Back

Non-Endoscopic Screening for Barrett's Esophagus Using a DNA Methylation-Based Assay: 18-Month Real-World Experience in 11,991 Patients

Smith, M. S.; Chen, W. T.; Kotfila, R. P.; Panzarella, P. S.; Le, I. T.; Verma, S.; Lee, V. T.; Aklog, L.

2025-11-21 gastroenterology
10.1101/2025.11.20.25340693 medRxiv
Show abstract

BackgroundBarretts esophagus (BE), characterized by specialized intestinal metaplasia (SIM), is the precursor to esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC). Despite published BE screening guidelines for at-risk individuals, uptake of endoscopic screening remains low. We present 18 months of real-world data on non-endoscopic BE screening using EsoGuard(R) (EG), the first commercially available U.S. molecular biomarker test for this purpose, performed on esophageal cell samples collected with the swallowable EsoCheck(R) (EC) balloon-capsule device. MethodsWe retrospectively analyzed EC performance and EG results in patients tested commercially from January 2023 to June 2024. A subset enrolled in a registry underwent follow-up endoscopy. Multivariable logistic regression was used to evaluate risk factors associated with (1) positive EG results, and (2) confirmed BE (SIM [&ge;]1 cm). ResultsAmong 11,991 tested patients, 11,355 (94.7%) had successful EC cell collection, averaging under 2 minutes with no serious adverse events. EG was positive in 16.6% of patients, with positivity increasing by age; age > 50 years was the strongest individual risk factor for predicting a positive EG result. Among 177 EG-positive registry patients who underwent endoscopy, 59 (33.3%) had SIM, of which 33 met American College of Gastroenterology criteria for BE and 26 had ultra-short SIM (<1 cm). Dysplasia was found in 3 patients: 1 HGD, 1 LGD, and 1 indefinite for dysplasia (IND). ConclusionsWe report here the largest real-world experience of EG and EC to date, demonstrating excellent safety, tolerability, and scalability. EG detects both guideline-recognized and ultra-short SIM, supporting its utility as a non-invasive BE screening tool.

Matching journals

The top 2 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
Gastroenterology
40 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
41.1%
2
Gut
36 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
15.0%
50% of probability mass above
3
Nature Biomedical Engineering
42 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
7.1%
4
American Journal of Gastroenterology
15 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
4.3%
5
Med
38 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
3.7%
6
Science Translational Medicine
111 papers in training set
Top 1%
3.2%
7
Cellular and Molecular Gastroenterology and Hepatology
41 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
2.7%
8
British Journal of Cancer
42 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
1.8%
9
Nature Genetics
240 papers in training set
Top 5%
1.5%
10
Cell Reports Medicine
140 papers in training set
Top 5%
1.4%
11
Nature Communications
4913 papers in training set
Top 56%
1.3%
12
The Journal of Molecular Diagnostics
36 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
1.2%
13
eBioMedicine
130 papers in training set
Top 3%
0.9%
14
Neurogastroenterology & Motility
13 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
0.8%
15
npj Precision Oncology
48 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.8%
16
Nature Medicine
117 papers in training set
Top 4%
0.8%
17
PLOS ONE
4510 papers in training set
Top 65%
0.8%
18
Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology
25 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
0.8%
19
Inflammatory Bowel Diseases
15 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
0.8%
20
Modern Pathology
21 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
0.7%
21
BMC Medicine
163 papers in training set
Top 8%
0.7%
22
Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention
17 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
0.7%
23
Scientific Reports
3102 papers in training set
Top 79%
0.5%