Literature DB >> 24807732

Ki-67 cytological index can distinguish well-differentiated from poorly differentiated pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors: a comparative cytohistological study of 53 cases.

Gabriele Carlinfante1, Paola Baccarini, Debora Berretti, Tiziana Cassetti, Maurizio Cavina, Rita Conigliaro, Alessandro De Pellegrin, Luca Di Tommaso, Carlo Fabbri, Adele Fornelli, Andrea Frasoldati, Giorgio Gardini, Luisa Losi, Livia Maccio, Raffaele Manta, Nico Pagano, Romano Sassatelli, Silvia Serra, Lorenzo Camellini.   

Abstract

The Ki-67 labeling index has been found to bear prognostic significance in gastrointestinal neuroendocrine tumors (NETs), and it was recently incorporated in NET histological grading. Nevertheless, a reliable preoperative determination of NET grading could be useful in clinical practice. The aim of this study is to compare the results of Ki-67 labeling index, as measured on cytological samples and on surgical specimens of patients with pancreatic NETs (P-NETs). We also investigated whether concordance might be improved, using a 5 % (instead of 2 %) cutoff value for defining G2 tumors. We retrospectively identified 48 consecutive patients with 53 P-NETs, from our five institutions, and we measured Ki-67 labeling index on their cytological samples and surgical specimens. The traditional 2 % and the alternative 5 % cutoff values were used to classify G2 tumors. The concordance rate between cytological and histological grading was 46/53 (86.8 %; weighted κ statistic 0.77; 95 % confidence interval (95 % CI) 0.60-0.94). No cases of cytological G1-G2 NETs were upgraded to G3 neuroendocrine carcinoma (NEC) at histological grading. Cytology was found to be highly specific in the diagnosis of both G2 (94.1 %; 95 % CI 80.3-99.3) and G3 tumors (100.0 %; 95 % CI 92.8-100), but the sensitivity was poor for G2 NETs (66.7 %; 95 % CI 38.4-88.2) and high for the prediction of G3 NECs (100 %; 95 % CI 39.8-100.0). When the 5 % cutoff value was adopted, concordance rate was 49/53 (92.4 %; weighted κ 0.82; 95 % CI 0.64-1.00). In conclusion, Ki-67 cytological expression can distinguish well-differentiated (both G1 and G2) from poorly differentiated P-NETs, and it may be useful for their preoperative classification.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2014        PMID: 24807732     DOI: 10.1007/s00428-014-1585-7

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Virchows Arch        ISSN: 0945-6317            Impact factor:   4.064


  25 in total

1.  Diagnostic accuracy and clinical significance of the fine needle aspiration Ki-67 labelling index in pancreatic endocrine tumours.

Authors:  Michail Kaklamanos; Ioannis Karoumpalis; Charitini Salla; Dimitrios Thomas; George Kanakis; Krystallenia Alexandraki; Stavros Sougioultzis; Evanthia Diakatou; George Kontogeorgos; Gregory Kaltsas
Journal:  Endocr Relat Cancer       Date:  2011-10-27       Impact factor: 5.678

2.  Gastroenteropancreatic (neuro)endocrine neoplasms: the histology report.

Authors:  Guido Rindi; C Bordi; S La Rosa; E Solcia; Gianfranco Delle Fave
Journal:  Dig Liver Dis       Date:  2011-03       Impact factor: 4.088

3.  Objective quantification of the Ki67 proliferative index in neuroendocrine tumors of the gastroenteropancreatic system: a comparison of digital image analysis with manual methods.

Authors:  Laura H Tang; Mithat Gonen; Cyrus Hedvat; Irvin M Modlin; David S Klimstra
Journal:  Am J Surg Pathol       Date:  2012-12       Impact factor: 6.394

4.  Pathology reporting of neuroendocrine tumors: application of the Delphic consensus process to the development of a minimum pathology data set.

Authors:  David S Klimstra; Irvin R Modlin; N Volkan Adsay; Runjan Chetty; Vikram Deshpande; Mithat Gönen; Robert T Jensen; Mark Kidd; Matthew H Kulke; Ricardo V Lloyd; Cesar Moran; Steven F Moss; Kjell Oberg; Dermot O'Toole; Guido Rindi; Marie E Robert; Saul Suster; Laura H Tang; Chin-Yuan Tzen; Mary Kay Washington; Betram Wiedenmann; James Yao
Journal:  Am J Surg Pathol       Date:  2010-03       Impact factor: 6.394

5.  Ki-67 grading of nonfunctioning pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors on histologic samples obtained by EUS-guided fine-needle tissue acquisition: a prospective study.

Authors:  Alberto Larghi; Gabriele Capurso; Antonella Carnuccio; Riccardo Ricci; Sergio Alfieri; Domenico Galasso; Francesca Lugli; Antonio Bianchi; Francesco Panzuto; Laura De Marinis; Massimo Falconi; Gianfranco Delle Fave; Giovanni Battista Doglietto; Guido Costamagna; Guido Rindi
Journal:  Gastrointest Endosc       Date:  2012-09       Impact factor: 9.427

6.  Metastatic and locally advanced pancreatic endocrine carcinomas: analysis of factors associated with disease progression.

Authors:  Francesco Panzuto; Letizia Boninsegna; Nicola Fazio; Davide Campana; Maria Pia Brizzi; Gabriele Capurso; Aldo Scarpa; Filippo De Braud; Luigi Dogliotti; Paola Tomassetti; Gianfranco Delle Fave; Massimo Falconi
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2011-05-09       Impact factor: 44.544

7.  Evaluation of Ki-67 index in EUS-FNA specimens for the assessment of malignancy risk in pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors.

