15
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Prognostic value of automated KI67 scoring in breast cancer: a centralised evaluation of 8088 patients from 10 study groups

      research-article
      1 , , 2 , 2 , 1 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 15 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24 , 25 , 26 , 27 , 27 , 27 , 28 , 29 , 30 , 30 , 1 , 1 , 31 , 32 , 31 , 4 , 30 , 1 , 33 , 2 , 34 , 4 , 30 , 31 , 32 , 23
      Breast Cancer Research : BCR
      BioMed Central
      Breast cancer, Automated KI67, Visual KI67, Prognostication

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          The value of KI67 in breast cancer prognostication has been questioned due to concerns on the analytical validity of visual KI67 assessment and methodological limitations of published studies. Here, we investigate the prognostic value of automated KI67 scoring in a large, multicentre study, and compare this with pathologists’ visual scores available in a subset of patients.

          Methods

          We utilised 143 tissue microarrays containing 15,313 tumour tissue cores from 8088 breast cancer patients in 10 collaborating studies. A total of 1401 deaths occurred during a median follow-up of 7.5 years. Centralised KI67 assessment was performed using an automated scoring protocol. The relationship of KI67 levels with 10-year breast cancer specific survival (BCSS) was investigated using Kaplan–Meier survival curves and Cox proportional hazard regression models adjusted for known prognostic factors.

          Results

          Patients in the highest quartile of KI67 (>12 % positive KI67 cells) had a worse 10-year BCSS than patients in the lower three quartiles. This association was statistically significant for ER-positive patients (hazard ratio (HR) (95 % CI) at baseline = 1.96 (1.31–2.93); P = 0.001) but not for ER-negative patients (1.23 (0.86–1.77); P = 0.248) ( P-heterogeneity = 0.064). In spite of differences in characteristics of the study populations, the estimates of HR were consistent across all studies ( P-heterogeneity = 0.941 for ER-positive and P-heterogeneity = 0.866 for ER-negative). Among ER-positive cancers, KI67 was associated with worse prognosis in both node-negative (2.47 (1.16–5.27)) and node-positive (1.74 (1.05–2.86)) tumours ( P-heterogeneity = 0.671). Further classification according to ER, PR and HER2 showed statistically significant associations with prognosis among hormone receptor-positive patients regardless of HER2 status ( P-heterogeneity = 0.270) and among triple-negative patients (1.70 (1.02–2.84)). Model fit parameters were similar for visual and automated measures of KI67 in a subset of 2440 patients with information from both sources.

          Conclusions

          Findings from this large-scale multicentre analysis with centrally generated automated KI67 scores show strong evidence in support of a prognostic value for automated KI67 scoring in breast cancer. Given the advantages of automated scoring in terms of its potential for standardisation, reproducibility and throughput, automated methods appear to be promising alternatives to visual scoring for KI67 assessment.

          Electronic supplementary material

          The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13058-016-0765-6) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

          Related collections

          Most cited references27

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Ki-67 as prognostic marker in early breast cancer: a meta-analysis of published studies involving 12 155 patients

          The Ki-67 antigen is used to evaluate the proliferative activity of breast cancer (BC); however, Ki-67's role as a prognostic marker in BC is still undefined. In order to better define the prognostic value of Ki-67/MIB-1, we performed a meta-analysis of studies that evaluated the impact of Ki-67/MIB-1 on disease-free survival (DFS) and/or on overall survival (OS) in early BC. Sixty-eight studies were identified and 46 studies including 12 155 patients were evaluable for our meta-analysis; 38 studies were evaluable for the aggregation of results for DFS, and 35 studies for OS. Patients were considered to present positive tumours for the expression of Ki-67/MIB-1 according to the cut-off points defined by the authors. Ki-67/MIB-1 positivity is associated with higher probability of relapse in all patients (HR=1.93 (95% confidence interval (CI): 1.74–2.14); P<0.001), in node-negative patients (HR=2.31 (95% CI: 1.83–2.92); P<0.001) and in node-positive patients (HR=1.59 (95% CI: 1.35–1.87); P<0.001). Furthermore, Ki-67/MIB-1 positivity is associated with worse survival in all patients (HR=1.95 (95% CI: 1.70–2.24; P<0.001)), node-negative patients (HR=2.54 (95% CI: 1.65–3.91); P<0.001) and node-positive patients (HR=2.33 (95% CI: 1.83–2.95); P<0.001). Our meta-analysis suggests that Ki-67/MIB-1 positivity confers a higher risk of relapse and a worse survival in patients with early BC.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Prognostic value of a combined estrogen receptor, progesterone receptor, Ki-67, and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 immunohistochemical score and comparison with the Genomic Health recurrence score in early breast cancer.

