Reliability of Ki67 visual scoring app compared to eyeball estimate and digital image analysis and its prognostic significance in hormone receptor-positive breast cancer.

Tytuł:: Reliability of Ki67 visual scoring app compared to eyeball estimate and digital image analysis and its prognostic significance in hormone receptor-positive breast cancer.
Autorzy:: Arun I; Department of Pathology, Tata Medical Center, Newtown, Kolkata, India.
Venkatesh S; Department of Pathology, Tata Medical Center, Newtown, Kolkata, India.
Ahmed R; Department of Breast Oncosurgery, Tata Medical Center, Newtown, Kolkata, India.
Agrawal SK; Department of Breast Oncosurgery, Tata Medical Center, Newtown, Kolkata, India.
Leung SCY; University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada.
Źródło:: APMIS : acta pathologica, microbiologica, et immunologica Scandinavica [APMIS] 2021 Aug; Vol. 129 (8), pp. 489-502. Date of Electronic Publication: 2021 Jun 24.
Typ publikacji:: Comparative Study; Journal Article
Język:: English
Imprint Name(s):: Publication: Copenhagen : Munksgaard
Original Publication: Copenhagen : Munksgaard, c1988-
MeSH Terms:: Mobile Applications*
Breast Neoplasms/*diagnosis
Image Processing, Computer-Assisted/*methods
Ki-67 Antigen/*metabolism
Receptors, Estrogen/*metabolism
Biomarkers, Tumor/genetics ; Biomarkers, Tumor/metabolism ; Breast Neoplasms/genetics ; Breast Neoplasms/metabolism ; Breast Neoplasms/pathology ; Eye ; Female ; Humans ; Immunohistochemistry ; Ki-67 Antigen/genetics ; Prognosis ; Receptor, ErbB-2/genetics ; Receptor, ErbB-2/metabolism ; Receptors, Estrogen/genetics
References:: Perou CM, Sørlie T, Eisen MB, van de Rijn M, Jeffrey SS, Rees CA, et al. Molecular portraits of human breast tumours. Nature. 2000;406:747-52.
Coates AS, Winer EP, Goldhirsch A, Gelber RD, Gnant M, Piccart-Gebhart M, et al. Tailoring therapies-improving the management of early breast cancer: St Gallen International Expert Consensus on the Primary Therapy of Early Breast Cancer 2015. Annal Oncol. 2015;26:1533-46.
Kos Z, Dabbs DJ. Biomarker assessment and molecular testing for prognostication in breast cancer. Histopathology. 2016;68:70-85.
Wirapati P, Sotiriou C, Kunkel S, Farmer P, Pradervand S, Haibe-Kains B, et al. Meta-analysis of gene expression profiles in breast cancer: toward a unified understanding of breast cancer subtyping and prognosis signatures. Breast Cancer Res. 2008;10:R65.
Dowsett M, Nielsen TO, A'Hern R, Bartlett J, Coombes RC, Cuzick J, et al. Assessment of Ki67 in breast cancer: recommendations from the International Ki67 in Breast Cancer working group. J. Natl Cancer Inst. 2011;103:1656-64.
Criscitiello C, Disalvatore D, De Laurentiis M, Gelao L, Fumagalli L, Locatelli M, et al. High Ki-67 score is indicative of a greater benefit from adjuvant chemotherapy when added to endocrine therapy in luminal B HER2 negative and node-positive breast cancer. Breast. 2014;23:69-75.
Denkert C, von Minckwitz G. Reply to Ki67 in breast cancer: a useful prognostic marker!. Annal Oncol. 2014;25:542-3.
Polley M-Y, Leung SCY, McShane LM, Gao D, Hugh JC, Mastropasqua MG, et al. An international Ki67 reproducibility study. J. Natl Cancer Inst. 2013;105:1897-906.
de Azambuja E, Cardoso F, de Castro G, Colozza M, Mano MS, Durbecq V, et al. Ki-67 as prognostic marker in early breast cancer: a meta-analysis of published studies involving 12,155 patients. Br. J. Cancer. 2007;96:1504-13.
Inwald EC, Klinkhammer-Schalke M, Hofstädter F, Zeman F, Koller M, Gerstenhauer M, et al. Ki-67 is a prognostic parameter in breast cancer patients: results of a large population-based cohort of a cancer registry. Breast Cancer Res. Treat. 2013;139:539-52.
Untch* M, Gerber B, Harbeck N, Jackisch C, Marschner N, Möbus V, et al. primary therapy of early breast cancer evidence, controversies, consensus - opinion of a german team of experts (zurich 2013). Breast Care. 2013;2013:221-9.
Polley M-Y, Leung SCY, Gao D, Mastropasqua MG, Zabaglo LA, Bartlett JMS, et al. An international study to increase concordance in Ki67 scoring. Modern Pathol. 2015;28:778-86.
Leung SCY, Nielsen TO, Zabaglo L, Arun I, Badve SS, Bane AL, et al. Analytical validation of a standardized scoring protocol for Ki67: phase 3 of an international multicenter collaboration. NPJ Breast Cancer. 2016;2:16014.
Wolff AC, Hammond MEH, Hicks DG, Dowsett M, McShane LM, Allison KH, et al. Recommendations for human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 testing in breast cancer: American Society of Clinical Oncology/College of American Pathologists clinical practice guideline update. J Clin Oncol. 2013;31:3997-4013.
Arima N, Nishimura R, Osako T, Nishiyama Y, Fujisue M, Okumura Y, et al. A Comparison of the hot spot and the average cancer cell counting methods and the optimal cutoff point of the Ki-67 index for luminal type breast cancer. Oncology. 2016;90:43-50.
Jang MH, Kim HJ, Chung YR, Lee Y, Park SY. A comparison of Ki-67 counting methods in luminal Breast Cancer: The Average Method vs. the Hot Spot Method. PLoS One. 2017;12:e0172031.
