4.1 Review

Esophageal adenocarcinoma phenotypes and risk factors

Journal

CURRENT OPINION IN GASTROENTEROLOGY
Volume 38, Issue 4, Pages 423-427

Publisher

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1097/MOG.0000000000000844

Keywords

Barrett's esophagus; chronic acid reflux; esophageal adenocarcinoma phenotype; intestinal metaplasia

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The increasing incidence of esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC) has prompted a reevaluation of screening methods. Recent research has identified two phenotypes of EAC, with the non-barrett esophagus/non-intestinal metaplasia phenotype associated with more aggressive behavior and worse survival. Additionally, the rising incidence of EAC cannot be attributed to new risk factors but rather a higher prevalence of known risk factors. Differences in genomic methylation and immune response may explain the two EAC phenotypes.
Purpose of review The incidence of esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC) has increased significantly over the last several decades. The majority of EAC patients present without a prior history of Barrett's esophagus (BE). As a result, endoscopic surveillance has made a suboptimal impact on EAC survival. These concerns raise serious question whether the time has come to take a different direction. The aim of this article is to review evolving evidence of EAC phenotypes and risk factors. Recent findings A recent study has identified two phenotypes of EAC based on the presence or absence of intestinal metaplasia (IM) in the background of the tumor (BE/IM and non-BE/IM). The study found that one-half of patients with EAC have the non-BE/IM phenotype, which is associated with more aggressive behavior and worse survival. A retrospective review demonstrates that the proportion of the two phenotypes has been stable over the last decades. Similarly, the increasing incidence of EAC cannot be explained by an increased frequency of new, unique risk factors but rather by a higher prevalence of already known risk factors. Emerging data also demonstrates that, whereas reflux symptoms are an unreliable feature for screening regardless of phenotype, the absence of reflux symptoms is more common for the non-BE/IM. Differences in the degree of genomic methylation and immune response might explain the two phenotypes at a genomic level. EAC phenotypes have implications for tumor behavior and phenotypic differences might underlie our suboptimal screening efforts. Future screening efforts should not uniformly rely on reflux symptoms as a prerequisite for screening and should consider alternatives to the current screening strategy.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.1
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available