Search

The authors conducted a review of the literature of cost-effectiveness analyses regarding management of Barrett's esophagus, including screening, surveillance, and treatment strategies. Because of the presence of multiple systematic reviews on this topic, they chose to focus on more recent economic analyses, with an emphasis on comparative modeling because these analyses have been demonstrated to achieve greater validity and impact when there are multiple competing strategies that are clinically reasonable to pursue. The authors identified areas of consensus across studies regarding management strategies and also areas that require additional empirical data., Competing Interests: Disclosure Research effort provided for J.H. Rubenstein and J.M. Inadomi by the National Institutes for Health (U01CA152926, U01CA199336, U54CA163059). J.H. Rubenstein has served as a consultant to the American Gastroenterological Association Institute for work related to TissueCypher. J.M. Inadomi is on the scientific advisory board of Cernostics, which developed and produces TissueCypher., (Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Barrett's esophagus (BE) is an abnormality arising from gastroesophageal reflux disease that can progressively evolve into a sequence of dysplasia and adenocarcinoma. Progression of Barrett's esophagus into dysplasia is monitored with endoscopic surveillance. The current surveillance standard requests random biopsies plus targeted biopsies of suspicious lesions under white-light endoscopy, known as the Seattle protocol. Recently, published evidence has shown that narrow-band imaging (NBI) can guide targeted biopsies to identify dysplasia and reduce the need for random biopsies. We aimed to assess the health economic implications of adopting NBI-guided targeted biopsy vs. the Seattle protocol from a National Health Service England perspective. A decision tree model was developed to undertake a cost-consequence analysis. The model estimated total costs (i.e. staff and overheads; histopathology; adverse events; capital equipment) and clinical implications of monitoring a cohort of patients with known/suspected BE, on an annual basis. In the simulation, BE patients (N = 161,657 at Year 1; estimated annual increase: +20%) entered the model every year and underwent esophageal endoscopy. After 7 years, the adoption of NBI with targeted biopsies resulted in cost reduction of £458.0 mln vs. HD-WLE with random biopsies (overall costs: £1,966.2 mln and £2,424.2 mln, respectively). The incremental investment on capital equipment to upgrade hospitals with NBI (+£68.3 mln) was offset by savings due to the reduction of histological examinations (-£505.2 mln). Reduction of biopsies also determined savings for avoided adverse events (-£21.1 mln). In the base-case analysis, the two techniques had the same accuracy (number of correctly identified cases: 1.934 mln), but NBI was safer than HD-WLE. Budget impact analysis and cost-effectiveness analyses confirmed the findings of the cost-consequence analysis. In conclusion, NBI-guided targeted biopsies was a cost-saving strategy for NHS England, compared to current practice for detection of dysplasia in patients with BE, whilst maintaining at least comparable health outcomes for patients., Competing Interests: We have the following interests: This study was funded by Olympus. ZI and RK are employees of Olympus. Olympus is the manufacturer of NBI, a technology which is the focus of this study. GF and LH are employees of CBPartners. There are no further patents, products in development or marketed products to declare. This does not alter our adherence to all the PLOS ONE policies on sharing data and materials.

Objective: Surveillance is recommended for Barrett's oesophagus (BO) to detect early oesophageal adenocarcinoma (OAC). The aim of this study was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of surveillance., Design: We included 714 patients with long-segment BO in a multicentre prospective cohort study and used a multistate Markov model to calculate progression rates from no dysplasia (ND) to low-grade dysplasia (LGD), high-grade dysplasia (HGD) and OAC. Progression rates were incorporated in a decision-analytic model, including costs and quality of life data. We evaluated different surveillance intervals for ND and LGD, endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR), radiofrequency ablation (RFA) and oesophagectomy for HGD or early OAC and oesophagectomy for advanced OAC. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was calculated in costs per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY)., Results: The annual progression rate was 2% for ND to LGD, 4% for LGD to HGD or early OAC and 25% for HGD or early OAC to advanced OAC. Surveillance every 5 or 4 years with RFA for HGD or early OAC and oesophagectomy for advanced OAC had ICERs of €5.283 and €62.619 per QALY for ND. Surveillance every five to one year had ICERs of €4.922, €30.067, €32.531, €41.499 and €75.601 per QALY for LGD. EMR prior to RFA was slightly more expensive, but important for tumour staging., Conclusions: Based on a Dutch healthcare perspective and assuming a willingness-to-pay threshold of €35.000 per QALY, surveillance with EMR and RFA for HGD or early OAC, and oesophagectomy for advanced OAC is cost-effective every 5 years for ND and every 3 years for LGD., (Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://group.bmj.com/group/rights-licensing/permissions.)

