Pathology Department, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, 75 Francis Street, MR-07-714C, Boston, MA, 02115-6105, USA.
Dig Dis Sci. 2018 Aug;63(8):2042-2051. doi: 10.1007/s10620-018-5151-z.
This review has provided a summary of the biology of goblet cell metaplasia in CLE as it pertains to BE. Goblet cells are terminally differentiated nonproliferative cells that have many overlapping histochemical characteristics with mucinous columnar cells and pseudogoblet cells. There is an abundance of evidence that suggests that use of goblet cells as a biomarker of BE, and its progression to malignancy, is problematic. Some of these limitations include the fact that the background non-goblet epithelium in most patients with CLE is biologically intestinalized and contains molecular abnormalities similar to goblet cell CLE, goblet cells fluctuate with time and decrease in number with progression of neoplasia, and pathologists have problems with interpretation, and distinction, of goblet cells from other types of cells in the esophagus. Sampling error results in sensitivity and specificity issues that limit its positive predictive value. Goblet cells are fewest in number in the same population of patients with CLE that are hardest to detect endoscopically (i.e., those with short or ultrashort CLE). Nevertheless, the risk of cancer in patients with short-segment BE, a condition difficult to distinguish from the stomach, is very low regardless of the presence or absence of goblet cells so it is unclear what the role of goblet cells is in these patients as a biomarker. Nevertheless, if the answer to the following question, "Would you as a gastroenterologist recommend surveillance for a patient with clear endoscopic evidence of CLE, particularly if it is ≥ 3 cm in length, but in which goblet cells were not reported to be present by the pathologist," is yes, then the US requirement for goblet cells as part of the criteria for "BE" is superfluous.
这篇综述总结了 CLE 中杯状细胞化生的生物学特性,因为它与 BE 有关。杯状细胞是终末分化的非增殖细胞,与黏液柱状细胞和假杯状细胞具有许多重叠的组织化学特征。有大量证据表明,使用杯状细胞作为 BE 的生物标志物及其向恶性肿瘤的进展存在问题。这些局限性包括以下事实:大多数 CLE 患者的背景非杯状上皮在生物学上是肠化的,并且含有与杯状细胞 CLE 相似的分子异常;杯状细胞随时间波动,随着肿瘤的进展数量减少;病理学家在解释和区分食管中的杯状细胞与其他类型的细胞方面存在问题。取样误差导致敏感性和特异性问题,限制了其阳性预测值。在 CLE 患者中,杯状细胞数量最少的是那些最难在内镜下检测到的(即那些 CLE 短或超短的)。然而,无论是否存在杯状细胞,短节段 BE 患者(一种很难与胃区分的疾病)的癌症风险非常低,因此不清楚杯状细胞在这些患者中作为生物标志物的作用是什么。然而,如果对以下问题的回答是肯定的,“作为一名胃肠病学家,您是否会建议对 CLE 内镜下有明确证据的患者进行监测,特别是如果 CLE 的长度≥3 厘米,但病理学家报告没有杯状细胞存在,”那么美国将杯状细胞作为“BE”标准一部分的要求是多余的。