4.2 Review

Ki-67 prognostic and therapeutic decision driven marker for pancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasms (PNENs): A systematic review

期刊

ADVANCES IN MEDICAL SCIENCES
卷 61, 期 1, 页码 147-153

出版社

ELSEVIER URBAN & PARTNER SP Z O O
DOI: 10.1016/j.advms.2015.10.001

关键词

Ki-67; Immune system disease; Pancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasms; Staging; Prognosis

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: We systematically evaluate the current evidence regarding Ki-67 as a prognostic factor in pancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasms to evaluate the differences of this marker in primary tumors and in distant metastases as well as the values of Ki-67 obtained by fine needle aspiration and by histology. Methods: The literature search was carried out using the MEDLINE/PubMed database, and only papers published in the last 10 years were selected. Results: The pancreatic tissue suitable for Ki-67 evaluation was obtained from surgical specimens in the majority of the studies. There was a concordance of 83% between preoperative and postoperative Ki-67 evaluation. Pooling the data of the studies which compared the Ki-67 values obtained in both cytological and surgical specimens, we found that they were not related. The assessment of Ki-67 was manual in the majority of the papers considered for this review. In order to eliminate manual counting, several imaging methods have been developed but none of them are routinely used at present. Twenty-two studies also explored the role of Ki-67 utilized as a prognostic marker for pancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasms and the majority of them showed that Ki-67 is a good prognostic marker of disease progression. Three studies explored the Ki-67 value in metastatic sites and one study demonstrated that, in metachronous and synchronous liver metastases, there was no significant variation in the index of proliferation. Conclusions: Ki-67 is a reliable prognostic marker for pancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasms. (C) 2015 Medical University of Bialystok. Published by Elsevier Sp. zo.o. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.2
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据