An economic analysis of endoscopic ablative therapy for management of nondysplastic Barrett’s esophagus

Background and aims: Advances have occurred in the development of safe and effective ablative therapies for Barrett’s esophagus. The aim of the current study was to perform an economic analysis evaluating the cost-effectiveness of endoscopic ablation of nondysplastic Barrett’s esophagus.

Methods: A Markov model evaluated three competing strategies in a hypothetical 50-year-old cohort with nondysplastic Barrett’s esophagus from a societal perspective. Strategy I – natural history of Barrett’s disease (without surveillance); Strategy II – surveillance performed according to the American College of Gastroenterology practice guidelines; Strategy III – endoscopic ablative therapy. The model was biased against ablative therapy with a conservative estimate of complete response and continued standard surveillance even after complete ablation. All potential complications were accounted for, and an incomplete histological response after ablation was presumed to have the same risk of progression as untreated Barrett’s. Transitional probabilities, discounted cost, and utility values to estimate quality-adjusted life-years (QALY) were obtained from published information. Direct costs were used in our analysis.

Results: In baseline analysis, the ablative strategy yielded the highest QALY and was more cost-effective than endoscopic surveillance. In a Monte Carlo analysis, the relative risk of developing cancer in the strategy based on endoscopic ablation was decreased compared with the other strategies. In threshold analysis, the critical determinants of cost-effectiveness of the ablative strategy were rate of complete response to ablation, total cost of ablation, and risk of progression to dysplasia.

Conclusions: Within the limits of the model, ablation for nondysplastic Barrett’s esophagus is more cost-effective than endoscopic surveillance. Clinical trials of ablative therapy in nondysplastic Barrett’s esophagus are needed to establish its effectiveness in reducing cancer risk.

References

• 1 Spechler S. Clinical practice. Barrett’s esophagus.  N Engl J Med. 2002;  346 836-842
• 2 Fitzgerald R C, Saeed I T, Khoo D. et al . Rigorous surveillance protocol increases detection of curable cancers associated with Barrett’s esophagus.  Dig Dis Sci. 2001;  46 1892-1898
• 3 Corley D A, Levin T R, Habel L A. et al . Surveillance and survival in Barrett’s adenocarcinomas: a population-based study.  Gastroenterology. 2002;  122 633-640
• 4 Sampliner R E. Updated guidelines for the diagnosis, surveillance, and therapy of Barrett’s esophagus.  Am J Gastroenterol. 2002;  97 1888-1895
• 5 Boyer J, Laugier R, Chemali M. et al . French Society of Digestive Endoscopy SFED guideline: monitoring of patients with Barrett’s esophagus.  Endoscopy. 2007;  39 840-842
• 6 Playford R J. New British Society of Gastroenterology (BSG) guidelines for the diagnosis and management of Barrett’s oesophagus.  Gut. 2006;  55 442
• 7 Inadomi J M, Sampliner R, Lagergren J. et al . Screening and surveillance for Barrett esophagus in high-risk groups: a cost-utility analysis.  Ann Intern Med. 2003;  138 176-186
• 8 Sampliner R E. Endoscopic ablative therapy for Barrett’s esophagus: current status.  Gastrointest Endosc. 2004;  59 66
• 9 Johnston M H. Technology insight: ablative techniques for Barrett’s esophagus – current and emerging trends.  Nat Clin Pract Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2005;  2 323-330
• 10 Dulai G S, Jensen D M, Cortina G. et al . Randomized trial of argon plasma coagulation vs. multipolar electrocoagulation for ablation of Barrett’s esophagus.  Gastrointest Endosc. 2005;  61 232-240
