Shinya Yamamoto1, Takashi Chishima2, Yuka Mastubara2, Shouko Adachi2, Fumi Harada2, Youko Toda3, Hitoshi Arioka3, Naoki Hasegawa4, Yukio Kakuta4, Kentaro Sakamaki5. 1. Department of Breast Surgery, Yokohama Rosai Hospital, Yokohama, Japan. Electronic address: shinya@rf.catv.ne.jp. 2. Department of Breast Surgery, Yokohama Rosai Hospital, Yokohama, Japan. 3. Department of Medical Oncology, Yokohama Rosai Hospital, Yokohama, Japan. 4. Department of Pathology, Yokohama Rosai Hospital, Yokohama, Japan. 5. Department of Biostatistics and Epidemiology, Yokohama City University Graduate School of Medicine, Yokohama, Japan.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Luminal-type breast cancer is divided into types A and B, depending on the Ki-67 labeling index (LI). However, the area at which Ki-67 is measured and the choice of specimen greatly affects the results. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the Ki-67 LI variability using different measurement methods and specimens. We also evaluated how the chemotherapy indication changed for luminal-type breast cancer using the different measurements. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The Ki-67 levels in 87 patients with breast cancer were assessed, and the Ki-67 LI was calculated. Five measurement sites were randomly selected, including the most densely labeled areas (hot spots) in both core needle biopsy (CNB) and surgical specimens. RESULTS: The intraclass correlation coefficient of the CNB and surgical specimens was 0.91 and 0.95, respectively. If the hot spot was used, the correlation coefficient (CC) between the CNB and surgical specimens was 0.635. If the average score was used, the CC was 0.730. If the average score was used, the CNB specimens indicated that 49 patients had a high Ki-67 LI, and 48 patients had a high Ki-67 LI using surgical specimens. If the hot spot was used, 60 patients using the CNB specimens and 58 patients using the surgical specimens had a high Ki-67 LI. If the average score was used, 17 patients were identified as being in different groups, and if the hot spot was used, 16 patients were identified as being in different groups, depending on the specimens that were used. CONCLUSION: The results differed according to the method and specimen type that was used.
BACKGROUND:Luminal-type breast cancer is divided into types A and B, depending on the Ki-67 labeling index (LI). However, the area at which Ki-67 is measured and the choice of specimen greatly affects the results. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the Ki-67 LI variability using different measurement methods and specimens. We also evaluated how the chemotherapy indication changed for luminal-type breast cancer using the different measurements. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The Ki-67 levels in 87 patients with breast cancer were assessed, and the Ki-67 LI was calculated. Five measurement sites were randomly selected, including the most densely labeled areas (hot spots) in both core needle biopsy (CNB) and surgical specimens. RESULTS: The intraclass correlation coefficient of the CNB and surgical specimens was 0.91 and 0.95, respectively. If the hot spot was used, the correlation coefficient (CC) between the CNB and surgical specimens was 0.635. If the average score was used, the CC was 0.730. If the average score was used, the CNB specimens indicated that 49 patients had a high Ki-67 LI, and 48 patients had a high Ki-67 LI using surgical specimens. If the hot spot was used, 60 patients using the CNB specimens and 58 patients using the surgical specimens had a high Ki-67 LI. If the average score was used, 17 patients were identified as being in different groups, and if the hot spot was used, 16 patients were identified as being in different groups, depending on the specimens that were used. CONCLUSION: The results differed according to the method and specimen type that was used.
Authors: D Ribnikar; J M Ribeiro; D Pinto; B Sousa; A C Pinto; E Gomes; E C Moser; M J Cardoso; F Cardoso Journal: Curr Treat Options Oncol Date: 2015-04
Authors: Elisa Neubauer; Ralph M Wirtz; Daniel Kaemmerer; Maria Athelogou; Lydia Schmidt; Jörg Sänger; Amelie Lupp Journal: Oncotarget Date: 2016-07-05