Department of Pathology, Mardin State Hospital, Mardin, Turkey.
Department of Pathology, University of Health Sciences Sisli Hamidiye Etfal Education and Research Center, Istanbul, Turkey.
Endocr Pathol. 2019 Mar;30(1):17-23. doi: 10.1007/s12022-018-9554-3.
Gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (GEP-NET) are classified according to tumor grade. Ki-67 and mitotic count are the two determinants of this classification. Therefore, Ki-67 scoring becomes very important in classifying the patients accurately. Eye-balling, counting of cells through the microscope, automated image analysis systems, and manual counting of printed image are the four major scoring methods in use. The aim of this study is to show the agreement between monitor-image method (MIM) and printout-image method (PIM) of Ki-67 scoring. In our study, 120 GEP-NETs from 85 patients diagnosed between January 2005 and July 2017 were evaluated. Thirty-seven cases with either polypectomy or resection material were selected. Seven different scoring methods using either a monitor-image or a printout-image were applied for Ki-67 scoring. They are as follows: whole-PIM, 1/9-PIM, whole-MIM, 1/4-MIM, 1/6-MIM, 1/9-MIM, and 1/12-MIM. In the comparison of Ki-67 scoring methods, intraclass correlation coefficients ranging from 0.951 to 0.999 were found. The Bland-Altman analysis showed near-perfect agreement between whole-MIM and whole-PIM as well as 1/9-MIM and 1/9-PIM. The level of agreements among the other methods were sufficient too, but there was a relative decrease in the level of agreement as the area of counting becomes smaller. The average application time decreased from 373.7 to 41.7 s gradually as the scoring area becomes smaller. Our study shows that there is a remarkable agreement between the MIM and PIM used in Ki-67 scoring.
胃肠胰神经内分泌肿瘤(GEP-NET)根据肿瘤分级进行分类。Ki-67 和有丝分裂计数是这种分类的两个决定因素。因此,Ki-67 评分在准确分类患者方面变得非常重要。目前主要使用四种评分方法:眼睛观察、通过显微镜计数细胞、自动图像分析系统和打印图像手动计数。本研究旨在显示 Ki-67 评分的监测图像法(MIM)和打印图像法(PIM)之间的一致性。在我们的研究中,评估了 2005 年 1 月至 2017 年 7 月期间诊断的 85 例患者的 120 个 GEP-NET。选择了 37 例息肉切除术或切除术标本。使用监测图像或打印图像应用了七种不同的 Ki-67 评分方法。分别为:全 PIM、1/9-PIM、全 MIM、1/4-MIM、1/6-MIM、1/9-MIM 和 1/12-MIM。在 Ki-67 评分方法的比较中,发现组内相关系数在 0.951 到 0.999 之间。Bland-Altman 分析显示,全 MIM 与全 PIM 以及 1/9-MIM 与 1/9-PIM 之间存在近乎完美的一致性。其他方法的一致性水平也足够高,但随着计数区域的缩小,一致性水平相对降低。平均应用时间从 373.7 秒逐渐减少到 41.7 秒,随着评分区域的缩小。我们的研究表明,Ki-67 评分中使用的 MIM 和 PIM 之间存在显著的一致性。