Brooke Brown
Current Organizations / Institutes
The organizations/institutes from the scholar's latest article
Research Subjects
Research Interests
Brooke Brown has a total of 8 co-authors. Here are the top co-authors by number of shared publications:
- Allon Kahn
Division of Gastroenterology & Hepatology, Mayo Clinic, Phoenix, AZ 85054, USA
1 shared publication - Cadman L. Leggett
Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, USA
1 shared publication - Don Chamil Codipilly
Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, USA
1 shared publication - Francisco C. Ramirez
Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Mayo Clinic, Scottsdale, Arizona, USA
1 shared publication - Jennifer M. Kolb
Vatche & Tamar Manoukian Division of Digestive Diseases, University of California, Los Angeles, California, USA
1 shared publication - Margaret M. Paul
Mayo Clinic
1 shared publication
Latest Publications
- Open Access
- 18 February 2026
- Published by Wolters Kluwer Health in Clinical and Translational Gastroenterology
- Vol. 17 (4) , e01001
Patient-Reported Barriers to On-Time Surveillance After Successful Endoscopic Eradication of Barrett's Esophagus Neoplasia: A Multicenter Qualitative Interview Study
INTRODUCTION: Ongoing surveillance after successful endoscopic eradication therapy for Barrett's esophagus (BE)-related neoplasia is essential to detect and manage recurrence. Despite established surveillance interval recommendations after complete eradication of intestinal metaplasia (CE-IM), patient compliance with repeat endoscopy is frequently suboptimal. Understanding patient drivers to adherence is essential to inform interventions that address the high rates of overdue surveillance and loss to follow-up. METHODS: Patients with BE-related neoplasia who achieved CE-IM were eligible for inclusion and classified as delayed or on-time for endoscopic surveillance. Patients were prospectively enrolled and participated in structured virtual interviews designed to explore barriers and facilitators to on-time care. A rapid qualitative analysis approach was applied, continuing until thematic saturation was reached. RESULTS: Thirty-nine patients were interviewed: 22 (56.4%) were delayed, and 17 (43.6%) were on-time for surveillance. Patients in the delayed group had longer mean BE segment lengths and a higher prevalence of tobacco use. Geographic distance from the treatment center was the most frequently cited barrier to follow-up (n = 17; 43.5%). Other common barriers were access limitations, financial concerns, misunderstanding of disease course, and test-related anxiety. DISCUSSION: Patient-related drivers of delay in postendoscopic eradication therapy surveillance are largely logistical, socioeconomical, and psychological in nature. Solutions to reduce the significant burden on the patient and achieve timely surveillance may include transitioning patients back to their local endoscopists after CE-IM or incorporating nonendoscopic surveillance methods through patient centered approaches.
- 18 February 2026
- Published by Wolters Kluwer Health in Clinical and Translational Gastroenterology
- Vol. 17 (4) , e01001
Open AccessPatient-Reported Barriers to On-Time Surveillance After Successful Endoscopic Eradication of Barrett's Esophagus Neoplasia: A Multicenter Qualitative Interview Study
INTRODUCTION: Ongoing surveillance after successful endoscopic eradication therapy for Barrett's esophagus (BE)-related neoplasia is essential to detect and manage recurrence. Despite established surveillance interval recommendations after complete eradication of intestinal metaplasia (CE-IM), patient compliance with repeat endoscopy is frequently suboptimal. Understanding patient drivers to adherence is essential to inform interventions that address the high rates of overdue surveillance and loss to follow-up. METHODS: Patients with BE-related neoplasia who achieved CE-IM were eligible for inclusion and classified as delayed or on-time for endoscopic surveillance. Patients were prospectively enrolled and participated in structured virtual interviews designed to explore barriers and facilitators to on-time care. A rapid qualitative analysis approach was applied, continuing until thematic saturation was reached. RESULTS: Thirty-nine patients were interviewed: 22 (56.4%) were delayed, and 17 (43.6%) were on-time for surveillance. Patients in the delayed group had longer mean BE segment lengths and a higher prevalence of tobacco use. Geographic distance from the treatment center was the most frequently cited barrier to follow-up (n = 17; 43.5%). Other common barriers were access limitations, financial concerns, misunderstanding of disease course, and test-related anxiety. DISCUSSION: Patient-related drivers of delay in postendoscopic eradication therapy surveillance are largely logistical, socioeconomical, and psychological in nature. Solutions to reduce the significant burden on the patient and achieve timely surveillance may include transitioning patients back to their local endoscopists after CE-IM or incorporating nonendoscopic surveillance methods through patient centered approaches.