Clinical Utility of EsoGuard® as a Triage Test for Endoscopy to Identify Barrett’s Esophagus in Fire Fighters

1. Introduction

Esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC) is the most common cancer of the esophagus in the United States (US), with an incidence that has been increasing over the last 40 years, particularly in white males, for whom the incidence has gone up more than 6-fold since the 1970’s.^[1-3] National statistics estimate there were 20,640 new cases of esophageal cancer, mostly adenocarcinomas, in 2022, with estimated 16,410 deaths.^[4] Despite advances in chemotherapy, radiotherapy, and surgical therapy, the prognosis for EAC remains poor, with a 5-year survival rate of only 20%. ^[4-5] Barrett’s Esophagus (BE) is a direct precursor to EAC and has well defined risk factors that characterize a “high-risk” population, with published guidelines and recommendations for screening from the American College of Gastroenterology (ACG) and other Gastroenterological societies. ^[6-7] This is because, contrary to the lethality of EAC, BE when detected early, can be successfully treated using endoscopic approaches such as radiofrequency or cryotherapy ablation with upwards of 80% success rates.^[8-10] However, most individuals, including those at elevated risk for disease, do not undergo recommended screening,^[11] likely due to barriers of conventional endoscopy including need for specialist referral and sedation, patient concerns regarding invasiveness of the procedure and complications, etc. Most recently, to bridge this gap, non-endoscopic cell collection devices such as EsoCheck® have been developed, and when paired with a biomarker test such as EsoGuard®, have been endorsed by the updated ACG guidelines and AGA clinical practice updates as a reasonable alternative to conventional upper endoscopy for BE screening.^[6-7]

One population of particular interest for BE/EAC screening are firefighters, who by nature of their occupation have ongoing exposure to multiple suspected and known carcinogenic agents, such as (but not limited to) formaldehyde, benzene, asbestos, and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons. In July of 2022, firefighting was designated a Group 1 carcinogen by the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC).^[12] Additionally, a recent pilot study from France suggests a link between specific occupational exposures (including those common to firefighters, such as asbestos, hydrocarbons, etc.) and esophageal cancer.^[13] Published literature has also shown relationships between firefighters and increased cancer mortality with firefighters having a 9% greater risk of getting cancer and a 14% greater risk of dying from cancer than the general population.^[14] Excess incidence of cancers of the digestive tract are observed within this population, namely esophageal and colorectal malignancies.^[14-15] As such, firefighters have the potential to significantly benefit from an easily accessible, minimally invasive, non-endoscopic screening test for BE/EAC. Early disease detection can guide physician decision-making, including determination of which patients warrant further evaluation and disease staging with upper endoscopy (UE).

This study evaluates clinical utility data captured from San Antonio firefighters who underwent clinically directed EsoGuard testing as part of two large cancer screening events in January 2023. To our knowledge, this was the first incidence of any large-scale screening for BE/EAC in U.S firefighters to date.

2. Materials Methods

2.3 EsoCheck® and EsoGuard®

EsoCheck® (EC) is an FDA cleared, non-endoscopic cell collection device (Figure 1) designed to circumferentially sample cells from a targeted region of the esophagus (Figure 2); EsoGuard® (EG) is a laboratory developed test (LDT) performed in a Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendment (CLIA) certified and College of American Pathologists (CAP) accredited lab that utilizes set of genetic assays and algorithms which examines the presence of cytosine methylation at 31 different genomic locations on the vimentin (VIM) and Cyclin-A1 (CCNA1) genes. EsoGuard has been clinically validated in a developmental study published in 2018 and shown to have a >90% sensitivity and >90% specificity in non-endoscopic detection of Barrett’s Esophagus (BE) or esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC).^[16]

• Download figure
• Open in new tab

Figure 1.

EsoCheck administration is a simple, non-invasive, non-endoscopic, office-based procedure that can be performed by a variety of healthcare providers including physicians, nurse practitioners, physician assistants, nurses, or other trained personnel usually in less than 5 minutes and without sedation or significant pre-procedure preparation.

• Download figure
• Open in new tab

Figure 2.

Non endoscopic cell-collection devices paired with a biomarker test (e.g., EsoCheck/EsoGuard) are deemed an acceptable alternative to UE to screen for BE, according to the 2022 ACG guidelines and AGA clinical practice updates for screening in Barrett’s Esophagus. ^[6-7]

3. Results

4. Discussion

One of the earliest suggestions of an association between firefighters and esophageal malignancy arose from a registry-based case-control study published in 2007. Based on records of 3,659 California firefighters, there was evidence that firefighting could be a risk factor for development of esophageal cancer, with an odds ratio of 1.48 (95% CI 1.14– 1.91). ^[17]

In a pooled cohort of U.S firefighters from San Francisco, Chicago, and Philadelphia, evaluating mortality and cancer incidence from 1950 to 2009 (later with updated mortality data through 2016), the standardized mortality ratio (ratio of observed to expected number of deaths) was 1.31-1.39 for esophageal cancer; the standardized incidence ratio (ratio of observed malignancies to the expected number of cases estimated using U.S incidence rates) was 1.62.^[14-15] Similar results were found by the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) in their study of California firefighters from 1988-2007 with an odds ratio of 1.6 for esophageal cancer. ^[18] In Western countries, the most common type of esophageal cancer is EAC, which is known to arise from the pre-malignant condition of BE. ^[19] Chronic GERD has long been associated with the development of BE and EAC, with additional demographic and lifestyle characteristics such as male sex, older age (≥50 years), white race, tobacco smoking history, obesity, and family history being well-described and quantified as risk factors. ^[20] As such, high-risk patients with multiple risk factors are recommended for BE screening, followed by recommendations for long-term surveillance or treatment of those diagnosed with disease.

