4.7 Article

Comparison of Visual and automated assessment of Ki-67 proliferative activity and their impact on outcome in primary operable invasive ductal breast cancer

Journal

BRITISH JOURNAL OF CANCER
Volume 106, Issue 2, Pages 383-388

Publisher

NATURE PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1038/bjc.2011.569

Keywords

primary invasive breast cancer; visual counting method; automated counting method; survival

Categories

Funding

  1. Libyan government
  2. Think Pink charity

Ask authors/readers for more resources

BACKGROUND: Immunohistochemistry of Ki-67 protein is widely used to assess tumour proliferation, and is an established prognostic factor in breast cancer. There is interest in automating the assessment of Ki-67 labelling index (LI) with possible benefits in handling increased workload, with improved accuracy and precision. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Visual and automated assessment of Ki-67 LI and survival were examined in patients with primary operable invasive ductal breast cancer. Tissue microarrays (n=379 patients) immunostained for Ki-67 were scored visually and automatically with the Slidepath Tissue IA system. RESULTS: Visual and automated Ki-67 LI were in excellent agreement (ICCC=0.96, P<0.001). On univariate analysis, visual (P<0.001) and automated Ki67 LI (P<0.05) were associated with cancer-specific survival in patients with invasive ductal breast cancer overall and in patients who received endocrine therapy (Tamoxifen) (P<0.01 for visual and P<0.05 for automated scoring). CONCLUSION: Automated assessment of Ki-67 LI would appear to be comparable to visual Ki-67 LI. However, automated Ki-67 LI assessment was inferior in predicting cancer survival in patients with breast cancer, including patients who received Tamoxifen. British Journal of Cancer (2012) 106, 383-388. doi:10.1038/bjc.2011.569 www.bjcancer.com Published online 3 January 2012 (C) 2012 Cancer Research UK

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available