the clinical standards for patients: double-balloon enteroscopy (DBE) and motorized spiral enteroscopy (mSPE). Initially, mSPE demonstrated impressive results, with high rates of total enteroscopy, which were superior to those of all other devices. However, for safety reasons, mSPE was withdrawn from the market, and it remains uncertain whether it will return after technical improvements. This prospective randomized trial aimed to compare the DBE and mSPE. Methods Patients indicated for enteroscopy were randomized to undergo either mSPE or DBE. The time to diagnosis or complete enteroscopy was measured, and all complications were recorded. Results A total of 48 enteroscopic procedures were performed, including 23 mSPE and 25 DBE. No significant difference was noted in the procedure time (p=0.212). The mSPE group exhibited a shorter mean procedure time of 54 (range, 15–114; standard deviation [SD], 26) minutes, whereas the DBE group had a mean procedure time of 63 (range, 20–131; SD, 25) minutes. One perforation was seen in the mSPE group. Conclusions DBE and mSPE are both effective enteroscopy methods but showed no significant difference in this randomized trial (German trial registry: DRKS 00025890).

INTRODUCTION:Multiple randomized studies have demonstrated that computer-assisted detection (CADe) improves the colonoscopic adenoma detection rate (ADR); however, these improvements have not been consistently reproduced in some more recent studies. METHODS:Patients aged 50 years and older undergoing outpatient colonoscopy in 12 German institutions were randomized to either the CADe group or the control group. The primary outcome parameter was the ADR, while secondary outcomes included the adenomas per colonoscopy rate, detection rates of different histologic subgroups, and adverse events. The median examiner-specific observed rates and examiner-adjusted rates were compared between treatment groups. RESULTS:One thousand six hundred twenty-seven patients were included (mean age 63.1 years, 39.8% female; 71% screening indications). The observed median examiner ADR was 40.0% (interquartile range 20.0%-57.1%) in the study vs 37.5% (inter-quartile range 20.0%-50.0%) in the control group. Similarly, adjusted overall ADR was 40.6% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 35.8%, 45.5%) in the study and 38.3% (95% CI: 33.5%, 43.1%) in the control group. No differences were observed in adenomas per colonoscopy or any of the adenoma subgroups with regard to size, morphology, location, and histology as well as colonoscopy indication. The examiner had a large influence on ADR (adjusted median odds ratio [OR] 1.32), similar to patient age (OR per 10-year increase 1.40, 95% CI: 1.23-1.59) and sex (OR 1.62, 95% CI: 1.30-2.04). On the other hand, more hyperplastic polyps were found by CADe (OR for adjusted hyperplastic polyp detection rate = 1.29; 95% CI: 1.02-1.63; P = 0.033). DISCUSSION:In patients older than 50 years with mixed colonoscopy indications, CADe did not increase the ADR. Further studies should define the requirements for selective CADe use in routine clinical practice, particularly in relation to the examiner's baseline ADR.

Background: Early Barrett cancer can be curatively treated by endoscopic resection. The choice of the resection technique, however-endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) or submucosal dissection (ESD)-largely depends on the assumed infiltration depth as judged by the endoscopist. However, the accuracy of endoscopic diagnosis of the degree of cancer infiltration is not known. Methods: Three to four high-quality images (both in overview and close-up) from 202 of early Barrett esophagus cancer cases (82% men, mean age 66.9 years) were selected from our endoscopy database (73.3% stage T1a and 26.7% in stage T1b). Images were shown to 9 Barrett esophagus experts, with patients' clinical data (age, sex, Barrett esophagus length) and biopsy results. The experts were asked to predict infiltration depth (T1b vs. T1a), and to suggest the appropriate endoscopic resection technique (EMR or ESD, or surgery). Interobserver variability (kappa values) was also determined for these parameters. Results: Overall positive (PPV) and negative predictive values (NPV) to diagnose T1b versus T1a infiltration were 40.7% (95% CI: 36.7, 44.8) and 79.8% (95% CI: 77.5, 81.9), respectively; kappa value was 0.41. Paris classification (kappa 0.51) and suggested treatment also varied between experts. In a post hoc analysis, only the correlation between lesions classified as invisible or flat according to the Paris classification (IIB; 25% of all cases) and the suggested resection technique was better: In this subgroup, EMR was recommended in >80% of cases, with a high complete (basal R0) resection rate (mean of 88.1%). Conclusions: Precise endoscopic distinction between mucosal and submucosal involvement of Barrett esophagus cancer by experts as a basis for choosing the resection technique has limited predictive values and high interobserver variability. It seems that mainly invisible/flat lesions may result in good resection outcomes when treated by EMR, but this stratification strategy has to be assessed in further studies.

