Correlation between MIB‐1 and other proliferation markers

Abstract

BACKGROUND Cell proliferation is a major determinant of the biologic behavior of breast carcinoma. MIB‐1 monoclonal antibody is a promising tool for determining cell proliferation on routine histologic material. The objectives of this study were to compare MIB‐1 evaluation to other methods of measuring cell proliferation, with a view to refining the cutoff used to classify tumors with low and high proliferation rates in therapeutic trials. METHODS One hundred eighty‐five invasive breast carcinomas were evaluated for cell proliferation by determining monoclonal antibody MIB‐1 staining, histologic parameters (Scarff–Bloom–Richardson grade and mitotic index) on paraffin sections, S‐phase fraction (SPF) by flow cytometry, and thymidine‐kinase (TK) content of frozen samples. RESULTS There was a high correlation (P = 0.0001) between the percentage of MIB‐1 positive tumor cells and SPF, TK, histologic grade, and the mitotic index. Multivariate analyses including MIB‐1 at 5 different cutoffs (10%, 15%, 17% [median], 20%, 25%) and the other proliferative markers showed that the optimal MIB‐1 cutoff was 25% and that the mitotic index was the proliferative variable that best discriminated between low and high MIB‐1 samples. A MIB‐1 cutoff of 25% adequately identified highly proliferative tumors. Conversely, with a MIB‐1 cutoff of 10%, few tumors with low proliferation were misclassified. CONCLUSIONS The choice of MIB‐1 cutoff depends on the following clinical objective: if MIB‐1 is used to exclude patients with slowly proliferating tumors from chemotherapeutic protocols, a cutoff of 10% will help to avoid overtreatment. In contrast, if MIB‐1 is used to identify patients sensitive to chemotherapy protocols, it is preferable to set the cutoff at 25%. The MIB‐1 index should be combined with some other routinely used proliferative markers, such as the mitotic index. Cancer 2002;94:2151–9. © 2002 American Cancer Society. DOI 10.1002/cncr.10458

Correlation between mammographic findings and corresponding histopathology: Potential predictors for biological characteristics of breast diseases

“…(4) The Ki-67 immunoreactivity was evaluated by examining highpower fields and counting 1000 tumor cells in the hot spots. (15) In addition, the presence or absence of lymphovascular invasion was determined according to Rosen's Breast Pathology. (12) Intrinsic subtypes were classified according to the St Gallen international expert consensus on the primary therapy of early breast cancer 2011 (16) as follows: luminal A was ER and ⁄ or PgR positive, HER2 negative, and Ki-67 low (<14%); luminal B was either ER and ⁄ or PgR positive, HER2 negative and Ki-67 high, or ER and ⁄ or PgR positive, any Ki-67, and HER2 overexpressed or amplified; the HER type was HER2 overexpressed or amplified and ER and PgR absent; and triple negative was ER, PgR and HER2 negative.…”

Standardized Assessment of Ki-67 in Breast Cancer Patients Using Virtual Slides and an Automated Analyzer in Comparison to Central/Local Pathological Assessments

“…Expression of the nuclear nonhistone protein Ki-67 (proliferation-related Ki-67 antigen) is associated with cell proliferation during interphase and commonly used as a predictive and prognostic marker of breast cancer [1][2][3][4][5][6][7]. In particular, in neoadjuvant endocrine therapy, differences in pre-and post-treatment using Ki-67 are reportedly related to preoperative hormone therapy as a predictor of prognosis and treatment outcome [8][9][10][11][12].…”

A Non-invasive Modality: The US Virtual Touch Tissue Quantification (VTTQ) for Evaluation of Breast Cancer

“…In addition, intratumoral heterogeneity may absorb the VTTQ waves and VTTQ velocity and therefore became unmeasurable (17,26). We employed the hotspot VTTQ velocity, which was also reported to represent the highest velocities of these lesions (19,27). The concept of hotspot has been used for the Ki-67 labeling index, and a statistically significant correlation between the hotspot of the Ki-67 labeling index and the clinicopathologic outcomes of breast disorders has also been reported in the literature (19,27).…”

“…We examined VTTQ on average in eight areas of lesions examined in this study (range: 2 -23 areas), including central and marginal areas. We defined the fastest velocities as the hotspots of these lesions in this study (19). When measurements were out of the tolerable range of the system, the VTTQ was displayed with 'X.XX'.…”

“…Positivity was defined as a HER2:CEP17 signal ratio (FISH score) of .2.2 (22). The Ki-67 labeling index was obtained by selecting the hotspots after evaluation at low power magnification and counting 1000 tumor cells in the hotspots (19).…”