• 11 Sharma V K, Wang K K, Overholt B F. et al . Balloon-based, circumferential, endoscopic radiofrequency ablation of Barrett’s esophagus: 1-year follow-up of 100 patients.  Gastrointest Endosc. 2007;  65 185-195
• 12 Peters F P, Krishnadath K K, Rygiel A M. et al . Stepwise radical endoscopic resection of the complete Barrett’s esophagus with early neoplasia successfully eradicates pre-existing genetic abnormalities.  Am J Gastroenterol. 2007;  102 1853-1861
• 13 Sonnenberg F A, Beck J R. Markov models in medical decision making: a practical guide.  Med Decis Making. 1993;  13 322-338
• 14 Weinstein M C, Siegel J E, Gold M R. et al . Recommendations of the Panel on Cost-effectiveness in Health and Medicine.  JAMA. 1996;  276 1253-1258
• 15 Shaheen N J, Inadomi J M, Overholt B F, Sharma P. What is the best management strategy for high grade dysplasia in Barrett’s oesophagus? A cost effectiveness analysis.  Gut. 2004;  53 1736-1744
• 16 Gerson L B, Groeneveld P W, Triadafilopoulos G. Cost-effectiveness model of endoscopic screening and surveillance in patients with gastroesophageal reflux disease.  Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2004;  2 868-879
• 17 Vij R, Triadafilopoulos G, Owens D K. et al . Cost-effectiveness of photodynamic therapy for high-grade dysplasia in Barrett’s esophagus.  Gastrointest Endosc. 2004;  60 739-756
• 18 Hur C, Nishioka N S, Gazelle G S. Cost-effectiveness of aspirin chemoprevention for Barrett’s esophagus.  J Natl Cancer Inst. 2004;  96 316-325
• 19 Sonnenberg A, Fennerty M B. Medical decision analysis of chemoprevention against esophageal adenocarcinoma.  Gastroenterology. 2003;  124 1758-1766
• 20 E A rias. United States life tables, 2003. National vital statistic reports; vol 54 no. 4. Hyattsville, MD; National Center for Health Statistics 2006
• 21 Schnell T G, Sontag S J, Chejfec G. et al . Long-term nonsurgical management of Barrett’s esophagus with high-grade dysplasia.  Gastroenterology. 2001;  120 1607-1619
• 22 Weston A P, Sharma P, Topalovski M. et al . Long-term follow-up of Barrett’s high-grade dysplasia.  Am J Gastroenterol. 2000;  95 1888-1893
• 23 Hameeteman W, Tytgat G N, Houthoff H J. et al . Barrett’s esophagus: development of dysplasia and adenocarcinoma.  Gastroenterology. 1989;  96 1249-1256
• 24 Sharma P, Morales T G, Bhattacharyya A. et al . Dysplasia in short-segment Barrett’s esophagus: a prospective 3-year follow-up.  Am J Gastroenterol. 1997;  92 2012-2016
• 25 Weston A P, Badr A S, Hassanein R S. Prospective multivariate analysis of clinical, endoscopic, and histological factors predictive of the development of Barrett’s multifocal high-grade dysplasia or adenocarcinoma.  Am J Gastroenterol. 1999;  94 3413-3419
• 26 Cameron A J, Ott B J, Payne W S. The incidence of adenocarcinoma in columnar-lined (Barrett’s) esophagus.  N Engl J Med. 1985;  313 857-859
• 27 Drewitz D J, Sampliner R E, Garewal H S. The incidence of adenocarcinoma in Barrett’s esophagus: a prospective study of 170 patients followed 4.8 years.  Am J Gastroenterol. 1997;  92 212-215
• 28 Spechler S J, Lee E, Ahnen D. et al . Long-term outcome of medical and surgical therapies for gastroesophageal reflux disease: follow-up of a randomized controlled trial.  JAMA. 2001;  285 2331-2338
• 29 O’Connor J B, Falk G W, Richter J E. The incidence of adenocarcinoma and dysplasia in Barrett’s esophagus: report on the Cleveland Clinic Barrett’s Esophagus Registry.  Am J Gastroenterol. 1999;  94 2037-2042
• 30 Shaheen N J, Crosby M A, Bozymski E M. et al . Is there publication bias in the reporting of cancer risk in Barrett’s esophagus?.  Gastroenterology. 2000;  119 333-338
• 31 Katz D, Rothstein R, Schned A. et al . The development of dysplasia and adenocarcinoma during endoscopic surveillance of Barrett’s esophagus.  Am J Gastroenterol. 1998;  93 536-541