Background/Aims Endoscopic therapy for neoplastic Barrett’s esophagus (BE) has become the standard of care over the past two decades. In clinical practice, we regularly encounter patients who fail to achieve complete squamous epithelialization of the esophagus. Although the therapeutic strategies in the individual stages of BE, dysplasia, and esophageal adenocarcinoma are well studied and largely standardized, the problem of inadequate healing after endoscopic therapy is only marginally considered. This study aimed to shed light on the variables influencing inadequate wound healing after endoscopic therapy and the effect of bile acid sequestrants (BAS) on healing. Methods Retrospective analysis of endoscopically treated neoplastic BE in a single referral center. Results In 12.1% out of 627 patients, insufficient healing was present 8 to 12 weeks after previous endoscopic therapy. The average follow-up duration was 38.8±18.4 months. Complete healing was achieved in 13 patients already after intensifying proton pump inhibitor therapy. Out of 48 patients under BAS, 29 patients (60.4%) showed complete healing. An additional eight patients (16.7%) improved, but only partial healing was achieved. Eleven (22.9%) patients showed no response to BAS augmented therapy. Conclusions In cases of insufficient healing even under exhaustion of proton pump inhibitors, treatment with BAS can be an option as an ultimate healing attempt.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS:Endoscopic resection is standard treatment for adenomatous colorectal lesions. Depending on lesion morphology and resection technique, recurrence can occur. Scarred adenomas are challenging to resect and may require surgical management. This study evaluated the safety and effectiveness of an endoscopic powered resection (EPR) system for scarred adenomatous colorectal lesions. METHODS:This single-arm, prospective, multicenter study was conducted from January 2018 to January 2021 at 12 sites. Patients with persistent flat or sessile colorectal lesions were enrolled. Primary end points were technical success (the ability of the device to resect the lesion[s] without use of other resection devices without device-related serious adverse events [AEs]) and safety (the occurrence of AEs through 90 days). Secondary end points included endoscopic confirmation of resection completeness, occurrence of colon stenosis, disease persistence, and diagnostic value of resected specimens. RESULTS:Sixty-five patients were in the intention-to-treat/safety analysis population. Primary analysis was performed on 45 per-protocol (PP) patients with 48 lesions. All PP patients were solely treated by using the EPR device. Technical success was achieved in 44 (98%) patients. Three (5%) serious AEs occurred: 2 delayed self-limited bleeds and 1 perforation. Nonserious AEs included 4 (6%) cases of mild intraprocedural bleeding. Completeness of resection and histopathologic diagnosis of tissue specimens were achieved in all patients. Twenty-one (46.7%) patients had disease persistence after the first treatment, and there was no colon stenosis. CONCLUSIONS:EPR is safe and effective for benign, persistent, large (>20 mm), scarred colorectal adenomas and should be considered as an alternative treatment in lieu of surgery. A persistence rate of 46.7% indicates that >1 treatment is necessary for effective endoscopic treatment. (Clinical trial registration number: NCT04203667.).

Objective Oesophageal cancer (EC) is the sixth leading cause of cancer-related deaths. Oesophageal adenocarcinoma (EA), with Barrett's oesophagus (BE) as a precursor lesion, is the most prevalent EC subtype in the Western world. This study aims to contribute to better understand the genetic causes of BE/EA by leveraging genome wide association studies (GWAS), genetic correlation analyses and polygenic risk modelling. Design We combined data from previous GWAS with new cohorts, increasing the sample size to 16 790 BE/EA cases and 32 476 controls. We also carried out a transcriptome wide association study (TWAS) using expression data from disease-relevant tissues to identify BE/EA candidate genes. To investigate the relationship with reported BE/EA risk factors, a linkage disequilibrium score regression (LDSR) analysis was performed. BE/EA risk models were developed combining clinical/lifestyle risk factors with polygenic risk scores (PRS) derived from the GWAS meta-analysis. Results The GWAS meta-analysis identified 27 BE and/or EA risk loci, 11 of which were novel. The TWAS identified promising BE/EA candidate genes at seven GWAS loci and at five additional risk loci. The LDSR analysis led to the identification of novel genetic correlations and pointed to differences in BE and EA aetiology. Gastro-oesophageal reflux disease appeared to contribute stronger to the metaplastic BE transformation than to EA development. Finally, combining PRS with BE/EA risk factors improved the performance of the risk models. Conclusion Our findings provide further insights into BE/EA aetiology and its relationship to risk factors. The results lay the foundation for future follow-up studies to identify underlying disease mechanisms and improving risk prediction.

