4.5 Article

Grading of Neuroendocrine Tumors With Ki-67 Requires High-quality Assessment Practices

Journal

AMERICAN JOURNAL OF SURGICAL PATHOLOGY
Volume 36, Issue 9, Pages 1359-1363

Publisher

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1097/PAS.0b013e3182632038

Keywords

neuroendocrine tumor; GEP-NET; Ki-67; proliferation index; image analysis

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Gastrointestinal and pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (NETs) arise from disseminated neuroendocrine cells, expressing general and specific neuroendocrine markers. The World Health Organization 2010 classification of NETs is based on grading them according to the proliferation index (PI), which is determined by immunohistochemical staining of the nuclear antigen Ki-67. The classification introduces Ki-67 as the most important criterion for tumor grading, influencing patients' prognoses and the choice of treatment. The aim of this study was to evaluate the assessment of PI value in NETs and its influence on tumor grading. The tumor material consisted of 51 NETs from the pancreas (n = 31) and ileum (n = 20). The slides were stained with the Ki-67 antibody and visualized using a polymer kit. PI was assessed visually by microscope oculars and using a public domain image analysis software, ImmunoRatio. The PI was measured from the most proliferative areas of the tumor. The PI values and tumor grade by ImmunoRatio were highly reproducible as compared with conventional assessment, which suffered from variation especially if ascertained by different observers. Computer-aided assessments had almost perfect correlation (r = 0.985, r = 0.987, and r = 0.995) (P = 0.000) and reproducibility (k = 0.886, k = 0.886, and k = 1.000) (P = 0.000) in PI values and tumor grades, respectively. The PI values and tumor grade between conventional and ImmunoRatio assessments by a qualified observer were in good agreement. ImmunoRatio is a qualified diagnostic aid to more objectively analyze Ki-67 PI-based tumor grade in NETs.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available