Mikami Y, Ueno T, Yoshimura K, Tsuda H, Kurosumi M, Masuda S, et al. Interobserver concordance of Ki67 labeling index in breast cancer: Japan Breast Cancer Research Group Ki67 ring study. Cancer Sci. 2013;104:1539-43.
Nielsen TO, Leung SCY, Rimm DL, Dodson A, Acs B, Badve S, et al. Assessment of Ki67 in breast cancer: updated recommendations from the international Ki67 in Breast Cancer Working Group. J. Natl Cancer Inst. 2020; (Epub ahead of print). https://doi.org/10.1093/jnci/djaa201.
Robertson S, Acs B, Lippert M, Hartman J. Prognostic potential of automated Ki67 evaluation in breast cancer: different hot spot definitions versus true global score. Breast Cancer Res. Treat. 2020;183:161-75.
Fulawka L, Halon A. Ki-67 evaluation in breast cancer: the daily diagnostic practice. Indian J Pathol Microbiol. 2017;60:177-84.
Reid MD, Bagci P, Ohike N, Saka B, Erbarut Seven I, Dursun N, et al. Calculation of the Ki67 index in pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors: a comparative analysis of four counting methodologies. Modern Pathol. 2015;28:686-94.
Zhong F, Bi R, Yu B, Yang F, Yang W, Shui R. A comparison of visual assessment and automated digital image analysis of Ki67 labeling index in breast cancer. PLoS One. 2016;11:e0150505.
Desmeules P, Hovington H, Nguilé-Makao M, Léger C, Caron A, Lacombe L, et al. Comparison of digital image analysis and visual scoring of KI-67 in prostate cancer prognosis after prostatectomy. Diagnostic Pathol. 2015;10:67.
Dzulkifli FA, Mashor MYMY, Jaafar H. An overview of recent counting methods for Ki67 IHC staining. J Biomed Clin Sci 3: 10-7.
Gudlaugsson E, Skaland I, Janssen EAM, Smaaland R, Shao Z, Malpica A, et al. Comparison of the effect of different techniques for measurement of Ki67 proliferation on reproducibility and prognosis prediction accuracy in breast cancer. Histopathology. 2012;61:1134-44.
Denkert C, Budczies J, von Minckwitz G, Wienert S, Loibl S, Klauschen F. Strategies for developing Ki67 as a useful biomarker in breast cancer. Breast. 2015;24(Suppl 2):S67-72.
Stålhammar G, Fuentes Martinez N, Lippert M, Tobin NP, Mølholm I, Kis L, et al. Digital image analysis outperforms manual biomarker assessment in breast cancer. Modern Pathol. 2016;29:318-29.
Klauschen F, Wienert S, Schmitt WD, Loibl S, Gerber B, Blohmer J-U, et al. Standardized Ki67 diagnostics using automated scoring-clinical validation in the GeparTrio Breast Cancer Study. Clin Cancer Res. 2015;21:3651-7.
Koopman T, Buikema HJ, Hollema H, de Bock GH, van der Vegt B. Digital image analysis of Ki67 proliferation index in breast cancer using virtual dual staining on whole tissue sections: clinical validation and inter-platform agreement. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2018;169:33-42.
Acs B, Pelekanou V, Bai Y, Martinez-Morilla S, Toki M, Leung SCY, et al. Ki67 reproducibility using digital image analysis: an inter-platform and inter-operator study. Lab. Invest. 2019;99:107-17.
Riber-Hansen R, Vainer B, Steiniche T. Digital image analysis: a review of reproducibility, stability and basic requirements for optimal results. APMIS. 2012;120:276-89.
Nielsen PS, Bentzer NK, Jensen V, Steiniche T, Jylling AM. Immunohistochemical Ki-67/KL1 double stains increase accuracy of Ki-67 indices in breast cancer and simplify automated image analysis. Appl Immunohistochem Molecular Morphol. 2014;22:568-76.
Røge R, Riber-Hansen R, Nielsen S, Vyberg M. Proliferation assessment in breast carcinomas using digital image analysis based on virtual Ki67/cytokeratin double staining. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2016;158:11-9.
Leung SCY, Nielsen TO, Zabaglo LA, Arun I, Badve SS, Bane AL, et al. Analytical validation of a standardised scoring protocol for Ki67 immunohistochemistry on breast cancer excision whole sections: an international multicentre collaboration. Histopathology. 2019;75:225-35.
Robertson J, Dowsett M, Bliss J, Morden J, Wilcox M, Evans A, et al. Abstract GS1-03: Peri-operative aromatase inhibitor treatment in determining or predicting longterm outcome in early breast cancer - The POETIC* Trial (CRUK/07/015). Can Res 2018;78:GS1-03-GS1.
Wishart GC, Rakha E, Green A, Ellis I, Ali HR, Provenzano E, et al. Inclusion of KI67 significantly improves performance of the PREDICT prognostication and prediction model for early breast cancer. BMC Cancer. 2014;14:908.
Bustreo S, Osella-Abate S, Cassoni P, Donadio M, Airoldi M, Pedani F, et al. Optimal Ki67 cut-off for luminal breast cancer prognostic evaluation: a large case series study with a long-term follow-up. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2016;157:363-71.
Contributed Indexing:: Keywords: Ki67 digital image analysis; Ki67 eyeball estimate; Ki67 scoring; Ki67 visual scoring app; hormone receptor-positive breast cancer; prognostic Ki67 cut points
Substance Nomenclature:: 0 (Biomarkers, Tumor)
0 (Ki-67 Antigen)
0 (Receptors, Estrogen)
EC 2.7.10.1 (ERBB2 protein, human)
EC 2.7.10.1 (Receptor, ErbB-2)
Entry Date(s):: Date Created: 20210530 Date Completed: 20210823 Latest Revision: 20210823
Update Code:: 20240105
DOI:: 10.1111/apm.13156
PMID:: 34053140
: Czasopismo naukowe

