The field effect in Barrett’s esophagus: can we use it for screening and surveillance?

Esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC) is a relatively uncommon but serious cancer afflicting 5 – 15 /100000 population in the UK, and in which diagnosis at the late rather than the early stage decreases the 5-year survival rates from 90 % to between 10 % and 20 % [1]. Barrett’s esophagus is present as a premalignant lesion in the majority of cases of EAC and although Barrett’s esophagus is a major risk factor, only 2.5 % – 5 % of cases progress to EAC. The increased risk generally initiates a program of endoscopic surveillance that enables early intervention if the disease progresses [2].

• References

• 1 Hirst NG, Gordon LG, Whiteman DC et al. Is endoscopic surveillance for non-dysplastic Barrett’s esophagus cost-effective? Review of economic evaluations. J Gastroenterol Hepatol 2011; 26: 247-254
• 2 Sharma P, Sidorenko EI. Are screening and surveillance for Barrett’s oesophagus really worthwhile?. Gut 2005; 54: i27-i32
• 3 Wang KK, Sampliner RE. Practice Parameters Committee of the American College of Gastroenterology. Updated guidelines 2008 for the diagnosis, surveillance and therapy of Barrett’s esophagus. Am J Gastroenterol 2008; 103: 788-797
• 4 Slaughter DP, Southwick HW, Smejkal W. Field cancerization in oral stratified squamous epithelium; clinical implications of multicentric origin. Cancer 1953; 6: 963-968
• 5 Brabender J, Marjoram P, Lord RV et al. The molecular signature of normal squamous esophageal epithelium identifies the presence of a field effect and can discriminate between patients with Barrett’s esophagus and patients with Barrett’s-associated adenocarcinoma. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2005; 14: 2113-2117
• 6 Jankowski JA, Harrison RF, Perry I et al. Barrett’s metaplasia. Lancet 2000; 356: 2079-2085
• 7 Jankowski JA, Wright NA, Meltzer SJ et al. Molecular evolution of the metaplasia-dysplasia-adenocarcinoma sequence in the esophagus. Am J Pathol 1999; 154: 965-973
• 8 Leedham SJ, Preston SL, McDonald SA et al. Individual crypt genetic heterogeneity and the origin of metaplastic glandular epithelium in human Barrett’s oesophagus. Gut 2008; 57: 1041-1048
• 9 Barrett MT, Sanchez CA, Prevo LJ et al. Evolution of neoplastic cell lineages in Barrett oesophagus. Nature genetics 1999; 22: 106-109
• 10 Maley CC, Galipeau PC, Finley JC et al. Genetic clonal diversity predicts progression to esophageal adenocarcinoma. Nat Genet 2006; 38: 468-473
• 11 Greaves LC, Preston SL, Tadrous PJ et al. Mitochondrial DNA mutations are established in human colonic stem cells, and mutated clones expand by crypt fission. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2006; 103: 714-719
• 12 Paulson TG, Xu L, Sanchez C et al. Neosquamous epithelium does not typically arise from Barrett’s epithelium. Clin Cancer Res 2006; 12: 1701-1706
• 13 Coad RA, Woodman AC, Warner PJ et al. On the histogenesis of Barrett’s oesophagus and its associated squamous islands: a three-dimensional study of their morphological relationship with native oesophageal gland ducts. J Pathol 2005; 206: 388-394
• 14 Gutierrez-Gonzalez L, Graham TA, Rodriguez-Justo M et al. The clonal origins of dysplasia from intestinal metaplasia in the human stomach. Gastroenterology 2011; 140: 1251-1260
• 15 Nicholson AM, Graham TA, Simpson A et al. Barrett’s metaplasia glands are clonal, contain multiple stem cells and share a common squamous progenitor. Gut 2012; 61: 1380-1389
• 16 Pan Q, Nicholson AM, Barr H et al. Identification of lineage-uncommitted, long-lived, label-retaining cells in healthy human esophagus and stomach, and in metaplastic esophagus. Gastroenterology 2013; 144: 761-770
• 17 Konda VJA, Cherkezyan L, Subramanian H et al. Nanoscale markers of esophageal field carcinogenesis: potential implications for esophageal cancer screening. Endoscopy 2013; 45: 983-988
• 18 Subramanian H, Roy HK, Pradhan P et al. Nanoscale cellular changes in field carcinogenesis detected by partial wave spectroscopy. Cancer Res 2009; 69: 5357-5363