Shui Ruohong, Yu Baohua, Bi Rui, Yang Fei, Yang Wentao
Department of Pathology, Fudan University Shanghai Cancer Center, Fudan University, Shanghai 200032, China; Department of Oncology, Shanghai Medical College, Fudan University, Shanghai 200032, China.
PLoS One. 2015 May 1;10(5):e0125131. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0125131. eCollection 2015.
Ki67 labeling index (LI) is used as a predictive marker and is associated with prognosis in breast cancer. However, standardised methodologies for measurement are lacking which has limited its application in clinical practice. In this study, we evaluated the interobserver concordance of visual assessment of Ki67 LI in breast cancer.
Ki67-immunostained slides of 160 cases of primary invasive breast cancer were visual assessed by five breast pathologists with two different methods to choose the scoring fields: (1) hot-spot score, (2) average score. Proportions of positive invasive tumor cells at 10 % intervals were scored. The intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC) was used to assess the interobserver reproducibility.
(1) A perfect concordance of Ki67 LI was demonstrated according to both score methods (P<0.0001). Average score method (ICC, 0.904) demonstrated a better correlation than hot-spot score method (ICC, 0.894). (2) By respective means according to two score methods, all cases were classified into three groups (≤10%, 11%-30% and >30% Ki-67 LI). The concordance was relatively low in intermediate Ki67 LI group compared with low and high Ki67 LI groups. (3) All cases were classified into three groups by paired-difference (d) between means of hot-spot score and average score (d<5, 5≤d<10, d≥10). The consistency was observed to decrease with increasing paired-difference according to both methods.
Visual assessment of Ki67 LI at 10 % intervals is a candidate for a standard method in breast cancer clinical practice. Average score and hot-spot score of visual assessment both demonstrated a perfect concordance, and an overall average assessment across the whole section including hot spots may be a better method. Interobserver concordance of intermediate Ki67 LI in which most cutoffs are located for making clinical decisions was relatively low.
Ki67标记指数(LI)用作预测标志物,与乳腺癌的预后相关。然而,缺乏标准化的测量方法,这限制了其在临床实践中的应用。在本研究中,我们评估了乳腺癌中Ki67 LI视觉评估的观察者间一致性。
160例原发性浸润性乳腺癌的Ki67免疫染色切片由五位乳腺病理学家采用两种不同方法进行视觉评估,以选择评分区域:(1)热点评分,(2)平均评分。对10%间隔的阳性浸润性肿瘤细胞比例进行评分。组内相关系数(ICC)用于评估观察者间的可重复性。
(1)两种评分方法均显示Ki67 LI具有完美的一致性(P<0.0001)。平均评分法(ICC,0.904)显示出比热点评分法(ICC,0.894)更好的相关性。(2)根据两种评分方法的各自均值,所有病例分为三组(Ki-67 LI≤10%、11%-30%和>30%)。与低Ki67 LI组和高Ki67 LI组相比,中间Ki67 LI组的一致性相对较低。(3)根据热点评分和平均评分均值之间的配对差异(d)将所有病例分为三组(d<5、5≤d<10、d≥10)。两种方法均观察到一致性随配对差异增加而降低。
以10%间隔对Ki67 LI进行视觉评估是乳腺癌临床实践中标准方法的一个候选。视觉评估的平均评分和热点评分均显示出完美的一致性,包括热点在内的整个切片的总体平均评估可能是更好的方法。大多数临床决策切点所在的中间Ki67 LI的观察者间一致性相对较低。