            We recently reported that the mRNA-based, 21-gene Genomic Health recurrence score (GHI-RS) provided additional prognostic information regarding distant recurrence beyond that obtained from classical clinicopathologic factors (age, nodal status, tumor size, grade, endocrine treatment) in women with early breast cancer, confirming earlier reports. The aim of this article is to determine how much of this information is contained in standard immunohistochemical (IHC) markers. The primary cohort comprised 1,125 estrogen receptor-positive (ER-positive) patients from the Arimidex, Tamoxifen, Alone or in Combination (ATAC) trial who did not receive adjuvant chemotherapy, had the GHI-RS computed, and had adequate tissue for the four IHC measurements: ER, progesterone receptor (PgR), human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2), and Ki-67. Distant recurrence was the primary end point, and proportional hazards models were used with sample splitting to control for overfitting. A prognostic model that used classical variables and the four IHC markers (IHC4 score) was created and assessed in a separate cohort of 786 patients. All four IHC markers provided independent prognostic information in the presence of classical variables. In sample-splitting analyses, the information in the IHC4 score was found to be similar to that in the GHI-RS, and little additional prognostic value was seen in the combined use of both scores. The prognostic value of the IHC4 score was further validated in the second separate cohort. This study suggests that the amount of prognostic information contained in four widely performed IHC assays is similar to that in the GHI-RS. Additional studies are needed to determine the general applicability of the IHC4 score.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Proliferation marker Ki-67 in early breast cancer.