There is increasing concern over the rising costs of healthcare leading to debate regarding the use of resources to implement preventive strategies. Oesophageal adenocarcinoma and its precursor, Barrett's oesophagus provides an excellent opportunity to highlight this issue since cancer is uncommon even among individuals with documented Barrett's oesophagus. This review provides a brief introduction to economic analysis in healthcare and summarizes published studies of the cost-effectiveness of strategies to reduce mortality from cancer. Current best estimates highlight the cost-effectiveness of endoscopic ablation among patients with Barrett's oesophagus and high-grade dysplasia and the low cost-effectiveness of ablation among patients without dysplasia. The cost-effectiveness of ablation among patients with Barrett's and low-grade dysplasia is poorly defined due to the ambiguity of diagnosing dysplasia, the unknown risk of cancer among patients with low-grade dysplasia, and the uncertain durability of ablation to maintain remission from metaplasia and dysplasia and prevent cancer., (Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background & Aims: We developed a model to compare the health benefits and cost effectiveness of screening for Barrett's esophagus by either Cytosponge™ or by conventional endoscopy vs no screening, and to estimate their abilities to reduce mortality from esophageal adenocarcinoma., Methods: We used microsimulation modeling of a hypothetical cohort of 50-year-old men in the United Kingdom with histories of gastroesophageal reflux disease symptoms, assuming the prevalence of Barrett's esophagus to be 8%. Participants were invited to undergo screening by endoscopy or Cytosponge (invitation acceptance rates of 23% and 45%, respectively), and outcomes were compared with those from men who underwent no screening. We estimated the number of incident esophageal adenocarcinoma cases prevented and the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) of the different strategies. Patients found to have high-grade dysplasia or intramucosal cancer received endotherapy. Model inputs included data on disease progression, test accuracy, post-treatment status, and surveillance protocols. Costs and benefits were discounted at 3.5% per year. Supplementary and sensitivity analyses comprised esophagectomy management of high-grade dysplasia or intramucosal cancer, screening by ultrathin nasal endoscopy, and different assumptions of uptake of screening invitations for either strategy., Results: We estimated that compared with no screening, Cytosponge screening followed by treatment of patients with dysplasia or intramucosal cancer costs an additional $240 (95% credible interval, $196-$320) per screening participant and results in a mean gain of 0.015 (95% credible interval, -0.001 to 0.029) QALYs and an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $15.7 thousand (K) per QALY. The respective values for endoscopy were $299 ($261-$367), 0.013 (0.003-0.023) QALYs, and $22.2K. Screening by the Cytosponge followed by treatment of patients with dysplasia or intramucosal cancer would reduce the number of cases of incident symptomatic esophageal adenocarcinoma by 19%, compared with 17% for screening by endoscopy, although this greater benefit for Cytosponge depends on more patients accepting screening by Cytosponge compared with screening by endoscopy., Conclusions: In a microsimulation model, screening 50-year-old men with symptoms of gastroesophageal reflux disease by Cytosponge is cost effective and would reduce mortality from esophageal adenocarcinoma compared with no screening., (Copyright © 2013 AGA Institute. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background and Study Aims: Advances in endoscopic imaging techniques have enabled more accurate identification of subtle mucosal abnormalities. The aim of the study was to assess the accuracy of predicting high grade dysplasia (HGD) and intramucosal cancer (IMC) in mucosa predicted as being nondysplastic vs. dysplastic by high definition white light endoscopy (HD-WLE), narrow band imaging (NBI), and confocal laser endomicroscopy (CLE)., Patients and Methods: A cross-sectional study was performed in a tertiary referral setting between February 2010 and September 2011. A total of 50 consecutive patients who were referred to St Vincent's Hospital for management of dysplastic Barrett's esophagus were included. A prediction of likely histology was made for each mucosal point (four-quadrant every 1 cm and any visible mucosal abnormality), first with HD-WLE, followed by NBI, and finally CLE. Biopsies were taken at all of these points., Results: A total of 1190 individual biopsy points were assessed. At histology, 39 biopsy points were found to harbor HGD and 52 biopsy points harbored IMC. For the detection of HGD/IMC the sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy were: HD - WLE, 79.1 %, 83.1 %, and 82.8 %; NBI, 89.0 %, 80.1 %, and 81.4 %; and CLE, 75.7 %, 80.0 %, and 79.9 %, respectively. All mucosal points with IMC and all patients with HGD were detected by targeted biopsies guided by HD-WLE and NBI without the need for random Seattle protocol biopsies., Conclusions: HD-WLE in combination with NBI is highly accurate in the detection of HGD/IMC. Performing targeted biopsies in the surveillance of Barrett's esophagus is possible in expert centers., (© Georg Thieme Verlag KG Stuttgart · New York.)

