Comparative Study
Journal Article
Multicenter Study
Add like
Add dislike
Add to saved papers

Risk factors for progression of low-grade dysplasia in patients with Barrett's esophagus.

Gastroenterology 2011 October
BACKGROUND & AIMS: Data vary on the progression of low-grade dysplasia (LGD) in patients with Barrett's esophagus (BE); in patients with LGD, we investigated the incidence of high-grade dysplasia (HGD) and esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC) and compared progression in patients with different forms of LGD (prevalent vs incident and multifocal vs unifocal). We assessed the effects of consensus diagnosis of LGD on progression rates to HGD and EAC among expert pathologists.

METHODS: In a multicenter outcomes project, 210 patients with BE and LGD (classified as incident, prevalent, or persistent) were included. Patients were followed up for an average of 6.2 years (959.6 patient-years). Persistent LGD was defined as detection of LGD on ≥2 consecutive occasions during the follow-up period and extent as either unifocal (LGD at one level of BE segment) or multifocal (>1 level). Histology specimens were reviewed by 2 blinded pathologists.

RESULTS: Six patients developed EAC (incidence of 0.44%/year), and 21 developed HGD (incidence of 1.6%/year). The incidence of the combination of HGD and EAC was 1.83%/year. There were no associations between presence of prevalent, incident, or persistent LGD and the extent of LGD with progression rates. Based on consensus diagnosis of 88 reviewed specimens, there was no difference in the progression of LGD to either EAC (the incidence based on analyses by the local pathologist was 0.18%/year, the incidence when there was agreement between the local and one central pathologist was 0.21%/year, and the incidence when all 3 pathologists were in agreement was 0.39%/year) or combined HGD and EAC (0.94%/year, 0.87%/year, and 0.84%/year, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS: Overall, patients with BE and LGD have a low annual incidence of EAC, similar to nondysplastic BE. There are no risk factors for progression and there is significant interobserver variation in diagnosis, even among expert pathologists.

Full text links

We have located links that may give you full text access.
Can't access the paper?
Try logging in through your university/institutional subscription. For a smoother one-click institutional access experience, please use our mobile app.

Related Resources

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

Mobile app image

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.

By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.

Your Privacy Choices Toggle icon

You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app