• 32 Spechler S J, Robbins A H, Rubins H B. et al . Adenocarcinoma and Barrett’s esophagus. An overrated risk?.  Gastroenterology. 1984;  87 927-933
• 33 Weston A P, Badr A S, Hassanein R S. Prospective multivariate analysis of factors predictive of complete regression of Barrett’s esophagus.  Am J Gastroenterol. 1999;  94 3420-346
• 34 Winters Jr C, Spurling T J, Chobanian S J. et al . Barrett’s esophagus. A prevalent, occult complication of gastroesophageal reflux disease.  Gastroenterology. 1987;  92 118-124
• 35 Streitz J MJ, Andrews C WJ, Ellis F H, Jr. E ndoscopic. Does it help?.  J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 1993;  105 383-387
• 36 Menke-Pluymers M B, Schoute N W, Mulder A H. et al . Outcome of surgical treatment of adenocarcinoma in Barrett’s oesophagus.  Gut. 1992;  33 1454-1458
• 37 Pera M, Trastek V F, Carpenter H A. et al . Barrett’s esophagus with high-grade dysplasia: an indication for esophagectomy?.  Ann Thorac Surg. 1992;  54 199-204
• 38 Peters J H, Clark G W, Ireland A P. et al . Outcome of adenocarcinoma arising in Barrett’s esophagus in endoscopically surveyed and nonsurveyed patients.  J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 1994;  108 813-821
• 39 Overholt B F, Panjehpour M, Halberg D L. Photodynamic therapy for Barrett’s esophagus with dysplasia and/or early stage carcinoma: long-term results.  Gastrointest Endosc. 2003;  58 183-188
• 40 Sharma P, Wani S, Weston A P. et al . A randomised controlled trial of ablation of Barrett’s oesophagus with multipolar electrocoagulation versus argon plasma coagulation in combination with acid suppression: long term results.  Gut. 2006;  55 1233-1239
• 41 Zaninotto G, Parenti A R, Ruol A. et al . Oesophageal resection for high-grade dysplasia in Barrett’s oesophagus.  Br J Surg. 2000;  87 1102-1105
• 42 Patti M G, Corvera C U, Glasgow R E. et al . A hospital’s annual rate of esophagectomy influences the operative mortality rate.  J Gastrointest Surg. 1998;  2 186-192
• 43 Bousamra M, Haasler G B. A decade of experience with transthoracic and transhiatal esophagectomy.  Am J Surg. 2002;  183 162-167
• 44 Lerut T, Coosemans W, Van Raemdonck D. et al . Surgical treatment of Barrett’s carcinoma. Correlations between morphologic findings and prognosis.  J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 1994;  107 1059-1065
• 45 McLarty A J, Deschamps C, Trastek V F. et al . Esophageal resection for cancer of the esophagus: long-term function and quality of life.  Ann Thorac Surg. 1997;  63 1568-1572
• 46 Chan M F. Complications of upper gastrointestinal endoscopy.  Gastrointest Endosc Clin N Am. 1996;  6 287-303
• 47 Kavic S M, Basson M D. Complications of endoscopy.  Am J Surg. 2001;  181 319-332
• 48 Arrowsmith J B, Gerstman B B, Fleischer D E. et al . Results from the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy/U.S. Food and Drug Administration collaborative study on complication rates and drug use during gastrointestinal endoscopy.  Gastrointest Endosc. 1991;  37 421-427
• 49 Hart R, Classen M. Complications of diagnostic gastrointestinal endoscopy.  Endoscopy. 1990;  22 229-233
• 50 Hernandez L J, Jacobson J W, Harris M S. Comparison among the perforation rates of Maloney, balloon, and savary dilation of esophageal strictures.  Gastrointest Endosc. 2000;  51 460-462
• 51 Iannettoni M D, Vlessis A A, Whyte R I. et al . Functional outcome after surgical treatment of esophageal perforation.  Ann Thorac Surg. 1997;  64 1606-1609
• 52 Ormsby A H, Petras R E, Henricks W H. et al . Observer variation in the diagnosis of superficial oesophageal adenocarcinoma.  Gut. 2002;  51 671-676
• 53 Montgomery E, Bronner M P, Goldblum J R. et al . Reproducibility of the diagnosis of dysplasia in Barrett esophagus: a reaffirmation.  Hum Pathol. 2001;  32 368-378
