TY - JOUR
T1 - Acceptability and Adequacy of a Non-endoscopic Cell Collection Device for Diagnosis of Barrett’s Esophagus
T2 - Lessons Learned
AU - Shaheen, Nicholas J.
AU - Komanduri, Srinadh
AU - Muthusamy, V. Raman
AU - Wani, Sachin
AU - O’Donovan, Maria
AU - Kaushal, Rajinder
AU - Haydek, John M.
N1 - Funding Information:
Nicholas J. Shaheen has served as a consultant for Cernostics, Lucid, and Cook Medical, and has received research funding from Medical, C2 Therapeutics, Medtronic, Interpace Diagnostics, CDx Medical, EndoStim and Ironwood Pharmaceuticals. Maria O’Donovan has served as a consultant for Medtronic plc. She is named on patents relating to the original Cytosponge design and TFF3 assay licensed to Medtronic. She is a cofounder of Cyted Ltd. V. Raman Muthusamy has served as a consultant for Boston Scientific, Interpace Diagnostics, Medtronic, and Torax Medical (Ethicon), and has received research funding from Boston Scientific and Medtronic. Sachin Wani has served as a consultant for Boston Scientific, Medtronic, Interpace Diagnostics and Cernostics.
Publisher Copyright:
© 2021, The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Science+Business Media, LLC part of Springer Nature.
PY - 2022/1
Y1 - 2022/1
N2 - Background: Endoscopic screening for Barrett’s esophagus (BE) is common, costly, and underperformed in at-risk people. A non-endoscopic cell collection device can be used to collect esophageal cells, enabling BE screening. Aims: This study assessed the acceptability and adequacy of a commercial non-endoscopic cell collection device in a US population. Methods: Six sites enrolled patients with confirmed BE or heartburn/regurgitation for ≥ 6 months. Patients underwent administration of the device, consisting of a sponge encapsulated in a capsule. The capsule dwelled in the stomach for 7.5 min and was retracted via an attached suture. An adequate sample was ≥ 1 columnar cell by H&E staining. Sample quality was rated using a 0–5 scale, with 0 = no columnar cells and 5 = plentiful groups. Trefoil Factor 3 (TFF3) staining was performed. Accuracy was assessed using esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD)/biopsy as the gold standard. Results: Of 191 patients, 99.5% successfully swallowed the device. Overall sample adequacy was 91% (171/188), with 84% (158/188) high quality. The detachment rate was 2/190 (1%). Overall sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of the assay with TFF3 staining were 76%, 77%, and 76%. Sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy for ≥ 3 cm BE were 86%, 77%, and 82%. Asked if willing to repeat the procedure, 93% would, and 65% indicated a preference for the device over EGD. Conclusions: This study demonstrated a high rate of sample adequacy and promising acceptability of this non-endoscopic sampling device in a US population. Diagnostic characteristics suggest that non-endoscopic assessment of BE deserves further development as an alternative to endoscopy.
AB - Background: Endoscopic screening for Barrett’s esophagus (BE) is common, costly, and underperformed in at-risk people. A non-endoscopic cell collection device can be used to collect esophageal cells, enabling BE screening. Aims: This study assessed the acceptability and adequacy of a commercial non-endoscopic cell collection device in a US population. Methods: Six sites enrolled patients with confirmed BE or heartburn/regurgitation for ≥ 6 months. Patients underwent administration of the device, consisting of a sponge encapsulated in a capsule. The capsule dwelled in the stomach for 7.5 min and was retracted via an attached suture. An adequate sample was ≥ 1 columnar cell by H&E staining. Sample quality was rated using a 0–5 scale, with 0 = no columnar cells and 5 = plentiful groups. Trefoil Factor 3 (TFF3) staining was performed. Accuracy was assessed using esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD)/biopsy as the gold standard. Results: Of 191 patients, 99.5% successfully swallowed the device. Overall sample adequacy was 91% (171/188), with 84% (158/188) high quality. The detachment rate was 2/190 (1%). Overall sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of the assay with TFF3 staining were 76%, 77%, and 76%. Sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy for ≥ 3 cm BE were 86%, 77%, and 82%. Asked if willing to repeat the procedure, 93% would, and 65% indicated a preference for the device over EGD. Conclusions: This study demonstrated a high rate of sample adequacy and promising acceptability of this non-endoscopic sampling device in a US population. Diagnostic characteristics suggest that non-endoscopic assessment of BE deserves further development as an alternative to endoscopy.
KW - Barrett’s esophagus
KW - Esophageal adenocarcinoma
KW - Non-endoscopic
KW - Screening
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85100344830&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85100344830&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1007/s10620-021-06833-6
DO - 10.1007/s10620-021-06833-6
M3 - Article
C2 - 33532971
AN - SCOPUS:85100344830
SN - 0163-2116
VL - 67
SP - 177
EP - 186
JO - Digestive diseases and sciences
JF - Digestive diseases and sciences
IS - 1
ER -