Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 284

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 79 of the 79 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Barrett Esophagus and Risk of Esophageal Cancer: A Clinical Review

Spechler, Stuart Jon·2013·JAMA

Abstract

IMPORTANCE: Barrett esophagus, a complication of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD), predisposes patients to esophageal adenocarcinoma, a tumor that has increased in incidence more than 7-fold over the past several decades. Controversy exists regarding the issues of endoscopic screening and surveillance for Barrett esophagus, treatment for the underlying GERD, and the role of endoscopic eradication therapy. OBJECTIVES: To review current concepts on the pathogenesis, diagnosis, and treatment of Barrett esophagus; to discuss the importance of dysplasia and the role of endoscopic eradication therapy for its treatment; and to review current management guidelines. EVIDENCE REVIEW: MEDLINE and the Cochrane Library were searched from 1984 to April 2013. Additional citations were obtained by reviewing references from selected research and review articles. FINDINGS: Risk factors for cancer in Barrett esophagus include chronic GERD, hiatal hernia, advanced age, male sex, white race, cigarette smoking, and obesity with an intra-abdominal body fat distribution. The annual risk of esophageal cancer is approximately 0.25% for patients without dysplasia and 6% for patients with high-grade dysplasia. High-quality studies have found no significant differences in cancer incidence for patients with Barrett esophagus whose GERD is treated medically or surgically. Endoscopic eradication therapy with radiofrequency ablation significantly reduces the frequency of progression to cancer for patients with high-grade dysplasia. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Endoscopic screening is recommended for patients with multiple risk factors for cancer in Barrett esophagus. For patients with Barrett esophagus without dysplasia, endoscopic surveillance at intervals of 3 to 5 years is recommended, and GERD is treated much as it is for patients without Barrett esophagus. Endoscopic eradication therapy is the treatment of choice for high-grade dysplasia and is an option for low-grade dysplasia. Endoscopic eradication therapy is not recommended for the general population of patients with nondysplastic Barrett esophagus.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1001/jama.2013.226450

Cites

79 of 79 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 79 references

Cited by

See all 284

Metadata

Authors
Spechler, S. J.
Venue
JAMA
Published
2013-08-14
Volume
310
Issue
6
Pages
627
ISSN
  • 0002-9955 (ISSN-L)
  • 0098-7484
OpenAlex
W2144409354
Cited by
284
References
79
FWCI
30.84
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Barrett Esophagus and Risk of Esophageal Cancer: A Clinical Review. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1001/jama.2013.226450
The paper
Spechler, S. J. (2013). Barrett Esophagus and Risk of Esophageal Cancer: A Clinical Review. JAMA. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2013.226450

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.