This study is the first to evaluate clinical utility of a nonendoscopic cell collection device (EsoCheck) paired with a biomarker test (EsoGuard) for screening of BE/EAC in the high-risk firefighter’s population. EsoGuard, when used to analyze samples collected using EsoCheck, is intended to serve as a screening tool and triage test for UE in patients determined to be at risk for BE/EAC. Given EsoGuard’s >90% sensitivity and specificity for detection of intestinal metaplasia, a positive result indicates the evaluated patient has a high pre-test (i.e., pre-endoscopy) probability for presence of disease along the BE to EAC spectrum. ^[16] In contrast, a negative EsoGuard result indicates a low pre-test (i.e., pre-endoscopy) probability for disease, and serves as a better-tolerated alternative to screening endoscopy for ruling out disease. It is important to note that EsoGuard is not intended as a replacement for UE to investigate patients with alarm symptoms or to diagnose other esophageal pathologies. Indeed, the results of this study support the clinical use of EsoGuard in this manner, with a 100% correlation between the EsoGuard results and subsequent endoscopy referral pattern. All 28 EsoGuard positive patients were referred to a GI specialist for confirmatory evaluation and disease staging with UE. All EsoGuard negative patients without “red flag” symptoms were deemed effectively screened and were not referred by their physician for any additional endoscopy workup.

The EsoGuard positivity rate within the tested population (7.27%) is consistent with expected BE prevalence rates from the literature (5-15%).^[21] The presence of GERD and/or heartburn symptoms in >80% of tested individuals, and higher EsoGuard positivity rate among those aged 50 and older is consistent with established risk factors. Taken together, this study provides a real-world example of how EsoGuard used with EsoCheck (EC/EG) can improve endoscopy resource utilization while still ensuring appropriate screening of an at-risk population for early disease detection. Indeed, EC/EG may significantly improve patient capture and disease detection, as it does not suffer from the same limitations as endoscopy when used as a screening test. Prior to development of nonendoscopic testing approaches (and even now), the overall BE screening rates were low, even in high-risk patients; less than 10% of patients with EAC were ever diagnosed with BE prior to discovering their malignancy. ^[22] Unlike endoscopy, EC/EG does not require a specialists’ expertise or specialized procedural setting, does not require patient sedation, and can be done with little to no patient preparation in any office setting. As seen in this firefighter screening experience, EsoCheck can be administered across large numbers of patients in an efficient and well-tolerated fashion with circumferential cell sampling and high DNA yield. Table 5 provides a summary of the EsoCheck characteristics (compared with upper endoscopy) and patient experience variables which the authors believe contributed to successful screening of nearly 400 firefighters over only four days.

EsoCheck was successfully swallowed in >99% of patients, and there were no complications reported. Additionally, recent literature suggests that use of endoscopy with punch biopsy as an initial screening test results in a high rate of missed diagnoses, possibly due to poor compliance with structured biopsy protocols, and inability to sample large areas of the esophageal mucosa.^[24] As such, methods of BE detection with high sensitivity and broader cell sampling are needed for more effective screening. Firefighters in particular stand to strongly benefit from testing that is effective, efficient, easily tolerated, and allows for minimal to no “out of service time,” allowing them to respond to calls if needed.

We recognize certain limitations to our study, including the observational nature and single-provider experience. Of note, during the first screening weekend, occupational exposure was not included in ICD-10 coding, as the provider was not aware of this option. Thus, the ICD-10 data presented within this manuscript does not accurately reflect the prevalence of that specific risk factor among the screened individuals. It is expected that as firefighters, all participants would have some degree of occupational exposure and associated risk for disease. Additionally, given that most lifestyle risk factors and obesity were patient-reported, these were excluded from current analysis, as they require additional provider validation.

This study was also not intended to validate the EsoGuard assay performance, but rather to evaluate the clinical utility as a screening tool and triage test for a large, high-risk group of individuals. Future directions for study would include evaluation of an even larger and geographically diverse population of firefighters, more comprehensive collection of individual risk factors, and longitudinal follow-up which could be powered for subgroup analysis. While the current study only tested active-duty firefighters, future studies may benefit from testing of retirees who have the longest duration of occupational exposure and would be at highest risk. However, despite the above limitations, we present the largest experience to date of BE/EAC screening in firefighters utilizing nonendoscopic strategies. This enabled effective and efficient management of nearly 400 firefighters who might otherwise not have been screened.

Conclusion

This study capturing real-world data on the use of EsoGuard for early detection of BE/EAC in firefighters demonstrates the ability of nonendoscopic strategies to efficiently screen high-risk populations in a manner that is well tolerated, has high result yield, and effectively drives physician management decisions.