Scinovex
article Open AccessTop 1% cited

Assessment of Ki67 in Breast Cancer: Recommendations from the International Ki67 in Breast Cancer Working Group

JNCI Journal of the National Cancer Institute · 2011 · Vol. 103(22) · pp. 1656–1664
M. DowsettTorsten O. NielsenRoger A’HernJ. BartlettR. Charles CoombesJ CuzickMathew J. EllisN. Lynn HenryJudith HughTracy LivelyLisa M. McShaneSeungmok PaikFrédérique Penault–LlorcaLudmila PrudkinMM ReganJanine SalterChristos SotiriouI E SmithG. VialeJ. ZujewskiDaniel F. Hayes

Abstract

Ki67 immunohistochemistry (IHC), commonly used as a proliferation marker in breast cancer, has limited value for treatment decisions due to questionable analytical validity. The International Ki67 in Breast Cancer Working Group (IKWG) consensus meeting, held in October 2019, assessed the current evidence for Ki67 IHC analytical validity and clinical utility in breast cancer, including the series of scoring studies the IKWG conducted on centrally stained tissues. Consensus observations and recommendations are: 1) as for estrogen receptor and HER2 testing, preanalytical handling considerations are critical; 2) a standardized visual scoring method has been established and is recommended for adoption; 3) participation in and evaluation of quality assurance and quality control programs is recommended to maintain analytical validity; and 4) the IKWG accepted that Ki67 IHC as a prognostic marker in breast cancer has clinical validity but concluded that clinical utility is evident only for prognosis estimation in anatomically favorable estrogen receptor-positive and HER2-negative patients to identify those who do not need adjuvant chemotherapy. In this T1-2, N0-1 patient group, the IKWG consensus is that Ki67 5% or less, or 30% or more, can be used to estimate prognosis. In conclusion, analytical validity of Ki67 IHC can be reached with careful attention to preanalytical issues and calibrated standardized visual scoring. Currently, clinical utility of Ki67 IHC in breast cancer care remains limited to prognosis assessment in stage I or II breast cancer. Further development of automated scoring might help to overcome some current limitations.

Breast Cancer Treatment StudiesHER2/EGFR in Cancer ResearchGene expression and cancer classificationBreast cancerMedicineBiomarkerOncologyClinical endpointSurrogate endpointClinical trialInternal medicineCancerNeoadjuvant therapy

MeSH terms

Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy ProtocolsBreast NeoplasmsClinical Trials as TopicFemaleHumansImmunohistochemistryPredictive Value of TestsPrognosisBiomarkers, TumorReproducibility of ResultsChemotherapy, AdjuvantAntineoplastic Agents, HormonalKi-67 AntigenNeoadjuvant TherapyProtein Array Analysis

Funding

  • Breast Cancer Research Foundation
  • Fashion Footwear Association of New York
  • Cancer Research UK
Citations
1,975
FWCI
40.63
field-weighted impact
References
80
Percentile
100%
vs. same field & year
Citations per year
Citation Network

How this paper connects to the literature. Drag to explore, click any node to open that paper.