To examine the efficacy and potential cost implications of acetic acid (AA) chromoendoscopy in the assessment of Barrett's neoplasia. Our prospective database of patients referred between 2005 and 2010 with suspected early neoplasia was reviewed. High-resolution Fujinon gastroscopes and EPX-4400 processor were used. Inspection of Barrett's neoplasia was carried out using white light followed by AA. Neoplastic areas were noted, and targeted biopsy was carried out. This was followed by quadrantic biopsies of the remaining Barrett's neoplasia. The cost of protocol-guided biopsies was compared with AA-guided biopsy protocols. Two hundred sixty-three procedures on 197 patients were examined. High-risk neoplasia was found during 143 procedures. In 96% of cases it was identified with AA. The cost of histological evaluation by Cleveland protocol would be £139,416.30. The cost by AA-targeted biopsy followed by random biopsies in one pot would be £25,032.50. For AA-targeted biopsies alone the cost would be £9,541.8 but results in a 4% miss rate. AA localizes neoplastic lesions in the majority of patients and could potentially represent a significant cost saving in patients with suspected neoplasia., (© 2011 Copyright the Authors. Journal compilation © 2011, Wiley Periodicals, Inc. and the International Society for Diseases of the Esophagus.)

Background: Colon cancer screening with colonoscopy is an accepted strategy; however, there are limited data regarding the cost-effectiveness of screening for upper GI cancers (esophageal adenocarcinoma with its premalignant precursor Barrett's esophagus, esophageal squamous cell cancer, gastric adenocarcinoma) in the United States., Objective: To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of screening the general population for upper GI cancers by performing an upper endoscopy at the time of screening colonoscopy., Design: Decision analysis., Setting: Third-party-payer perspective with a time horizon of 30 years or until death., Patients: This study involved 50-year-old patients already undergoing screening colonoscopy., Intervention: Comparison of two strategies: performing and not performing a screening upper endoscopy at the time of screening colonoscopy., Main Outcome Measurements: Incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER)., Results: One-time screening for the general population at the age of 50 for upper GI cancers required $115,664 per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) compared with no screening or surveillance. A strategy of screening and surveillance for Barrett's esophagus required only $95,559 per QALY saved. In 1-way sensitivity analyses, the prevalence rates of esophageal adenocarcinoma, esophageal squamous cell cancer, or gastric adenocarcinoma would have to increase by 654%, 1948%, and 337%, respectively, to generate an ICER of less than $50,000 per QALY., Limitations: Omission of premalignant conditions for squamous cell cancer and gastric adenocarcinoma., Conclusion: The ICER for screening the general population for upper GI cancers with endoscopy remains high, despite accounting for reduced endoscopy costs and the combined benefits of detecting early esophageal adenocarcinoma, esophageal squamous cell cancer, and gastric adenocarcinoma. However, the ICER compares favorably with commonly performed screening strategies for other cancers., (Copyright © 2011 American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy. Published by Mosby, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Advances in the development of endoscopic therapies for Barrett's esophagus have resulted in the emergence of an important paradigm shift for management of early neoplasia and represent an opportunity to alter the natural history of the disease. Clinical incorporation of these endoscopic modalities may have significant implications for disease management and health care delivery from a cost perspective. This article reviews the current literature on the cost analyses of commonly used Barrett endoscopic interventions and summarizes the overall cost-effectiveness of these treatments as compared with surveillance or surgery., (Copyright © 2011 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Screening and surveillance of Barrett's esophagus is a matter of discussion in the current world literature due to uncertainties concerning its cost-effectiveness. Important and valid arguments for and against it are available. Despite the fact that this issue is still to be resolved, screening using standard gastroscopy once in a lifetime and surveillance using repeated endoscopies with multiple blind biopsies are widely practiced by individual gastroenterologists. Further studies that mainly focus on finding better predictors of progression to cancer are needed to be able to prepare clear and useful guidelines. The ultimate aim of screening and surveillance should be decrease in mortality from esophageal adenocarcinoma resulting from Barrett's esophagus.