Introduction Worldwide, gastrointestinal endoscopies are predominantly performed under sedation. National and international guidelines and recommendations contain very different specifications for the use of sedation in gastrointestinal endoscopy. These differences come from specific requirements for staffing during endoscopy. Aim The aim of the study is to evaluate whether endoscopist-guided sedation without additional sedation assistance is not inferior to endoscopist-guided sedation with additional sedation assistance with respect to the rate of sedation-associated complications in a defined low-risk population (low-risk procedure and low-risk patient). Methods Prospective, multicenter, randomized study. Results 27 German study centers participated in the study. A total of 30 569 endoscopies were recorded during the study period from 1.8.2015 to 10.3.2020. The final data analysis included 28 673 examinations (64.1 % esophagosgastroduodenoscopies and 35.9 % colonoscopies). In 307 (1.1 %) examinations, 322 sedation-associated complications occurred. Of these, 321 (1.1 %) were minor complications and one (0.003 %) was a major complication. There was no statistically significant difference in the frequency of sedation-associated complications between endoscopist-guided sedation with versus without additional sedation assistance. Within the legal framework, a "shadow " sedation assistant was present in the study group without sedation assistance. This assistant intervened because of sedation-associated complications in 101 (0.7 %) of the endoscopies. Conclusion The study documents the safety of propofol-based endoscopist-guided sedation in a low-risk population. In 98.9 % of all endoscopies, no sedation-associated complication occurred or it was so minimal that no intervention (e. g., increase of oxygen supply) was necessary. The study cannot answer to what extent a serious complication was avoided by the active intervention of the "shadow " sedation assistance in the group without sedation assistance.The study proves in a randomized, prospective design that sedation in low-risk endoscopy (low-risk patient, low-risk procedure) can be performed as endoscopist-guided sedation without additional sedation assistance, without demonstrably accepting a reduction in safety.

Introduction Radiofrequency ablation (RFA) and hybrid argon plasma coagulation (H-APC) are established thermal ablation techniques for eradicating Barrett’s esophagus after endoscopic resection. This study aimed to compare RFA with H-APC in relation to safety, effectiveness and eradication rates. Methods After endoscopic resection, patients were randomly assigned to H-APC or RFA. A simplified H-APC technique was applied at 60 W. RFA was used with a 90° focal catheter and a simplified protocol of 12 J/cm 2 × 3 or with a Halo 360° balloon and 10 J/cm 2 /cleaning/10 J/cm 2 . Eradication rates and adverse events were recorded. Patients received follow-up examinations after 3, 6, 12 and 24 months. Results One hundred and one patients were finally included in the study (RFA N = 47, H-APC N = 54). The median follow-up period for short-term was 6.0 (CI 5.4–6.9) months and for long term 21 (CI 19.2.5–22.7) months. In total 211 ablations were performed. The eradication rates after long-term follow-up were 74.2% in the RFA group and 82.9% in the H-APC group. Post-interventional pain was significantly greater in the RFA group, with a mean score of 4.56/10 and duration of 7.54 days, in comparison with a mean score of 2.07/10 over 3.59 days in the H-APC group. Stenoses requiring intervention were noted in 3.7% of patients in the H-APC arm and 14.9% of those in the RFA arm. Conclusions Both ablation techniques have good results in relation to the eradication rate, with a slightly better outcome in the H-APC group. The severity and duration of pain were significantly greater in the RFA group.

BACKGROUND:Over 20 susceptibility single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNP) have been identified for esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC) and its precursor, Barrett esophagus (BE), explaining a small portion of heritability. METHODS:Using genetic data from 4,323 BE and 4,116 EAC patients aggregated by international consortia including the Barrett's and Esophageal Adenocarcinoma Consortium (BEACON), we conducted a comprehensive transcriptome-wide association study (TWAS) for BE/EAC, leveraging Genotype Tissue Expression (GTEx) gene-expression data from six tissue types of plausible relevance to EAC etiology: mucosa and muscularis from the esophagus, gastroesophageal (GE) junction, stomach, whole blood, and visceral adipose. Two analytical approaches were taken: standard TWAS using the predicted gene expression from local expression quantitative trait loci (eQTL), and set-based SKAT association using selected eQTLs that predict the gene expression. RESULTS:Although the standard approach did not identify significant signals, the eQTL set-based approach identified eight novel associations, three of which were validated in independent external data (eQTL SNP sets for EXOC3, ZNF641, and HSP90AA1). CONCLUSIONS:This study identified novel genetic susceptibility loci for EAC and BE using an eQTL set-based genetic association approach. IMPACT:This study expanded the pool of genetic susceptibility loci for EAC and BE, suggesting the potential of the eQTL set-based genetic association approach as an alternative method for TWAS analysis.

