A novel model for Ki67 assessment in breast cancer

被引:29
|
作者
Romero, Quinci [1 ]
Bendahl, Par-Ola [1 ]
Ferno, Marten [1 ]
Grabau, Dorthe [3 ]
Borgquist, Signe [1 ,2 ]
机构
[1] Lund Univ, Div Oncol, Dept Clin Sci Lund, SE-22185 Lund, Sweden
[2] Skane Univ Hosp, Dept Oncol, Lund, Sweden
[3] Lund Univ, Dept Clin Sci, Div Pathol, SE-22185 Lund, Sweden
来源
DIAGNOSTIC PATHOLOGY | 2014年 / 9卷
关键词
Ki67; Breast cancer; Proliferation; Counting strategy; Statistical model; PROLIFERATIVE ACTIVITY; KI-67; ANTIGEN; MIB-1; RECOMMENDATIONS; METAANALYSIS; BIOMARKERS; MARKERS;
D O I
10.1186/1746-1596-9-118
中图分类号
R36 [病理学];
学科分类号
100104 ;
摘要
Background: Ki67 is currently the proliferation biomarker of choice, with both prognostic and predictive value in breast cancer. A lack of consensus regarding Ki67 use in pre-analytical, analytical and post-analytical practice may hinder its formal acceptance in the clinical setting. Methods: One hundred breast cancer samples were stained for Ki67. A standard estimation of Ki67 using fixed denominators of 200, 400 and 1 000 counted tumor cells was performed, and a cut-off at 20% was applied, Ki67static. A novel stepwise counting strategy for Ki67 estimation, Ki67(scs), was developed based on rejection regions derived from exact two-sided binomial confidence intervals for proportions. Ki67scs was defined by the following parameters: the cut-off (20%), minimum (50) and maximum (400) number of tumor cells to count, increment (10) and overall significance level of the test procedure (0.05). Results from Ki67scs were compared to results from the Ki67static estimation with fixed denominators. Results: For Ki67scs, the median number of tumor cells needed to determine Ki67 status was 100; the average, 175. Among 38 highly proliferative samples, the average Ki67scs fraction was 45%. For these samples, the fraction decreased from 39% to 37% to 35% with static counting of 200, 400 and 1 000 cells, respectively. The largest absolute difference between the estimation methods was 23% (42% (Ki67scs) vs. 19% (Ki67static)) and resulted in an altered sample classification. Among the 82 unequivocal samples, 74 samples received the same classification using both Ki67scs and Ki67static. Of the eight disparate samples, seven were classified highly proliferative by Ki67static when 200 cells were counted; whereas all eight cases were classified as low proliferative when 1 000 cells were counted. Conclusions: Ki67 estimation using fixed denominators may be inadequate, particularly for tumors demonstrating extensive heterogeneity. We propose a time saving stepwise counting strategy, which acknowledges small highly proliferative hot spots. Virtual Slides: The virtual slide(s) for this article can be found here: http://www.diagnosticpathology.diagnomx.eu/vs/3588156111195336
引用
收藏
页数:8
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] Expression, assessment and significance of Ki67 expression in breast cancer: an update
    Lashen, Ayat Gamal
    Toss, Michael S.
    Ghannam, Suzan Fathy
    Makhlouf, Shorouk
    Green, Andrew
    Mongan, Nigel P.
    Rakha, Emad
    JOURNAL OF CLINICAL PATHOLOGY, 2023, 76 (06) : 357 - 364
  • [22] An interobserver reproducibility analysis of size-set semiautomatic counting for Ki67 assessment in breast cancer
    Wang, Yi-xing
    Wang, Yuan-yuan
    Yang, Cheng-gang
    Bu, Hong
    Yang, Wen-tao
    Wang, Li
    Xu, Wen-mang
    Zhao, Xi-long
    Zhao, Wen-xing
    Li, Lei
    Song, Shu-ling
    Yang, Ju-lun
    BREAST, 2020, 49 : 225 - 232
  • [23] A Scoring Method for Immunohistochemical Staining on Ki67
    Guo, Rui
    Ma, Li
    Bai, Xiomei
    Miao, Li
    Li, Zongfang
    Yang, Jun
    APPLIED IMMUNOHISTOCHEMISTRY & MOLECULAR MORPHOLOGY, 2021, 29 (03) : E20 - E28
  • [24] Ki67 assessment in invasive luminal breast cancer: a comparative study between different scoring methods
    Lashen, Ayat
    Toss, Michael S.
    Green, Andrew R.
    Mongan, Nigel P.
    Rakha, Emad
    HISTOPATHOLOGY, 2022, 81 (06) : 786 - 798
  • [25] Validity of the proliferation markers Ki67, TOP2A, and RacGAP1 in molecular subgroups of breast cancer
    Milde-Langosch, Karin
    Karn, Thomas
    Mueller, Volkmar
    Witzel, Isabell
    Rody, Achim
    Schmidt, Markus
    Wirtz, Ralph M.
    BREAST CANCER RESEARCH AND TREATMENT, 2013, 137 (01) : 57 - 67
  • [26] The prognostic significance of Ki67 before and after neoadjuvant chemotherapy in breast cancer
    Jones, Robin L.
    Salter, Janine
    A'Hern, Roger
    Nerurkar, Ash
    Parton, Marina
    Reis-Filho, Jorge S.
    Smith, Ian E.
    Dowsett, Mitchell
    BREAST CANCER RESEARCH AND TREATMENT, 2009, 116 (01) : 53 - 68
  • [27] Impact of tissue sampling on accuracy of Ki67 immunohistochemistry evaluation in breast cancer
    Besusparis, Justinas
    Plancoulaine, Benoit
    Rasmusson, Allan
    Augulis, Renaldas
    Green, Andrew R.
    Ellis, Ian O.
    Laurinaviciene, Aida
    Herlin, Paulette
    Laurinavicius, Arvydas
    DIAGNOSTIC PATHOLOGY, 2016, 11
  • [28] Ki67 and proliferation in breast cancer
    Pathmanathan, Nirmala
    Balleine, Rosemary L.
    JOURNAL OF CLINICAL PATHOLOGY, 2013, 66 (06) : 512 - 516
  • [29] Ki67 targeted strategies for cancer therapy
    Yang, C.
    Zhang, J.
    Ding, M.
    Xu, K.
    Li, L.
    Mao, L.
    Zheng, J.
    CLINICAL & TRANSLATIONAL ONCOLOGY, 2018, 20 (05) : 570 - 575
  • [30] Developments in Ki67 and other biomarkers for treatment decision making in breast cancer
    Sheri, A.
    Dowsett, M.
    ANNALS OF ONCOLOGY, 2012, 23 : 219 - 227