Barrett's Esophagus, GERD
Conditions
Brief summary
This study will assess the Minimally Invasive Esophageal Cytology Collection System in Patients with Barrett's Esophagus or GERD Symptoms.
Detailed description
This is a cross-sectional study of subjects with Barrett's esophagus (BE) to assess the utility of the Cytosponge device as a non-endoscopic method for collecting surface cells from the esophagus. This study will enroll 2 groups of subjects: 1) Subjects presenting for routine endoscopic BE surveillance examinations (n=120), and 2) Subjects with gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) symptoms undergoing upper endoscopy for screening for BE (n=55). After informed consent, and on the same day as the endoscopic procedure, the subject will undergo administration of the Cytosponge device and complete a questionnaire. The subject will then undergo routine upper endoscopy, with assessment of BE (where applicable), and biopsy per accepted surveillance or screening recommendations. The Cytosponge will be placed in fixative and shipped to an accredited pathology laboratory for embedding in paraffin and hematoxylin and eosin (H&E) staining to assess the adequacy of the specimen. Further evaluation of the specimen may be performed using trefoil factor 3 (TFF3). If the Cytosponge tissue specimen is inadequate, the subject will be recalled for a repeat sponge procedure (not endoscopy) 30 days later. Routine care tissue biopsies will undergo standard processing and H&E staining at the home institution, with assessment by expert gastrointestinal pathologists. Subjects will be contacted via phone 7 days (+/- 2 days) after Cytosponge administration to complete additional questionnaires and assess adverse events.
Interventions
Cytosponge™ Cell Collection Device is indicated for use in the collection and retrieval of surface cells in the esophagus.
Sponsors
Study design
Eligibility
Inclusion criteria
1. Male or female subjects, age 18 and above. 2. Able to read, comprehend, and complete the consent form. 3. Clinically fit for an endoscopy. 4. a) Previous confirmed diagnosis of Barrett's esophagus with intestinal metaplasia, and Prague classification of at least one circumferential centimeter of BE or a total BE segment length of at least 3 centimeters (C1+ or CXM3+) (BE arm) . OR b) If the subject does not have documented Prague Classification prior to screening, but the PI is convinced that the subject will meet the inclusion criteria based on previous documentation (for instance, mention of long-segment BE, they may enroll the subject in the study at their discretion. The study upper endoscopy must confirm that the subject has C1+ or CXM3+ (BE arm). If (C1+ or CXM3+) is not observed at the time of study endoscopy, the subject may still be enrolled but not included in the data analysis with the BE cohort. The data may be analyzed in a separate cohort. OR c) Self-reported heartburn or regurgitation on at least a monthly basis for at least 6 months (GERD arm).
Exclusion criteria
1. Individuals with a diagnosis of an oropharynx, esophageal or gastro-esophageal tumor, or symptoms of dysphagia. 2. Any history of esophageal varices, stricture, or prior dilation of the esophagus. 3. Current use of anti-thrombotics (anti-coagulants and anti-platelet drugs) that cannot be safely discontinued for the appropriate drug-specific interval in the peri-administration period. Depending on the particular agent or reason for the anti-thrombotic therapy, it may not be necessary to discontinue anti-thrombotic agents. There could be circumstances where the drug may not need to be discontinued if the risk of bleeding is considered negligible (e.g. daily aspirin therapy). Physicians should use their clinical judgement and should consult guidelines such as those provided by the ASGE. 4. Known bleeding disorder. 5. Individuals who have had a myocardial infarction or any cardiac event \< 6 months prior to enrollment. 6. Individuals who have had a cerebrovascular event \< 6 months prior to enrollment in which swallowing was affected. 7. Prior ablative or resection therapy of the esophagus including radiofrequency ablation (RFA), photodynamic therapy (PDT), spray cryotherapy, endoscopic mucosal resection, and other ablation therapies. 8. Any history of esophageal surgery, except for uncomplicated fundoplication. 9. Do not need upper endoscopy as part of patient management. 10. Pregnancy
Design outcomes
Primary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Procedure Preference and Acceptability Questionnaire and Visual Analog Scale | Immediately post procedure up to 7 days +/- 3 days | The first primary objective of the study was to assess the acceptability of a novel, minimally invasive esophageal mucosal sampling technique, the Cytosponge™, in subjects undergoing surveillance of BE who have had at least a C1 or M3 segment confirmed, and 2) in subjects with GERD undergoing screening for BE. This includes measures of acceptability as demonstrated on the Impact of Event Scale, a Visual Analog Scale for Pain, and the subject's willingness to undergo repeat Cytosponge™ administration if it were offered to him/her. The Visual Analog Scale is measured from 0-100 scale for pain, 0 representing no pain and 100 representing the highest level of pain. |
