Literature DB >> 25342217

Reliability of proliferation assessment by Ki-67 expression in neuroendocrine neoplasms: eyeballing or image analysis?

Marie-Louise F van Velthuysen1, Emilie J Groen, Joyce Sanders, Frans A Prins, Vincent van der Noort, Catharina M Korse.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The latest WHO classification for neuroendocrine neoplasms (NEN) of the gastrointestinal tract defines grade according to Ki-67 and mitotic indices. Some have questioned the reproducibility and thus the reliability of Ki-67 assessment. We therefore investigated the accuracy of this proliferation marker in NEN.
METHODS: The Ki-67 index of tumor specimens of NEN (n = 73) was assessed by two pathologists as in routine practice with eyeballing and twice by image analysis using ImageJ freeware at different magnifications. RESULTS were correlated with overall survival.
RESULTS: The intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) between pathologists was 0.88. The ICC for the measurements using image analysis was 0.85. The ICC between all four measurements (pathologists and ImageJ) was 0.80. If the Ki-67 index was translated to grade as prescribed by the current WHO classification (<3% = grade 1, 3-20% = grade 2, >20% = grade 3), kappa was between 0.61 and 0.75. Grades based on pathologist scoring were often (16-29%) higher than grades assigned by image analysis (p < 0.001). Grade was significantly correlated with survival (p < 0.0001) irrespective of the way Ki-67 was assessed.
CONCLUSION: Assessment of the Ki-67 index by eyeballing correlates remarkably well with the Ki-67 index as calculated by image analysis and is therefore an accurate parameter. Moreover, it is significantly related to survival irrespective of the method used. Yet if the Ki-67 index is translated to grade, the grade should be interpreted with caution due to values around threshold levels.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2014        PMID: 25342217     DOI: 10.1159/000367713

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Neuroendocrinology        ISSN: 0028-3835            Impact factor:   4.914


  8 in total

Review 1.  Gastroenteropancreatic Well-Differentiated Grade 3 Neuroendocrine Tumors: Review and Position Statement.

Authors:  Romain Coriat; Thomas Walter; Benoît Terris; Anne Couvelard; Philippe Ruszniewski
Journal:  Oncologist       Date:  2016-07-08

2.  Pathology Reporting in Neuroendocrine Neoplasms of the Digestive System: Everything You Always Wanted to Know but Were Too Afraid to Ask.

Authors:  Manuela Albertelli; Federica Grillo; Fabio Lo Calzo; Giulia Puliani; Carmen Rainone; Annamaria Anita Livia Colao; Antongiulio Faggiano
Journal:  Front Endocrinol (Lausanne)       Date:  2021-04-23       Impact factor: 5.555

3.  Synaptophysin-Ki67 double stain: a novel technique that improves interobserver agreement in the grading of well-differentiated gastrointestinal neuroendocrine tumors.

Authors:  Karen Matsukuma; Kristin A Olson; Dorina Gui; Regina Gandour-Edwards; Yueju Li; Laurel Beckett
Journal:  Mod Pathol       Date:  2017-01-13       Impact factor: 7.842

Review 4.  Ki-67 assessment of pancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasms: Systematic review and meta-analysis of manual vs. digital pathology scoring.

Authors:  Claudio Luchini; Liron Pantanowitz; Volkan Adsay; Sylvia L Asa; Pietro Antonini; Ilaria Girolami; Nicola Veronese; Alessia Nottegar; Sara Cingarlini; Luca Landoni; Lodewijk A Brosens; Anna V Verschuur; Paola Mattiolo; Antonio Pea; Andrea Mafficini; Michele Milella; Muhammad K Niazi; Metin N Gurcan; Albino Eccher; Ian A Cree; Aldo Scarpa
Journal:  Mod Pathol       Date:  2022-03-05       Impact factor: 8.209

Review 5.  Digestive Well-Differentiated Grade 3 Neuroendocrine Tumors: Current Management and Future Directions.

Authors:  Anna Pellat; Anne Ségolène Cottereau; Lola-Jade Palmieri; Philippe Soyer; Ugo Marchese; Catherine Brezault; Romain Coriat
Journal:  Cancers (Basel)       Date:  2021-05-18       Impact factor: 6.639

6.  Comparative evaluation of three proliferation markers, Ki-67, TOP2A, and RacGAP1, in bronchopulmonary neuroendocrine neoplasms: Issues and prospects.

Authors:  Elisa Neubauer; Ralph M Wirtz; Daniel Kaemmerer; Maria Athelogou; Lydia Schmidt; Jörg Sänger; Amelie Lupp
Journal:  Oncotarget       Date:  2016-07-05

7.  Low BUB1 expression is an adverse prognostic marker in gastric adenocarcinoma.

Authors:  David Stahl; Martin Braun; Andrew J Gentles; Philipp Lingohr; Adeline Walter; Glen Kristiansen; Ines Gütgemann
Journal:  Oncotarget       Date:  2017-07-18

8.  Prognostic value of histopathological DCIS features in a large-scale international interrater reliability study.

Authors:  Emma J Groen; Jan Hudecek; Lennart Mulder; Maartje van Seijen; Mathilde M Almekinders; Stoyan Alexov; Anikó Kovács; Ales Ryska; Zsuzsanna Varga; Francisco-Javier Andreu Navarro; Simonetta Bianchi; Willem Vreuls; Eva Balslev; Max V Boot; Janina Kulka; Ewa Chmielik; Ellis Barbé; Mathilda J de Rooij; Winand Vos; Andrea Farkas; Natalja E Leeuwis-Fedorovich; Peter Regitnig; Pieter J Westenend; Loes F S Kooreman; Cecily Quinn; Giuseppe Floris; Gábor Cserni; Paul J van Diest; Esther H Lips; Michael Schaapveld; Jelle Wesseling
Journal:  Breast Cancer Res Treat       Date:  2020-07-30       Impact factor: 4.872

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.