Challenges remain to determine which patients with Barrett’s esophagus with no dysplasia or low-grade dysplasia would benefit from therapy or tailored surveillance intervals. Biomarkers have the potential to improve risk stratification in Barrett’s esophagus through predictive capability and ease of use. We highlight biomarkers investigated in risk stratification in Barrett’s esophagus including p53 aberrancy, chromosomal derangements, immunofluorescence-based panels, and DNA methylation panels. We explore non-endoscopic approaches that may be implemented in the office-based setting and discuss the utility of sample collection in patients with Barrett’s esophagus and in the broader population.
KondaVJRossASFergusonMK, et al. Is the risk of concomitant invasive esophageal cancer in high-grade dysplasia in Barrett’s esophagus overestimated?Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2008;6(2):159-164.
2.
RastogiAPuliSEl-SeragHB, et al. Incidence of esophageal adenocarcinoma in patients with Barrett’s esophagus and high-grade dysplasia: a meta-analysis. Gastrointest Endosc. 2008;67(3):394-398.
3.
SharmaPShaheenNJKatzkaD, et al. AGA clinical practice update on endoscopic treatment of Barrett’s esophagus with dysplasia and/or early cancer: expert review. Gastroenterology. 2020;158(3):760-769.
4.
DesaiTKKrishnanKSamalaN, et al. The incidence of oesophageal adenocarcinoma in non-dysplastic Barrett’s oesophagus: a meta-analysis. Gut. 2012;61(7):970-976.
5.
ShaheenNFalkGIyerP, et al. ACG clinical guideline: diagnosis and management of Barrett’s esophagus. Am J Gastroenterol. 2016;111(1):30-50.
6.
WaniSWilliamsJLKomanduriS, et al. Endoscopists systematically undersample patients with long-segment Barrett’s esophagus: an analysis of biopsy sampling practices from a quality improvement registry. Gastrointest Endosc. 2019;90(5):732-741.
7.
VennalagantiPKanakadandiVGoldblumJR, et al. Discordance among pathologists in the United States and Europe in diagnosis of low-grade dysplasia for patients with Barrett’s esophagus. Gastroenterology. 2017;152(3):564-570.
8.
Downs-KellyEMendelinJEBennettAE, et al. Poor interobserver agreement in the distinction of high-grade dysplasia and adenocarcinoma in pretreatment Barrett’s esophagus biopsies. Am J Gastroenterol. 2008;103(9):2333-2340.
9.
CurversWLten KateFJKrishnadathKK, et al. Low-grade dysplasia in Barrett’s esophagus: overdiagnosed and underestimated. Am J Gastroenterol. 2010;105(7):1523-1530.
10.
DuitsLCvan der WelMJCottonCC, et al. Patients with Barrett’s esophagus and confirmed persistent low-grade dysplasia are at increased risk for progression to neoplasia. Gastroenterology. 2017;152(5):993-1001.
11.
ParasaSVennalagantiSGaddamS, et al. Development and validation of a model to determine risk of progression of Barrett’s esophagus to neoplasia. Gastroenterology. 2018;154(5):1282-1289.
12.
ThotaPNLeeHJGoldblumJR, et al. Risk stratification of patients with barrett’s esophagus and low-grade dysplasia or indefinite for dysplasia. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2015;13(3):459-465.
13.
SongKYHennAJGravelyAA, et al. Persistent confirmed low-grade dysplasia in Barrett’s esophagus is a risk factor for progression to high-grade dysplasia and adenocarcinoma in a US Veterans cohort. Dis Esophagus. 2020;33(2):doz061.
14.
SchölvinckDWvan der MeulenKBergmanJJGHM, et al. Detection of lesions in dysplastic Barrett’s esophagus by community and expert endoscopists. Endoscopy. 2017;49(2):113-120.
15.
RoumansCAMvan der BogtRDSteyerbergEW, et al. Adherence to recommendations of Barrett’s esophagus surveillance guidelines: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Endoscopy. 2020;52(1):17-28.