Authors:  Toshiyuki Hasegawa; Kenji Yamao; Susumu Hijioka; Vikram Bhatia; Nobumasa Mizuno; Kazuo Hara; Hiroshi Imaoka; Yasumasa Niwa; Masahiro Tajika; Shinya Kondo; Tutomu Tanaka; Yasuhiro Shimizu; Taira Kinoshita; Takuhiro Kohsaki; Isao Nishimori; Shinji Iwasaki; Toshiji Saibara; Waki Hosoda; Yasushi Yatabe
Journal:  Endoscopy       Date:  2013-11-11       Impact factor: 10.093

8.  Correlation between grade and prognosis in metastatic gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine tumors.

Authors:  Jonathan Strosberg; Aejaz Nasir; Domenico Coppola; Mark Wick; Larry Kvols
Journal:  Hum Pathol       Date:  2009-04-14       Impact factor: 3.466

9.  Immunocytochemical evaluation of estrogen receptor on archival Papanicolaou-stained fine-needle aspirate smears.

Authors:  Savitri Krishnamurthy; Haytham Dimashkieh; Shobha Patel; Nour Sneige
Journal:  Diagn Cytopathol       Date:  2003-12       Impact factor: 1.582

10.  TNM staging of foregut (neuro)endocrine tumors: a consensus proposal including a grading system.

Authors:  G Rindi; G Klöppel; H Alhman; M Caplin; A Couvelard; W W de Herder; B Erikssson; A Falchetti; M Falconi; P Komminoth; M Körner; J M Lopes; A-M McNicol; O Nilsson; A Perren; A Scarpa; J-Y Scoazec; B Wiedenmann
Journal:  Virchows Arch       Date:  2006-09-12       Impact factor: 4.064

View more
  10 in total

Review 1.  [What is new in the pathology of pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors?].

Authors:  P Komminoth; A Perren
Journal:  Pathologe       Date:  2015-05       Impact factor: 1.011

Review 2.  Imaging modalities for characterising focal pancreatic lesions.

Authors:  Lawrence Mj Best; Vishal Rawji; Stephen P Pereira; Brian R Davidson; Kurinchi Selvan Gurusamy
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2017-04-17

3.  Grading Pancreatic Neuroendocrine Tumors via Endoscopic Ultrasound-guided Fine Needle Aspiration: A Multi-Institutional Study.

Authors:  Ammar A Javed; Alessandra Pulvirenti; Samrah Razi; Jian Zheng; Theodoros Michelakos; Yurie Sekigami; Elizabeth Thompson; David S Klimstra; Vikram Deshpande; Aatur D Singhi; Matthew J Weiss; Christopher L Wolfgang; John L Cameron; Alice C Wei; Amer H Zureikat; Cristina R Ferrone; Jin He
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  2022-01-25       Impact factor: 13.787

4.  Grading of pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors on endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration using Ki-67 index and 2017 World Health Organization criteria: An analysis of 32 cases.

Authors:  Sweety Kalantri; Pooja Bakshi; Kusum Verma
Journal:  Cytojournal       Date:  2020-09-18       Impact factor: 2.091

Review 5.  [Grading of neuroendocrine tumors].

Authors:  W Saeger; P A Schnabel; P Komminoth
Journal:  Pathologe       Date:  2016-07       Impact factor: 1.011

6.  Clinical and Prognostic Value of PET/CT Imaging with Combination of 68Ga-DOTATATE and 18F-FDG in Gastroenteropancreatic Neuroendocrine Neoplasms.

Authors:  Panpan Zhang; Jiangyuan Yu; Jie Li; Lin Shen; Nan Li; Hua Zhu; Shizhen Zhai; Yan Zhang; Zhi Yang; Ming Lu
Journal:  Contrast Media Mol Imaging       Date:  2018-02-26       Impact factor: 3.161

7.  Assessment of ARX expression, a novel biomarker for metastatic risk in pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors, in endoscopic ultrasound fine-needle aspiration.

Authors:  Wenzel M Hackeng; Folkert H M Morsink; Leon M G Moons; Christopher M Heaphy; G Johan A Offerhaus; Koen M A Dreijerink; Lodewijk A A Brosens
Journal:  Diagn Cytopathol       Date:  2019-12-17       Impact factor: 1.582

8.  The Role of Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Ki67 in the Management of Non-Functioning Pancreatic Neuroendocrine Tumors.

Authors:  YongYan Cui; Lauren G Khanna; Anjali Saqi; John P Crapanzano; James M Mitchell; Amrita Sethi; Tamas A Gonda; Michael D Kluger; Beth A Schrope; John Allendorf; John A Chabot; John M Poneros
Journal:  Clin Endosc       Date:  2019-07-15

9.  Diagnostic accuracy of EUS-FNA in the evaluation of pancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasms grading: Possible clinical impact of misclassification.

Authors:  Matteo Tacelli; Maria Chiara Petrone; Gabriele Capurso; Francesca Muffatti; Valentina Andreasi; Stefano Partelli; Claudio Doglioni; Massimo Falconi; Paolo Giorgio Arcidiacono
Journal:  Endosc Ultrasound       Date:  2021 Sep-Oct       Impact factor: 5.628

10.  Diagnostic performance and factors influencing the accuracy of EUS-FNA of pancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasms.

Authors:  Susumu Hijioka; Kazuo Hara; Nobumasa Mizuno; Hiroshi Imaoka; Vikram Bhatia; Mohamed A Mekky; Kenichi Yoshimura; Tsukasa Yoshida; Nozomi Okuno; Nobuhiro Hieda; Masahiro Tajika; Tsutomu Tanaka; Makoto Ishihara; Yasushi Yatabe; Yasuhiro Shimizu; Yasumasa Niwa; Kenji Yamao
Journal:  J Gastroenterol       Date:  2016-01-14       Impact factor: 7.527

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.