| Number of Participants With Adequate Cytosponge™ Sample | Immediately post procedure up to 7 days +/- 3 days | To assess the adequacy of cytology samples obtained by Cytosponge in this population after 1 sampling, and after 2 samplings if first sample inadequate. |
Secondary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Cytosponge™ Operating Characteristics as a Function of Baseline Histology | Immediately post procedure up to 7 days +/- 3 days | The third secondary objective was to assess the operating characteristics of Cytosponge™ as a function of baseline histology. At the outset of this study, no data was available regarding the accuracy of TFF3 in samples collected by Cytosponge™ in subjects with BE and more advanced disease (low-grade dysplasia and high-grade dysplasia). These subjects are at greatest risk for progression to cancer. We planned to collect pilot data on operating characteristics of the assay by degree of baseline dysplasia. We hypothesized that TFF3 would perform with similar operating characteristics in this group compared to non-dysplastic BE. |
| Operating Characteristics | Immediately post procedure up to 7 days +/- 3 days | The operating characteristics of this technique against a gold standard of upper endoscopy with biopsies for endoscopic surveillance in subjects with BE who demonstrate an adequate sample on Cytosponge assessment. |
| Ongoing Safety Measures | Immediately post procedure up to 7 days +/- 3 days | To collect and analyze ongoing safety measures of Cytosponge use in the target population. |
| Summary of Abrasion, Bleeding, and Perforation Observed Via Endoscopy | Immediately post procedure up to 7 days +/- 3 days | The fourth secondary objective was to assess the degree of mucosal abrasion following Cytosponge™ administration, using a standardized scale. The incidence is presented in the data below for abrasion, bleeding and perforation observed during Endoscopy. |
| Cytosponge™ Operating Characteristics vs Worst Histology Ever | Immediately post procedure up to 7 days +/- 3 days | The second secondary objective was to assess the operating characteristics of Cytosponge™ against the worst ever histology documented in the subject. |
Countries
United States
Participant flow
Participants by arm
| Arm | Count |
|---|---|
| Patient Wth Barrett's Subjects presenting for routine endoscopic BE surveillance examinations
Cytosponge™ Cell Collection Device: Cytosponge™ Cell Collection Device is indicated for use in the collection and retrieval of surface cells in the esophagus. | 129 |
| Patients With GERD Subjects with gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) symptoms undergoing upper endoscopy for screening for BE
Cytosponge™ Cell Collection Device: Cytosponge™ Cell Collection Device is indicated for use in the collection and retrieval of surface cells in the esophagus. | 62 |
| Total | 191 |
Withdrawals & dropouts
| Period | Reason | FG000 | FG001 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Overall Study | Failure to swollow sponge twice | 1 | 0 |
| Overall Study | Lost to Follow-up | 2 | 0 |
| Overall Study | Patient did not return for procedure | 0 | 1 |
| Overall Study | Physician Decision | 1 | 0 |
| Overall Study | Protocol Violation | 0 | 1 |
| Overall Study | Subject not eligible | 1 | 0 |
| Overall Study | Withdrawal by Subject | 2 | 1 |
Baseline characteristics
| Characteristic | Patients With GERD | Total | Patient Wth Barrett's |
|---|---|---|---|
| Age, Continuous | 54.2 years STANDARD_DEVIATION 15.1 | 60.8 years STANDARD_DEVIATION 12.9 | 64 years STANDARD_DEVIATION 10.4 |
| Ethnicity (NIH/OMB) Hispanic or Latino | 4 Participants | 6 Participants | 2 Participants |
| Ethnicity (NIH/OMB) Not Hispanic or Latino | 57 Participants | 184 Participants | 127 Participants |
| Ethnicity (NIH/OMB) Unknown or Not Reported | 1 Participants | 1 Participants | 0 Participants |
| Race/Ethnicity, Customized American Indian Or Alaska Native | 1 Participants | 1 Participants | 0 Participants |
| Race/Ethnicity, Customized Asian | 2 Participants | 3 Participants | 1 Participants |
| Race/Ethnicity, Customized Black or African American | 5 Participants | 5 Participants | 0 Participants |
| Race/Ethnicity, Customized Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander | 1 Participants | 1 Participants | 0 Participants |
| Race/Ethnicity, Customized Other | 2 Participants | 3 Participants | 1 Participants |
| Race/Ethnicity, Customized White | 52 Participants | 179 Participants | 127 Participants |
| Sex: Female, Male Female | 39 Participants | 75 Participants | 36 Participants |
| Sex: Female, Male Male | 23 Participants | 116 Participants | 93 Participants |
Adverse events
| Event type | EG000 affected / at risk | EG001 affected / at risk |
|---|---|---|
| deaths Total, all-cause mortality | 0 / 129 | 0 / 62 |
| other Total, other adverse events | 8 / 129 | 6 / 62 |
| serious Total, serious adverse events | 2 / 129 | 0 / 62 |
Outcome results
Number of Participants With Adequate Cytosponge™ Sample
To assess the adequacy of cytology samples obtained by Cytosponge in this population after 1 sampling, and after 2 samplings if first sample inadequate.