16.
DulaiGSGuhaSKahnKL, et al. Preoperative prevalence of Barrett’s esophagus in esophageal adenocarcinoma: a systematic review. Gastroenterology. 2002;122(1):26-33.
17.
TanMCMansourNWhiteDL, et al. Systematic review with meta-analysis: prevalence of prior and concurrent Barrett’s oesophagus in oesophageal adenocarcinoma patients. Aliment Pharmacol Ther. 2020;52(1):20-36.
18.
BarbiereJMLyratzopoulosG. Cost-effectiveness of endoscopic screening followed by surveillance for Barrett’s esophagus: a review. Gastroenterology. 2009;137(6):1869-1876.
19.
CaliffRM. Biomarker definitions and their applications. Exp Biol Med. 2018;243(3):213-221.
20.
StachlerMDTaylor-WeinerAPengS, et al. Paired exome analysis of Barrett’s esophagus and adenocarcinoma. Nat Genet. 2015;47(9):1047-1055.
21.
SnyderPDunbarKCipherDJ, et al. Aberrant p53 immunostaining in Barrett’s esophagus predicts neoplastic progression: systematic review and meta-analyses. Dig Dis Sci. 2019;64(5):1089-1097.
22.
KayePVIlyasMSoomroI, et al. Dysplasia in Barrett’s oesophagus: p53 immunostaining is more reproducible than haematoxylin and eosin diagnosis and improves overall reliability, while grading is poorly reproducible. Histopathology. 2016;69(3):431-440.
23.
FitzgeraldRCdi PietroMRagunathK, et al. British Society of Gastroenterology guidelines on the diagnosis and management of Barrett’s oesophagus. Gut. 2014;63(1):7-42.
24.
SrivastavaAAppelmanHGoldsmithJD, et al. The use of ancillary stains in the diagnosis of Barrett esophagus and Barrett esophagus-associated dysplasia: recommendations from the Rodger C. Haggitt gastrointestinal pathology society. Am J Surg Pathol. 2017;41(5):e8-e21.
25.
ReidBJLevineDSLongtonG, et al. Predictors of progression to cancer in Barrett’s esophagus: baseline histology and flow cytometry identify low- and high-risk patient subsets. Am J Gastroenterol. 2000;95(7):1669-1676.
26.
HadjinicolaouAVvan MunsterSNAchilleosA, et al. Aneuploidy in targeted endoscopic biopsies outperforms other tissue biomarkers in the prediction of histologic progression of Barrett’s oesophagus: a multi-centre prospective cohort study. EBioMedicine. 2020;56:102765.
27.
ChoiWTTsaiJHRabinovitchPS, et al. Diagnosis and risk stratification of Barrett’s dysplasia by flow cytometric DNA analysis of paraffin-embedded tissue. Gut. 2018;67(7):1229-1238.
28.
WangYMcManusDTArthurK, et al. Whole slide image cytometry: a novel method to detect abnormal DNA content in Barrett’s esophagus. Lab Invest. 2015;95(11):1319-1330.
29.
DunnJMMackenzieGDOukrifD, et al. Image cytometry accurately detects DNA ploidy abnormalities and predicts late relapse to high-grade dysplasia and adenocarcinoma in Barrett’s oesophagus following photodynamic therapy. Br J Cancer. 2010;102(11):1608-1617.
30.
KillcoyneSGregsonEWedgeDC, et al. Genomic copy number predicts esophageal cancer years before transformation. Nat Med. 2020;26(11):1726-1732.
31.
Critchley-ThorneRJDavisonJMPrichardJW, 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):240-248.
32.
DavisonJMGoldblumJGrewalUS, et al. Independent blinded validation of a tissue systems pathology test to predict progression in patients with Barrett’s esophagus. Am J Gastroenterol. 2020;115(6):843-852.
33.
