Ki-67 assessment in early breast cancer: SAKK28/12 validation study on the IBCSG VIII and IBCSG IX cohort.
Adult
Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols
/ therapeutic use
Biomarkers, Pharmacological
/ analysis
Breast Neoplasms
/ classification
Chemotherapy, Adjuvant
/ methods
Cohort Studies
Disease-Free Survival
Female
Humans
Immunohistochemistry
/ methods
Ki-67 Antigen
/ immunology
Middle Aged
Prognosis
Proportional Hazards Models
Receptor, ErbB-2
Receptors, Estrogen
Receptors, Progesterone
Reproducibility of Results
Switzerland
Journal
Scientific reports
ISSN: 2045-2322
Titre abrégé: Sci Rep
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101563288
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
19 09 2019
19 09 2019
Historique:
received:
15
04
2019
accepted:
29
08
2019
entrez:
21
9
2019
pubmed:
21
9
2019
medline:
28
10
2020
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
The assessment of Ki-67 in early-stage breast cancer has become an important diagnostic tool in planning adjuvant therapy, particularly for the administration of additional chemotherapy to hormone-responsive patients. An accurate determination of the Ki-67 index is of the utmost importance; however, the reproducibility is currently unsatisfactory. In this study, we addressed the predictive/prognostic value of Ki-67 index assessed by using the most reproducible methods, which were identified in the pilot phase. Paraffin blocks obtained from patients with moderately differentiated, estrogen receptor (ER)-positive early-stage breast cancer in Switzerland, who were originally randomized to the treatment arms with and without chemotherapy in the IBCSG VIII-IX trials, were retrieved. Of these 344 randomized patients, we identified 158 patients (82 treated with and 76 treated without chemotherapy) for whom sufficient tumour tissue was available. The presence of Ki-67 was assessed visually by counting 2000 cells at the periphery (A) and estimating the number of positive cells in five different peripheral regions (C), which was determined to be the most reproducible method identified the pilot phase. The prognostic and predictive value was assessed by calculating the breast cancer-free interval (BCFI) and overall survival (OS) rate. Ki-67 was considered a numerical and categorical variable when different cut-off values were used (10%, 14%, 20% and 30%). An mRNA-based subtyping by using the MammaTyper kit with the application of a 20% Ki-67 immunohistochemistry (IHC) cut-off equivalent was also performed. 158 of 344 randomized patients could be included in the Ki-67 analysis. The mean Ki-67 values obtained by using the two methods differed (A: 21.32% and C: 16.07%). Ki-67 assessed by using method A with a cut-off of 10% was a predictive marker for OS, as the hazard ratio (>10% vs. <=10%) in patients with chemotherapy was 0.48 with a 95% confidence interval of [0.19-1.19]. Further, the HR of patients treated without chemotherapy was 3.72 with a 95% confidence interval of [1.16-11.96] (p
Identifiants
pubmed: 31537812
doi: 10.1038/s41598-019-49638-4
pii: 10.1038/s41598-019-49638-4
pmc: PMC6753092
doi:
Substances chimiques
Biomarkers, Pharmacological
0
Ki-67 Antigen
0
Receptors, Estrogen
0
Receptors, Progesterone
0
Receptor, ErbB-2
EC 2.7.10.1
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
13534Références
Clin Transl Oncol. 2018 May;20(5):570-575
pubmed: 29058263
Ann Oncol. 2011 Oct;22(10):2216-26
pubmed: 21325445
Ann Oncol. 2013 Nov;24(11):2786-93
pubmed: 23970015
Ann Oncol. 2017 Aug 1;28(8):1700-1712
pubmed: 28838210
Phys Ther. 1994 Aug;74(8):777-88
pubmed: 8047565
J Clin Oncol. 2008 Dec 1;26(34):5569-75
pubmed: 18981464
J Clin Pathol. 2015 May;68(5):356-61
pubmed: 25673730
NPJ Breast Cancer. 2016 May 18;2:16014
pubmed: 28721378
Cancer Sci. 2013 Nov;104(11):1539-43
pubmed: 23905924
Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2016 Jun;157(2):363-371
pubmed: 27155668
Hum Pathol. 2015 Sep;46(9):1341-9
pubmed: 26206765
PLoS One. 2014 Nov 06;9(11):e112121
pubmed: 25375149
J Natl Cancer Inst. 2008 Feb 6;100(3):207-12
pubmed: 18230798
Ann Oncol. 2015 Aug;26(8):1533-46
pubmed: 25939896
Breast. 2015 Nov;24 Suppl 2:S67-72
pubmed: 26283598
Pathologe. 2012 May;33(3):245-50
pubmed: 22576598
Ann Oncol. 2013 Sep;24(9):2206-23
pubmed: 23917950
Histopathology. 2016 Nov;69(5):849-861
pubmed: 27270560
PLoS One. 2016 Feb 29;11(2):e0150505
pubmed: 26928407
J Natl Cancer Inst. 2011 Nov 16;103(22):1656-64
pubmed: 21960707
Clin Cancer Res. 2015 Aug 15;21(16):3651-7
pubmed: 25501130
Pathologe. 2014 Feb;35(1):54-60
pubmed: 24414612
Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2012 Apr;132(3):895-915
pubmed: 22048814
Ann Oncol. 2011 Aug;22(8):1736-47
pubmed: 21709140
Ann Oncol. 2011 Sep;22(9):1981-1987
pubmed: 21282282
Mod Pathol. 2015 Jun;28(6):778-86
pubmed: 25698062
Breast Cancer. 2016 Jan;23(1):92-100
pubmed: 24794952
Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2016 Sep;159(2):257-63
pubmed: 27558625
J Natl Cancer Inst. 2013 Dec 18;105(24):1897-906
pubmed: 24203987
Breast Cancer Res. 2017 May 11;19(1):55
pubmed: 28490348
PLoS One. 2012;7(5):e37379
pubmed: 22662150
Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2017 Jul;164(2):341-348
pubmed: 28478613
Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2015 Oct;153(3):477-91
pubmed: 26341751
Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2018 Nov;172(2):327-338
pubmed: 30120700
Eur J Cancer. 2000 Mar;36(4):549-50
pubmed: 10798850
Eur J Cancer. 2017 Oct;84:219-227
pubmed: 28829990
PLoS One. 2015 Apr 17;10(4):e0123435
pubmed: 25885288
PLoS One. 2015 Jul 15;10(7):e0119565
pubmed: 26177501
Jpn J Clin Oncol. 2016 Dec;46(12):1081-1087
pubmed: 27511992
J Natl Cancer Inst. 2002 Jul 17;94(14):1054-65
pubmed: 12122096