BOB CAT: a Large-Scale Review and Delphi Consensus for Management of Barrett’s Esophagus With No Dysplasia, Indefinite for, or Low-Grade Dysplasia

OBJECTIVES: Barrett’s esophagus (BE) is a common premalignant lesion for which surveillance is recommended. This strategy is limited by considerable variations in clinical practice. We conducted an international, multidisciplinary, systematic search and evidence-based review of BE and provided consensus recommendations for clinical use in patients with nondysplastic, indefinite, and low-grade dysplasia (LGD). METHODS: We defined the scope, proposed statements, and searched electronic databases, yielding 20,558 publications that were screened, selected online, and formed the evidence base. We used a Delphi consensus process, with an 80% agreement threshold, using GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) to categorize the quality of evidence and strength of recommendations. RESULTS: In total, 80% of respondents agreed with 55 of 127 statements in the final voting rounds. Population endoscopic screening is not recommended and screening should target only very high-risk cases of males aged over 60 years with chronic uncontrolled reflux. A new international definition of BE was agreed upon. For any degree of dysplasia, at least two specialist gastrointestinal (GI) pathologists are required. Risk factors for cancer include male gender, length of BE, and central obesity. Endoscopic resection should be used for visible, nodular areas. Surveillance is not recommended for <5 years of life expectancy. Management strategies for indefinite dysplasia (IND) and LGD were identified, including a de-escalation strategy for lower-risk patients and escalation to intervention with follow-up for higher-risk patients. CONCLUSIONS: In this uniquely large consensus process in gastroenterology, we made key clinical recommendations for the escalation/de-escalation of BE in clinical practice. We made strong recommendations for the prioritization of future research.

Colorectal cancer risk following adenoma removal: a large prospective population-based cohort study

Background: Randomised controlled trials have demonstrated significant reductions in colorectal cancer (CRC) incidence and mortality associated with polypectomy. However, little is known about whether polypectomy is effective at reducing CRC risk in routine clinical practice. The aim of this investigation was to quantify CRC risk following polypectomy in a large prospective population-based cohort study.

Methods: Patients with incident colorectal polyps between 2000 and 2005 in Northern Ireland (NI) were identified via electronic pathology reports received to the NI Cancer Registry (NICR). Patients were matched to the NICR to detect CRC and deaths up to 31st December 2010. CRC standardised incidence ratios (SIRs) were calculated and Cox proportional hazards modelling applied to determine CRC risk.

Results: During 44,724 person-years of follow-up, 193 CRC cases were diagnosed amongst 6,972 adenoma patients, representing an annual progression rate of 0.43%. CRC risk was significantly elevated in patients who had an adenoma removed (SIR 2.85; 95% CI: 2.61 to 3.25) compared with the general population. Male sex, older age, rectal site and villous architecture were associated with an increased CRC risk in adenoma patients. Further analysis suggested that not having a full colonoscopy performed at, or following, incident polypectomy contributed to the excess CRC risk.

Conclusions: CRC risk was elevated in individuals following polypectomy for adenoma, outside of screening programmes.

Impact: This finding emphasises the need for full colonoscopy and adenoma clearance, and appropriate surveillance, after endoscopic diagnosis of adenoma.

Randomized comparison of unfractionated heparin with corticosteroids in severe active inflammatory bowel disease

BACKGROUND: Heparin therapy may be effective in steroid resistant inflammatory bowel disease.

AIM: A randomized pilot study, to compare unfractionated heparin as a first-line therapy with corticosteroids in colonic inflammatory bowel disease.

METHODS: Twenty patients with severe inflammatory bowel disease (ulcerative colitis, n=17; Crohn's colitis, n=3) were randomized to either intravenous heparin for 5 days, followed by subcutaneous heparin for 5 weeks (n=8), or high-dose intravenous hydrocortisone for 5 days followed by oral prednisolone 40 mg daily, reducing by 5 mg per day each week (n=12). After 5 days, non-responders in each treatment group were commenced on combination therapy. Response to therapy was monitored by: clinical disease activity (ulcerative colitis: Truelove and Witt Index; Crohn's colitis: Harvey and Bradshaw Index), stool frequency, serum C-reactive protein and alpha1 acid glycoprotein, endoscopic and histopathological grading.

RESULTS: The response rates were similar in both treatment groups: clinical activity index (heparin vs. steroid; 75% vs. 67%; P=0.23), stool frequency (75% vs. 67%; P=0.61), endoscopic (75% vs. 67%; P=0.4) and histopathological grading (63% vs. 50%; P=0.67). Both treatments were well-tolerated with no serious adverse events.

CONCLUSION: Heparin as a first line therapy is as effective as corticosteroids in the treatment of colonic inflammatory bowel disease. Large multicentre randomized comparative studies are required to determine the role of heparin in the management of inflammatory bowel disease.