Time frame: Immediately post procedure up to 7 days +/- 3 days
| Arm | Measure | Value (COUNT_OF_PARTICIPANTS) |
|---|---|---|
| Study Participant Cytosponge Procedure Acceptability | Number of Participants With Adequate Cytosponge™ Sample | 115 Participants |
| Patients With GERD | Number of Participants With Adequate Cytosponge™ Sample | 56 Participants |
Procedure Preference and Acceptability Questionnaire and Visual Analog Scale
The first primary objective of the study was to assess the acceptability of a novel, minimally invasive esophageal mucosal sampling technique, the Cytosponge™, in subjects undergoing surveillance of BE who have had at least a C1 or M3 segment confirmed, and 2) in subjects with GERD undergoing screening for BE. This includes measures of acceptability as demonstrated on the Impact of Event Scale, a Visual Analog Scale for Pain, and the subject's willingness to undergo repeat Cytosponge™ administration if it were offered to him/her. The Visual Analog Scale is measured from 0-100 scale for pain, 0 representing no pain and 100 representing the highest level of pain.
Time frame: Immediately post procedure up to 7 days +/- 3 days
| Arm | Measure | Group | Value (MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Study Participant Cytosponge Procedure Acceptability | Procedure Preference and Acceptability Questionnaire and Visual Analog Scale | On scale of 0-10 (10-high), rate Cytosponge exper. | 7.2 Units on a scale | Standard Deviation 2.5 |
| Study Participant Cytosponge Procedure Acceptability | Procedure Preference and Acceptability Questionnaire and Visual Analog Scale | On scale of 0-10 (10-high), rate endoscopy exper. | 8.5 Units on a scale | Standard Deviation 2.5 |
| Study Participant Cytosponge Procedure Acceptability | Procedure Preference and Acceptability Questionnaire and Visual Analog Scale | Diff. between the two scales: (Cyto/Endoscop) | -1.3 Units on a scale | Standard Deviation 2.4 |
| Study Participant Cytosponge Procedure Acceptability | Procedure Preference and Acceptability Questionnaire and Visual Analog Scale | Visual Analog Scale | 16.2 Units on a scale | Standard Deviation 18.3 |
Cytosponge™ Operating Characteristics as a Function of Baseline Histology
The third secondary objective was to assess the operating characteristics of Cytosponge™ as a function of baseline histology. At the outset of this study, no data was available regarding the accuracy of TFF3 in samples collected by Cytosponge™ in subjects with BE and more advanced disease (low-grade dysplasia and high-grade dysplasia). These subjects are at greatest risk for progression to cancer. We planned to collect pilot data on operating characteristics of the assay by degree of baseline dysplasia. We hypothesized that TFF3 would perform with similar operating characteristics in this group compared to non-dysplastic BE.
Time frame: Immediately post procedure up to 7 days +/- 3 days
Population: Among study subjects with BE that exhibited HGD, there were no true negatives or false positives, therefore specificity of the assay was not calculated for this subgroup.
| Arm | Measure | Group | Value (NUMBER) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Study Participant Cytosponge Procedure Acceptability | Cytosponge™ Operating Characteristics as a Function of Baseline Histology | Sensitivity | 76.2 Percentage |
| Study Participant Cytosponge Procedure Acceptability | Cytosponge™ Operating Characteristics as a Function of Baseline Histology | Accuracy | 74.0 Percentage |
| Study Participant Cytosponge Procedure Acceptability | Cytosponge™ Operating Characteristics as a Function of Baseline Histology | Specificity | 64.3 Percentage |
| Patients With GERD | Cytosponge™ Operating Characteristics as a Function of Baseline Histology | Sensitivity | 66.7 Percentage |
| Patients With GERD | Cytosponge™ Operating Characteristics as a Function of Baseline Histology | Accuracy | 69.2 Percentage |
| Patients With GERD | Cytosponge™ Operating Characteristics as a Function of Baseline Histology | Specificity | 100 Percentage |
| Low Grade Dysplasia | Cytosponge™ Operating Characteristics as a Function of Baseline Histology | Sensitivity | 77.8 Percentage |
| Low Grade Dysplasia | Cytosponge™ Operating Characteristics as a Function of Baseline Histology | Specificity | 0 Percentage |
| Low Grade Dysplasia | Cytosponge™ Operating Characteristics as a Function of Baseline Histology | Accuracy | 70.0 Percentage |
| High Grade Dysplasia | Cytosponge™ Operating Characteristics as a Function of Baseline Histology | Sensitivity | 83.3 Percentage |
| High Grade Dysplasia | Cytosponge™ Operating Characteristics as a Function of Baseline Histology | Accuracy | 83.3 Percentage |
| High Grade Dysplasia | Cytosponge™ Operating Characteristics as a Function of Baseline Histology | Specificity | NA Percentage |
Cytosponge™ Operating Characteristics vs Worst Histology Ever
The second secondary objective was to assess the operating characteristics of Cytosponge™ against the worst ever histology documented in the subject.