Pełny tekst

We analysed the reproducibility of Ki67 labelling index (LI) between two scorers using the International Ki67 Working Group (IKWG) global methods on an Android application (APP), correlated the APP and eyeball estimate (EBE) with digital image analysis (DIA) scores and determined the prognostic significance of Ki67LI. Global weighted (GW) and global unweighted (GUW) Ki67 app scores of hormone receptor-positive and HER2 (human epidermal growth factor receptor 2)-negative breast cancer patients were obtained. Reproducibility of Ki67LI between 2 scorers and correlation of APP and EBE scores with DIA scores were performed. The prognostic significance of APP scores and its correlation with other clinico-pathologic variables were evaluated. The intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC) between 2 scorers showed excellent reliability with both GW and GUW methods. ICC between DIA and APP scores was significantly greater than DIA versus EBE. The three categories of APP scores based on median value and cut points of 10%, 18% and 38% were significantly associated with poor DFS. On multivariate analysis, significant association between Ki67LI, tumour size, nodal involvement and DFS was noted. Our study shows that the visual Ki67 scoring app is effective in bringing consistency to KI67LI and APP scores showed significant correlation with DFS.
(© 2021 Scandinavian Societies for Medical Microbiology and Pathology.)

Zaloguj się, aby uzyskać dostęp do pełnego tekstu.

Informacja