              Molecular markers have been extensively investigated with a view to providing early and accurate information on long-term outcome and prediction of response to treatment of early breast cancer. Proliferation is a key feature of the progression of tumors and is now widely estimated by the immunohistochemical assessment of the nuclear antigen Ki-67. The expression of Ki-67 correlates with other measurements of proliferation, including S-phase and bromodeoxyuridine uptake. High Ki-67 is a sign of poor prognosis associated with a good chance of clinical response to chemotherapy, but its independent significance is modest and does not merit measurements in most routine clinical scenarios. However, its application as a pharmacodynamic intermediate marker of the effectiveness of medical therapy holds great promise for rapid evaluation of new drugs.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Mustapha.Abubakar@icr.ac.uk
                Nicholas.Orr@icr.ac.uk
                Frances.Daley@icr.ac.uk
                Penny.Coulson@icr.ac.uk
                Raza.Ali@cruk.cam.ac.uk
                fmb28@medschl.cam.ac.uk
                jbenitez@cnio.es
                Roger.Milne@cancervic.org.au
                h.brenner@dkfz.de
                c.stegmaier@soziales.saarland.de
                arto.mannermaa@uef.fi
                j.chang-claude@dkfz-heidelberg.de
                a.rudolph@dkfz-heidelberg.de
                Peter.Sinn@med.uni-heidelberg.de
                Couch.Fergus@mayo.edu
                p.devilee@lumc.nl
                R.A.E.M.Tollenaar@lumc.nl
                c.seynaeve@erasmusmc.nl
                Jonine.figueroa@ed.ac.uk
                shermans@mail.nih.gov
                lissowsj@coi.waw.pl
                hewitts@mail.nih.gov
                D.M.Eccles@soton.ac.uk
                m.hooning@erasmusmc.nl
                a.hollestelle@erasmusmc.nl
                j.martens@erasmusmc.nl
                c.h.m.vandeurzen@erasmusmc.nl
                heather.thorne@petermac.org
                mkh39@medschl.cam.ac.uk
                qw232@medschl.cam.ac.uk
                Michael.Jones@icr.ac.uk
                Minouk.Schoemaker@icr.ac.uk
                j.wesseling@nki.nl
                f.v.leeuwen@nki.nl
                Laura.Vantveer@ucsf.edu
                dfe20@medschl.cam.ac.uk
                Anthony.Swerdlow@icr.ac.uk
                Mitchell.Dowsett@icr.ac.uk
                pp10001@medschl.cam.ac.uk
                mk.schmidt@nki.nl
                montserrat.garcia-closas@nih.gov
                Journal
                Breast Cancer Res
                Breast Cancer Res
                Breast Cancer Research : BCR
                BioMed Central (London )
                1465-5411
                1465-542X
                18 October 2016
                18 October 2016
                2016
                : 18
                : 104
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Division of Genetics and Epidemiology, The Institute of Cancer Research, 15 Cotswold Road, Sutton, London, SM2 5NG UK
                [2 ]Breast Cancer Now Toby Robins Research Centre, Division of Breast Cancer Research, The Institute of Cancer Research, London, UK
                [3 ]Cancer Research UK Cambridge Institute, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
                [4 ]Centre for Cancer Genetic Epidemiology, Department of Oncology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
                [5 ]Human Genetics Group, Human Cancer Genetics Program, Spanish National Cancer Research Centre (CNIO), Madrid, Spain
                [6 ]Centro de Investigacion en Red de Enfermedades Raras (CIBERER), Valencia, Spain
                [7 ]Cancer Epidemiology Centre, Cancer Council Victoria, Melbourne, Australia
                [8 ]Centre for Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Melbourne School of Population and Global health, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia
                [9 ]Division of Clinical Epidemiology and Aging Research, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany
                [10 ]Division of Preventive Oncology, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ) and National Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT), Heidelberg, Germany
                [11 ]German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany
                [12 ]Saarland Cancer Registry, Saarland, Germany
                [13 ]School of Medicine, Institute of Clinical Medicine, Pathology and Forensic Medicine, Cancer Center of Eastern Finland, University of Eastern Finland, Kuopio, Finland
                [14 ]Imaging Center, Department of Clinical Pathology, Kuopio University Hospital, Kuopio, Finland
                [15 ]Division of Cancer Epidemiology, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany
                [16 ]University Cancer Center Hamburg, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany
                [17 ]Department of Pathology, Institute of Pathology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany
                [18 ]Department of Laboratory Medicine and Pathology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN USA
                [19 ]Department of Human Genetics and Department of Pathology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands
                [20 ]Department of Surgery, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands
                [21 ]Department of Medical Oncology, Family Cancer Clinic, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
                [22 ]Usher Institute of Population Health Sciences and Informatics, The University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK
                [23 ]Divisions of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, National Cancer Institute, Rockville, MD USA
                [24 ]Department of Cancer Epidemiology and Prevention, M. Sklodowska-Curie Memorial Cancer Center and Institute of Oncology, Warsaw, Poland
                [25 ]Laboratory of Pathology, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Rockville, MD USA
                [26 ]Faculty of Medicine Academic Unit of Cancer Sciences, Southampton General Hospital, Southampton, UK
                [27 ]Family Cancer Clinic, Department of Medical Oncology, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
                [28 ]Department of Pathology, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
                [29 ]Department of Genetics, QIMR Berghofer Medical Research Institute, Brisbane, Australia
                [30 ]Centre for Cancer Genetic Epidemiology, Department of Public Health and Primary Care, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
                [31 ]Division of Molecular Pathology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Antoni van Leeuwenhoek Hospital, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
                [32 ]Division of Psychosocial Research and Epidemiology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Antoni van Leeuwenhoek Hospital, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
                [33 ]Division of Breast Cancer Research, The Institute of Cancer Research, London, UK
                [34 ]Academic Department of Biochemistry, Royal Marsden Hospital, Fulham Road, London, UK
                Article
                765
                10.1186/s13058-016-0765-6
                5070183
                27756439
                34d697de-ba46-42d6-a000-0eeeab6e1acf
                © The Author(s). 2016

                Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver ( http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.

                History
                : 4 July 2016
                : 27 September 2016
                Categories
                Research Article
                Custom metadata
                © The Author(s) 2016

                Oncology & Radiotherapy
                breast cancer,automated ki67,visual ki67,prognostication
                Oncology & Radiotherapy
                breast cancer, automated ki67, visual ki67, prognostication

                Comments

                Comment on this article