Time frame: Immediately post procedure up to 7 days +/- 3 days
| Arm | Measure | Group | Value (NUMBER) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Study Participant Cytosponge Procedure Acceptability | Cytosponge™ Operating Characteristics vs Worst Histology Ever | Sensitivity | 77 Percentage |
| Study Participant Cytosponge Procedure Acceptability | Cytosponge™ Operating Characteristics vs Worst Histology Ever | Specificity | 81 Percentage |
| Study Participant Cytosponge Procedure Acceptability | Cytosponge™ Operating Characteristics vs Worst Histology Ever | Positive Predictive Value | 87.5 Percentage |
| Study Participant Cytosponge Procedure Acceptability | Cytosponge™ Operating Characteristics vs Worst Histology Ever | Negative Predictive Value | 67.1 Percentage |
| Study Participant Cytosponge Procedure Acceptability | Cytosponge™ Operating Characteristics vs Worst Histology Ever | Accuracy | 78.5 Percentage |
Ongoing Safety Measures
To collect and analyze ongoing safety measures of Cytosponge use in the target population.
Time frame: Immediately post procedure up to 7 days +/- 3 days
| Arm | Measure | Group | Value (COUNT_OF_PARTICIPANTS) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Study Participant Cytosponge Procedure Acceptability | Ongoing Safety Measures | Dyspepsia | 1 Participants |
| Study Participant Cytosponge Procedure Acceptability | Ongoing Safety Measures | Vomiting | 1 Participants |
| Study Participant Cytosponge Procedure Acceptability | Ongoing Safety Measures | Chest Discomfort | 1 Participants |
| Study Participant Cytosponge Procedure Acceptability | Ongoing Safety Measures | Device Breakage | 2 Participants |
| Study Participant Cytosponge Procedure Acceptability | Ongoing Safety Measures | Not Coded | 3 Participants |
| Study Participant Cytosponge Procedure Acceptability | Ongoing Safety Measures | Oropharyngeal Pain | 4 Participants |
| Study Participant Cytosponge Procedure Acceptability | Ongoing Safety Measures | Throat Irritation | 2 Participants |
Operating Characteristics
The operating characteristics of this technique against a gold standard of upper endoscopy with biopsies for endoscopic surveillance in subjects with BE who demonstrate an adequate sample on Cytosponge assessment.
Time frame: Immediately post procedure up to 7 days +/- 3 days
| Arm | Measure | Group | Value (NUMBER) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Study Participant Cytosponge Procedure Acceptability | Operating Characteristics | Accuracy | 76 Percentage |
| Study Participant Cytosponge Procedure Acceptability | Operating Characteristics | Sensitivity | 75.5 Percentage |
| Study Participant Cytosponge Procedure Acceptability | Operating Characteristics | Specificity | 76.7 Percentage |
| Study Participant Cytosponge Procedure Acceptability | Operating Characteristics | Positive Predictive Value | 83.5 Percentage |
Summary of Abrasion, Bleeding, and Perforation Observed Via Endoscopy
The fourth secondary objective was to assess the degree of mucosal abrasion following Cytosponge™ administration, using a standardized scale. The incidence is presented in the data below for abrasion, bleeding and perforation observed during Endoscopy.
Time frame: Immediately post procedure up to 7 days +/- 3 days
| Arm | Measure | Group | Value (COUNT_OF_PARTICIPANTS) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Study Participant Cytosponge Procedure Acceptability | Summary of Abrasion, Bleeding, and Perforation Observed Via Endoscopy | Abrasion | 117 Participants |
| Study Participant Cytosponge Procedure Acceptability | Summary of Abrasion, Bleeding, and Perforation Observed Via Endoscopy | Bleeding | 58 Participants |
| Study Participant Cytosponge Procedure Acceptability | Summary of Abrasion, Bleeding, and Perforation Observed Via Endoscopy | Bleeding-From Cytosponge contact site | 14 Participants |
| Study Participant Cytosponge Procedure Acceptability | Summary of Abrasion, Bleeding, and Perforation Observed Via Endoscopy | Bleeding-From Biopsy Site | 56 Participants |
| Study Participant Cytosponge Procedure Acceptability | Summary of Abrasion, Bleeding, and Perforation Observed Via Endoscopy | Perforation | 0 Participants |
| Study Participant Cytosponge Procedure Acceptability | Summary of Abrasion, Bleeding, and Perforation Observed Via Endoscopy | Any of These 3 Conditions | 141 Participants |