Abstract Background  Motorized spiral enteroscopy (MSE) has been shown to be safe and effective for deep enteroscopy in studies performed at expert centers with limited numbers of patients without previous abdominal surgery. This study aimed to investigate the safety, efficacy, and learning curve associated with MSE in a real-life scenario, with the inclusion of patients after abdominal surgery and with altered anatomy. Methods  Patients with indications for deep enteroscopy were enrolled in a prospective observational multicenter study. The primary objective was the serious adverse event (SAE) rate; secondary objectives were the diagnostic and therapeutic yield, procedural success, time, and insertion depth. Data analysis was subdivided into training and core (post-training) study phases at centers with different levels of MSE experience. Results  298 patients (120 women; median age 68, range 19–92) were enrolled. In the post-training phase, 21.5 % (n = 54) had previous abdominal surgery, 10.0 % (n = 25) had surgically altered anatomy. Overall, SAEs occurred in 2.3 % (7/298; 95 %CI 0.9 %–4.8 %). The SAE rate was 2.0 % (5/251) in the core group and 4.3 % (2/47) in the training group, and was not increased after abdominal surgery (1.9 %). Total enteroscopy was achieved in half of the patients (n = 42) undergoing planned total enteroscopy. In 295/337 procedures (87.5 %), the anatomical region of interest could be reached. Conclusions  This prospective multicenter study showed that MSE was feasible and safe in a large cohort of patients in a real-life setting, after a short learning curve. MSE was shown to be feasible in postsurgical patients, including those with altered anatomy, without an increase in the SAE rate.

INTRODUCTION: The current therapy of neoplastic Barrett's esophagus (BE) consists of endoscopic resection plus ablation, with radiofrequency ablation as the best studied technique. This prospective trial assesses a potential alternative, namely hybrid argon plasma ablation. METHODS: Consecutive patients with neoplastic BE undergoing ablation after curative endoscopic resection (89.6%) or primarily were included into this prospective trial in 9 European centers. Up to 5 ablation sessions were allowed for complete eradication of BE (initial complete eradication of intestinal metaplasia [CE-IM]), by definition including BE-associated neoplasia, documented by 1 negative endoscopy with biopsies. The main outcome was the rate of initial CE-IM in intention-to-treat (ITT) and per-protocol (PP) samples at 2 years. The secondary end points were the rate of recurrence-free cases (sustained CE-IM) documented by negative follow-up endoscopies with biopsies and immediate/delayed adverse events. RESULTS: One hundred fifty-four patients (133 men and 21 women, mean age 64 years) received a mean of 1.2 resection and 2.7 ablation sessions (range 1–5). Initial CE-IM was achieved in 87.2% of 148 cases in the PP analysis (ITT 88.4%); initial BE-associated neoplasia was 98.0%. On 2-year follow-up of the 129 successfully treated cases, 70.8% (PP) or 65.9% (ITT) showed sustained CE-IM; recurrences were mostly endoscopy-negative biopsy-proven BE epithelium and neoplasia in 3 cases. Adverse events were seen in 6.1%. DISCUSSION: Eradication and recurrence rates of Barrett's intestinal metaplasia and neoplasia by means of hybrid argon plasma coagulation at 2 years seem to be within expected ranges. Final evidence in comparison to radiofrequency ablation can only be provided by a randomized comparative trial.

Purpose Early detection of adenocarcinomas in the esophagus is crucial for achieving curative endoscopic therapy. Targeted biopsies of suspicious lesions, as well as four-quadrant biopsies, represent the current diagnostic standard. However, this procedure is time-consuming, cost-intensive, and examiner-dependent. The aim of this study was to test whether impedance spectroscopy is capable of distinguishing between healthy, premalignant, and malignant lesions. An ex vivo measurement method was developed to examine esophageal lesions using impedance spectroscopy immediately after endoscopic resection. Methods After endoscopic resection of suspicious lesions in the esophagus, impedance measurements were performed on resected cork-covered tissue using a measuring head that was developed, with eight gold electrodes, over 10 different measurement settings and with frequencies from 100 Hz to 1 MHz. Results A total of 105 measurements were performed in 60 patients. A dataset of 400 per investigation and a total of more than 42,000 impedance measurements were therefore collected. Electrical impedance spectroscopy (EIS) was able to detect dysplastic esophageal mucosa with a sensitivity of 81% in Barrett's esophagus. Conclusion In summary, EIS was able to distinguish different tissue characteristics in the different esophageal tissues. EIS thus holds potential for further development of targeted biopsies during surveillance endoscopy. Trial Registration NCT04046601