Oesophageal adenocarcinoma has a low incidence and still remains an uncommon cancer; however, it has been on the rise over the past 20 years. Barrett's oesophagus, a complication of gastro-oesophageal reflux disease, is the only known precursor of this adenocarcinoma. It can often be asymptomatic and probably goes undiagnosed in the majority of the population. There are no direct data supporting the practice of screening for Barrett's oesophagus and oesophageal adenocarcinoma among the general population or even in patients with chronic reflux symptoms. However, many argue that the detection of neoplasms at a curable state in a high risk population can perhaps justify screening endoscopy. No prospective, controlled trials have been conducted to support the effectiveness of surveillance, but some indirect evidence does exist. The cost effectiveness of surveillance programmes needs to be further assessed in prospective studies. Ultimately, the use of better tools to diagnose Barrett's oesophagus and dysplasia and the identification of high risk groups for progression to oesophageal adenocarcinoma could potentially make screening and surveillance a cost effective practice.

Background: Multiple treatment strategies for subjects with high grade dysplasia (HGD) in Barrett's oesophagus (BO) have been suggested. However, it is unclear which of these strategies provides the greatest life expectancy, and the costs associated with the management strategies are unknown., Aim: To compare the efficacy and cost effectiveness of competing management strategies for BO with HGD., Methods: We created a decision analysis model in Data 4.0 to assess possible treatment strategies for BO with HGD. The strategies included: (1) no preventative strategy, (2) elective surgical oesophagectomy, (3) endoscopic ablation, and (4) surveillance endoscopy. The base case was a healthy 50 year old White male with an initial diagnosis of BO with HGD. The model allowed for complications of surgery, including death. Ablative therapy could cause stricture or perforation. Pathological misinterpretation was allowed, and modelled after reported rates. Estimates were derived from the literature for the rate of progression of HGD to cancer and for complication rates for the various treatment modalities. The endoscopic ablation arm was modelled as photodynamic therapy. Sensitivity analyses were performed over a wide range of cancer incidences, complication rates, and procedure costs., Results: Endoscopic ablation was the most effective strategy, yielding 15.5 discounted quality adjusted life years (dQALY), compared with 15.0 for endoscopic surveillance and 14.9 for oesophagectomy. No preventative strategy was the most inexpensive option, yielding an average cost per quality adjusted life year of US dollars 54 (44) per dQALY, but resulted in high rates of cancer. Endoscopic surveillance dominated oesophagectomy, being both less costly and more effective. The condition of extended dominance occurred when comparing endoscopic ablation to endoscopic surveillance because, although the total costs of ablation were greater than those of surveillance, it was less expensive to buy an additional life year using endoscopic ablation than endoscopic surveillance. The incremental cost effectiveness ratio when moving from no therapy to ablative therapy was a reasonable US dollars 25 621/dQALY (21 009/dQALY). Sensitivity analysis demonstrated that when yearly rates of progression to cancer from HGD exceeded 30%, oesophagectomy became the most cost effective option., Conclusions: A strategy of endoscopic ablation provided the longest quality adjusted life expectancy for BO with HGD. Although endoscopic surveillance was less expensive than endoscopic ablation, it was associated with shorter survival. Optimal utilisation of healthcare resources may be achieved with endoscopic ablative therapy for BO with HGD.

Background & Aims: Endoscopic screening and periodic surveillance for patients with Barrett's esophagus has been shown to be cost-effective in patients with esophageal dysplasia, with treatment for esophageal cancer limited to esophagectomy. Most gastroenterologists refer patients with high-grade dysplasia for esophagectomy, and effective endoscopic therapies are available for nonoperative patients with esophageal cancer. The cost-effectiveness of screening strategies that incorporate these nonsurgical treatment modalities has not been determined., Methods: We designed a Markov model to compare lifetime costs and life expectancy for a cohort of 50-year-old men with chronic reflux symptoms. We compared 10 clinical strategies incorporating combinations of screening and surveillance protocols (no screening, screening with periodic surveillance for both dysplastic and nondysplastic Barrett's esophagus, or periodic surveillance for dysplasia only), treatment for high-grade dysplasia (esophagectomy or intensive surveillance), and treatment for cancer (esophagectomy or surgical and endoscopic treatment options)., Results: Screening and surveillance of patients with both dysplastic and nondysplastic Barrett's esophagus followed by esophagectomy for surgical candidates with high-grade dysplasia or esophageal cancer and endoscopic therapy for cancer patients who were not operative candidates cost $12,140 per life-year gained compared to no screening. Other screening strategies, including strategies that had no endoscopic treatment options, were either less effective at the same cost, or equally effective at a higher cost., Conclusions: The cost-effectiveness of screening and subsequent surveillance of patients with dysplastic as well as nondysplastic Barrett's esophagus followed by endoscopic or surgical therapy in patients who develop cancer compares favorably to many widely accepted screening strategies for cancer.