FreiNFKhoshiwalAMKonteK, et al. Tissue systems pathology test objectively risk stratifies Barrett’s esophagus patients with low-grade dysplasia. Am J Gastroenterol. 2020. doi: 10.14309/ajg.0000000000001037. Epub ahead of print.
34.
SchulmannKSterianABerkiA, et al. Inactivation of p16, RUNX3, and HPP1 occurs early in Barrett’s-associated neoplastic progression and predicts progression risk. Oncogene. 2005;24(25):4138-4148.
35.
JinZChengYGuW, et al. A multicenter, double-blinded validation study of methylation biomarkers for progression prediction in Barrett’s esophagus. Cancer Res. 2009;69(10):4112-4115.
36.
GrossSASmithMSKaulV. US Collaborative WATS3D Study Group. Increased detection of Barrett’s esophagus and esophageal dysplasia with adjunctive use of wide-area transepithelial sample with three-dimensional computer-assisted analysis (WATS). United European Gastroenterol J. 2018;6(4):529-535.
37.
SmithMSIkonomiEBhutaR, et al. US Collaborative WATS Study Group. Wide-area transepithelial sampling with computer-assisted 3-dimensional analysis (WATS) markedly improves detection of esophageal dysplasia and Barrett’s esophagus: analysis from a prospective multicenter community-based study. Dis Esophagus. 2019;32(3):doy099.
38.
ShaheenNJSmithMSGoldblumJR, et al. Progression of Barrett’s esophagus (BE) and dysplasia detected by wide area transepithelial sampling with computer-assisted 3D analysis (WATS3D) confirms the clinical significance of crypt dysplasia: ACG Governors Award for Excellence in Clinical Research. Am J Gastroenterol. 2018;113:S172.
39.
MallickRPatnaikSKWaniS, et al. A systematic review of esophageal microRNA markers for diagnosis and monitoring of Barrett’s esophagus. Dig Dis Sci. 2016;61:1039-1050.
40.
BusPKestensCTen KateFJ, et al. Profiling of circulating microRNAs in patients with Barrett’s esophagus and esophageal adenocarcinoma. J Gastroenterol. 2016;51(6):560-570.
41.
CraigMPRajakarunaSPaliyO, et al. Differential microRNA signatures in the pathogenesis of Barrett’s esophagus. Clin Transl Gastroenterol. 2020;11(1):e00125.
42.
Baus-LoncarMGiraudAS. Trefoil factors. Cell Mol Life Sci. 2005;62(24):2921-2931.
43.
Ross-InnesCSDebiram-BeechamIO’DonovanM, 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.
44.
FitzgeraldRCdi PietroMO’DonovanM, et al. Cytosponge-trefoil factor 3 versus usual care to identify Barrett’s oesophagus in a primary care setting: a multicentre, pragmatic, randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2020;396(10247):333-344.
45.
JanuszewiczWTanWKLehovskyK, et al. Safety and acceptability of esophageal cytosponge cell collection device in a pooled analysis of data from individual patients. Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2019;17(4):647-656.
46.
IyerPGTaylorWRJohnsonML, et al. Highly discriminant methylated DNA markers for the non-endoscopic detection of Barrett’s esophagus. Am J Gastroenterol. 2018;113(8):1156-1166.
47.
IyerPGTaylorWRJohnsonML, et al. Accurate nonendoscopic detection of Barrett’s esophagus by methylated DNA markers: a multisite case control study. Am J Gastroenterol. 2020;115(8):1201-1209.
48.
MoinovaHRLaFramboiseTLutterbaughJD, et al. Identifying DNA methylation biomarkers for non-endoscopic detection of Barrett’s esophagus. Sci Transl Med. 2018;10(424):eaao5848.
49.
PetersYSchrauwenRWMTanAC, et al. Detection of Barrett’s oesophagus through exhaled breath using an electronic nose device. Gut. 2020;69(7):1169-1172.