• 54 Provenzale D, Schmitt C, Wong J B. Barrett’s esophagus: a new look at surveillance based on emerging estimates of cancer risk.  Am J Gastroenterol. 1999;  94 2043-2053
• 55 Provenzale D, Kemp J A, Arora S. et al . A guide for surveillance of patients with Barrett’s esophagus.  Am J Gastroenterol. 1994;  89 670-680
• 56 Alikhan M, Rex D, Khan A. et al . Variable pathologic interpretation of columnar lined esophagus by general pathologists in community practice.  Gastrointest Endosc. 1999;  50 23-26
• 57 Zaman R, Hapke G, Sahagun G, Katon R M. Unsedated peroral endoscopy with a video ultrathin endoscope: patient acceptance, tolerance, and diagnostic accuracy.  Am J Gastroenterol. 1998;  93 1260-1263
• 58 de Boer A G, Stalmeier P F, Sprangers M A. et al . Transhiatal vs extended transthoracic resection in oesophageal carcinoma: patients’ utilities and treatment preferences.  Br J Cancer. 2002;  86 851-857
• 59 Doubilet P, Begg C B, Weinstein M C. et al . Probabilistic sensitivity analysis using Monte Carlo simulation: a practical approach.  Med Decis Making. 1985;  5 157-177
• 60 Stinnett A A, Mullahy J. Net health benefits: a new framework for the analysis of uncertainty in cost-effectiveness analysis.  Med Decis Making. 1998;  18 (Suppl. 2) S68-S80
• 61 Heitjan D F. Fieller’s method and net health benefit.  Health Econ. 2000;  9 327-335
• 62 Ganz R A, Overholt B F, Sharma V K. et al . Circumferential ablation of Barrett’s esophagus that contains high-grade dysplasia: a U.S. Multicenter Registry.  Gastrointest Endosc. 2008;  68 35-40
• 63 Gondrie J J, Pouw R E, Sondermeijer C M. et al . Effective treatment of early Barrett’s neoplasia with stepwise circumferential and focal ablation using the HALO system.  . 2008;  40 370-379
• 64 Sharma V K, Kim H J, Das A. et al . Circumferential and focal ablation of Barrett esophagus containing dysplasia.  Am J Gastroenterol. 2009;  104 310-317
• 65 Gondrie J J, Pouw R E, Sondermeijer C M. et al . Stepwise circumferential and focal ablation of Barrett’s esophagus with high-grade dysplasia: results of the first prospective series of 11 patients.  Endoscopy. 2008;  40 359-369
• 66 Sharma V K, Kim H J, Das A. et al . A prospective pilot trial of ablation of Barrett’s esophagus with low-grade dysplasia using stepwise circumferential and focal ablation (HALO system).  Endoscopy. 2008;  40 380-387
• 67 Fleischer D E, Overholt B F, Sharma V K. et al . Endoscopic ablation of Barrett’s esophagus: a multicenter study with 2.5-year follow-up.  . 2008;  68 867-876
• 68 Shaheen N J, Sharma P, Overholt B F. et al . A randomized, multicenter, sham-controlled trial of radiofrequency ablation (RFA) for subjects with Barrett’s esophagus (BE) containing dysplasia: interim results of the AIM Dysplasia Trial.  Gastroenterology. 2008;  134 A37
• 69 Arguedas M R, Eloubeidi M A. Barrett’s esophagus: a review of costs of the illness.  Pharmacoeconomics. 2001;  19 1003-1011
• 70 Weston A P. Automated circumferential Barrett’s ablation by using radiofrequency energy: a welcome step in the right direction.  Gastrointest Endosc. 2007;  65 196-199
• 71 Bergman J J. Radiofrequency energy ablation of Barrett’s esophagus: the best is yet to come!.  Gastrointest Endosc. 2007;  65 200-202
• 72 Inadomi J M, Madanick R D, Somsouk M. et al . Radiofrequency ablation is more cost-effective than endoscopic surveillance or esophagectomy among patients with Barrett’s esophagus and low-grade dysplasia [abstract].  Gastroenterology. 2007;  132 A53
• 73 Craig B A, Black M A, Sendi P P. Uncertainty in decision models analyzing cost-effectiveness.  Med Decis Making. 2000;  20 135-137
• 74 Sampliner R E. The better burn.  Gastrointest Endosc. 2005;  61 241-242
• 75 Krishnadath K K, Reid B J, Wang K K. Biomarkers in Barrett esophagus.  Mayo Clin Proc. 2001;  76 438-446