Factors influencing agreement of breast cancer luminal molecular subtype by Ki67 labeling index between core needle biopsy and surgical resection specimens.
Adult
Aged
Aged, 80 and over
Biopsy, Large-Core Needle
Breast Neoplasms
/ chemistry
Disease Progression
Female
Humans
Immunohistochemistry
Ki-67 Antigen
/ analysis
Middle Aged
Neoplasm Grading
Neoplasm Recurrence, Local
Predictive Value of Tests
Progression-Free Survival
Receptor, ErbB-2
/ analysis
Receptors, Estrogen
/ analysis
Receptors, Progesterone
/ analysis
Reproducibility of Results
Retrospective Studies
Risk Factors
Time Factors
Tumor Suppressor Protein p53
/ analysis
Agreement
Breast cancer
Core needle biopsy
Ki67
Luminal molecular subtype
Journal
Virchows Archiv : an international journal of pathology
ISSN: 1432-2307
Titre abrégé: Virchows Arch
Pays: Germany
ID NLM: 9423843
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Oct 2020
Oct 2020
Historique:
received:
19
02
2020
accepted:
16
04
2020
revised:
20
03
2020
pubmed:
10
5
2020
medline:
8
10
2020
entrez:
9
5
2020
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Reliable determination of Ki67 labeling index (Ki67-LI) on core needle biopsy (CNB) is essential for determining breast cancer molecular subtype for therapy planning. However, studies on agreement between molecular subtype and Ki67-LI between CNB and surgical resection (SR) specimens are conflicting. The present study analyzed the influence of clinicopathological and sampling-associated factors on agreement. Molecular subtype was determined visually by Ki67-LI in 484 pairs of CNB and SR specimens of invasive estrogen receptor (ER)-positive, human epidermal growth factor (HER2)-negative breast cancer. Luminal B disease was defined by Ki67-LI > 20% in SR. Correlation of molecular subtype agreement with age, menopausal status, CNB method, Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System imaging category, time between biopsies, type of surgery, and pathological tumor parameters was analyzed. Recurrence-free survival (RFS) and overall survival (OS) were analyzed using the Kaplan-Meier method. CNB had a sensitivity of 77.95% and a specificity of 80.97% for identifying luminal B tumors in CNB, compared with the final molecular subtype determination after surgery. The correlation of Ki67-LI between CNB and SR was moderate (ROC-AUC 0.8333). Specificity and sensitivity for CNB to correctly define molecular subtype of tumors according to SR were significantly associated with tumor grade, immunohistochemical progesterone receptor (PR) and p53 expression (p < 0.05). Agreement of molecular subtype did not significantly impact RFS and OS (p = 0.22 for both). The identified factors likely mirror intratumoral heterogeneity that might compromise obtaining a representative CNB. Our results challenge the robustness of a single CNB-driven measurement of Ki67-LI to identify luminal B breast cancer of low (G1) or intermediate (G2) grade.
Identifiants
pubmed: 32383007
doi: 10.1007/s00428-020-02818-4
pii: 10.1007/s00428-020-02818-4
pmc: PMC7508960
doi:
Substances chimiques
Ki-67 Antigen
0
MKI67 protein, human
0
Receptors, Estrogen
0
Receptors, Progesterone
0
TP53 protein, human
0
Tumor Suppressor Protein p53
0
ERBB2 protein, human
EC 2.7.10.1
Receptor, ErbB-2
EC 2.7.10.1
Types de publication
Comparative Study
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
545-555Subventions
Organisme : NCI NIH HHS
ID : P30 CA008748
Pays : United States
Références
BMC Cancer. 2011 Aug 07;11:341
pubmed: 21819622
J Clin Pathol. 2007 Dec;60(12):1300-6
pubmed: 17630399
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2003 Jul 8;100(14):8418-23
pubmed: 12829800
J Natl Cancer Inst. 2009 May 20;101(10):736-50
pubmed: 19436038
Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2010 Jul;134(7):e48-72
pubmed: 20586616
Ann Oncol. 2011 Aug;22(8):1736-47
pubmed: 21709140
Breast Cancer. 2016 Jan;23(1):92-100
pubmed: 24794952
Virchows Arch. 2016 Apr;468(4):493-502
pubmed: 26818835
PLoS One. 2012;7(5):e37379
pubmed: 22662150
Asian Pac J Cancer Prev. 2018 Jan 27;19(1):179-183
pubmed: 29373911
Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2018 Mar;142(3):364-368
pubmed: 29144790
Clin Cancer Res. 2011 Dec 15;17(24):7828-34
pubmed: 21998336
Rev Assoc Med Bras (1992). 2012 Sep-Oct;58(5):532-6
pubmed: 23090222
Breast. 2008 Aug;17(4):323-34
pubmed: 18455396
BMC Cancer. 2014 Jul 30;14:550
pubmed: 25073969
Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2007 Mar;102(1):103-10
pubmed: 16838109
Ann Oncol. 2015 Aug;26(8):1533-46
pubmed: 25939896
Virchows Arch. 2015 Oct 19;:
pubmed: 26481244
Histopathology. 2018 May;72(6):974-989
pubmed: 29220095
Hematol Oncol Clin North Am. 2013 Aug;27(4):703-14, vii-viii
pubmed: 23915740
BMC Cancer. 2015 Oct 30;15:822
pubmed: 26514283
Ann Oncol. 2013 Sep;24(9):2206-23
pubmed: 23917950
Histopathology. 2016 Nov;69(5):849-861
pubmed: 27270560
J Clin Oncol. 2013 Nov 1;31(31):3997-4013
pubmed: 24101045
Virchows Arch. 2018 Feb;472(2):195-203
pubmed: 28825136
J Clin Oncol. 2009 Mar 10;27(8):1168-76
pubmed: 19204205
Breast. 2006 Dec;15(6):744-53
pubmed: 16730173
J Natl Cancer Inst. 2011 Nov 16;103(22):1656-64
pubmed: 21960707
Histopathology. 2018 Oct;73(4):545-558
pubmed: 29603357
Ann Surg Oncol. 2017 May;24(5):1251-1257
pubmed: 28008571
Nature. 2000 Aug 17;406(6797):747-52
pubmed: 10963602
J Clin Oncol. 2011 Nov 10;29(32):4273-8
pubmed: 21990413
J Pathol Transl Med. 2020 Jan;54(1):87-94
pubmed: 31718121
Cancer Genet Cytogenet. 2009 Mar;189(2):105-11
pubmed: 19215791
Breast. 2014 Feb;23(1):69-75
pubmed: 24314620
Breast. 2014 Jun;23(3):259-63
pubmed: 24613255
Oncotarget. 2017 Sep 28;8(57):97114-97126
pubmed: 29228597
Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2009 Feb;113(3):457-66
pubmed: 18340528
BMC Cancer. 2013 Aug 19;13:390
pubmed: 23957561
Clin Cancer Res. 2013 Aug 15;19(16):4521-31
pubmed: 23812670
Histopathology. 1991 Nov;19(5):403-10
pubmed: 1757079
Eur Radiol. 2007 Feb;17(2):581-8
pubmed: 17013595