Objective: Cost-effective strategies for identifying patients with Barrett's esophagus who are most likely to develop cancer have not been developed. Surveillance endoscopy is currently used, and we hypothesized that more frequent surveillance intervals would identify patients with "transient positive" diagnoses of dysplasia--dysplasia found on one examination but not on subsequent ones. Our aim was to explore the potential economic impact of transient positive diagnoses of dysplasia on alternative surveillance strategies over a 10-yr period., Methods: Data were derived from a 2-yr randomized, prospective study comparing omeprazole to ranitidine in 95 patients with Barrett's esophagus. A transient positive diagnosis of dysplasia was defined as a patient who was diagnosed with dysplasia during the study period but whose 24-month biopsies revealed no dysplasia. We calculated the number of transient positive diagnoses of dysplasia and modeled the potential economic impact of a diagnosis of dysplasia over a 10-yr period., Results: Thirty patients (31%) had at least one reading of dysplasia during the study period. Nineteen patients (20%) had a transient positive diagnosis of dysplasia. During the study period, no cancers were found. A surveillance strategy of every other year and every 6 months for dysplasia would result in 1072 endoscopies over a 10-yr period at a discounted cost of $1,587,184. A total of 61% of endoscopies would be because of transient positive diagnoses of dysplasia. A strategy of yearly surveillance and every 6 months for dysplasia would result in 1404 endoscopies at a discounted cost of $2,096,733, of which 28% would result from transient positive diagnoses of dysplasia. The discounted incremental costs of more frequent surveillance in this cohort of patients over 10 yr is $509,549., Conclusions: Based on current practice strategies, transient positive diagnoses of dysplasia account for 28-61% of endoscopies in Barrett's surveillance programs. This analysis suggests that the endoscopy workload and costs associated with surveillance could be substantially reduced if patients with transient positive diagnoses of dysplasia reverted to usual surveillance after two negative examinations.

Objective: Surveillance of Barrett's patients is recommended, to detect dysplasia and early cancer. The reported risk for developing cancer varies substantially, however. Our previous analysis used an average cancer incidence of 1/75 patient-years (PY). Recent reports suggest that the risk may range from 1/251 to 1/208 PY in combined series of patients with long segment Barrett's esophagus (LSBE, >3 cm), and short segment Barrett's esophagus (SSBE), and up to 1% annually in patients with SSBE. Our goal was to consider these new estimates of cancer risk in a cost-utility analysis of surveillance of patients with Barrett's esophagus., Methods: Using our previously published model, we incorporated an average of the recent estimates of cancer risk (0.4% annually, 1/227 PY), and our primary data on quality of life after esophagectomy. We included actual variable (direct) costs and used a discount rate of 5%. From the perspective of an HMO, the model evaluates surveillance every 1-5 yr and no surveillance, with esophagectomy performed if high grade dysplasia is diagnosed, and calculates the incremental cost-utility ratios for each strategy., Results: The results suggest that, at our baseline, annual cancer risk surveillance every 5 yr is the only viable strategy. More frequent surveillance costs more and yields a lower life expectancy. The incremental cost-utility ratio for surveillance every 5 yr is $98,000/quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained, comparable to the incremental cost-effectiveness ratios of accepted practices (heart transplantation and screening for tuberculosis in selected populations, $160,000/LY gained and $216,000/LY gained, respectively)., Conclusions: Surveillance of Barrett's patients should extend life, with incremental cost-utility ratios that compare favorably with some accepted medical practices. Policy makers can compare the cost of surveillance to that of other accepted practices to determine their willingness to fund surveillance.

A review of endoscopic records at the Cleveland Clinic Foundation over a 7-yr period yielded 72 cases of Barrett's esophagus. Ten patients had adenocarcinoma at the time of diagnosis of Barrett's esophagus (14%). Sixty-two were followed for a mean of 31 months (range 2-154 months). During this follow-up period, cancer developed in one patient, an incidence of one cancer per 166 patient yr and an annual incidence of 0.6%. Males predominated in the group with both Barrett's esophagus (55 of 72) and adenocarcinoma (10 of 11). Symptoms were similar in those with simple Barrett's esophagus and those complicated by cancer. Our findings on incidence of cancer in Barrett's was applied to a model surveillance program. The cost of yearly endoscopic surveillance is estimated to be +62,000 and 78 lost work days to discover one cancer during the follow-up period. An endoscopic surveillance program requiring every-other-year studies appears justified and would cost only half as much, annually.