Expression, assessment and significance of Ki67 expression in breast cancer: an update.

Ki67 expression is one of the most important and cost-effective surrogate markers to assess for tumour cell proliferation in breast cancer (BC). The Ki67 labelling index has prognostic and predictive value in patients with early-stage BC, particularly in the hormone receptor-positive, HER2 (human epidermal growth factor receptor 2)-negative (luminal) tumours. However, many challenges exist in using Ki67 in routine clinical practice and it is still not universally used in the clinical setting. Addressing these challenges can potentially improve the clinical utility of Ki67 in BC. In this article, we review the function, immunohistochemical (IHC) expression, methods for scoring and interpretation of results as well as address several challenges of Ki67 assessment in BC. The prodigious attention associated with use of Ki67 IHC as a prognostic marker in BC resulted in high expectation and overestimation of its performance. However, the realisation of some pitfalls and disadvantages, which are expected with any similar markers, resulted in an increasing criticism of its clinical use. It is time to consider a pragmatic approach and weigh the benefits against the weaknesses and identify factors to achieve the best clinical utility. Here we highlight the strengths of its performance and provide some insights to overcome the existing challenges.

Ki67 assessment in invasive luminal breast cancer: a comparative study between different scoring methods.

BACKGROUND: Ki67 reflects the proliferation activity in breast cancer (BC). However, an optimal method for its assessment in clinical settings has yet to be robustly defined. In this study we compared several methods to score Ki67 to identify a reliable and reproducible method for routine practice. METHODS: Sections from luminal BC cohort (n = 1662) were immunohistochemically stained with Ki67 and were assessed for the percentage, pattern, and intensity of expression. Ki67 positivity was evaluated using three methods: (i) quantification of Ki67-positive cells among 1000 invasive tumour cells within hotspot, (ii) average estimation of Ki67 within a defined hotspot, and (iii) average estimation of Ki67 positivity within the whole section. Time required for scoring, interobserver agreement and association with outcome were determined. RESULTS: The mean percentage of Ki67 expression per 1000 cells method was 16%, while the mean value of Ki67 scores using the average estimation within hotspot and whole slide were 14% and 12%, respectively. Quantification of Ki67-positive cells within 1000 cells had the highest degree of consistency between observers, and the highest hazard ratio predicting patient outcome when compared to using different common Ki67 cutoffs, which was independent of the other two methods. Granular pattern of Ki67 expression was associated with poorer outcome as compared to the other patterns. CONCLUSION: Assessment of Ki67 expression using quantification positive cells among 1000 tumour cells is an optimal method to achieve high reliability and reproducibility. Comment on the predominant Ki67 expression pattern would add prognostic and predictive value in luminal BC.

Assessment of mitotic activity in breast cancer: revisited in the digital pathology era.

The assessment of cell proliferation is a key morphological feature for diagnosing various pathological lesions and predicting their clinical behaviour. Visual assessment of mitotic figures in routine histological sections remains the gold-standard method to evaluate the proliferative activity and grading of cancer. Despite the apparent simplicity of such a well-established method, visual assessment of mitotic figures in breast cancer (BC) remains a challenging task with low concordance among pathologists which can lead to under or overestimation of tumour grade and hence affects management. Guideline recommendations for counting mitoses in BC have been published to standardise methodology and improve concordance; however, the results remain less satisfactory. Alternative approaches such as the use of the proliferation marker Ki67 have been recommended but these did not show better performance in terms of concordance or prognostic stratification. The advent of whole slide image technology has brought the issue of mitotic counting in BC into the light again with more challenges to develop objective criteria for identifying and scoring mitotic figures in digitalised images. Using reliable and reproducible morphological criteria can provide the highest degree of concordance among pathologists and could even benefit the further application of artificial intelligence (AI) in breast pathology, and this relies mainly on the explicit description of these figures. In this review, we highlight the morphology of mitotic figures and their mimickers, address the current caveats in counting mitoses in breast pathology and describe how to strictly apply the morphological criteria for accurate and reliable histological grade and AI models.

Visual assessment of mitotic figures in breast cancer: a comparative study between light microscopy and whole slide images.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Visual assessment of mitotic figures in breast cancer (BC) remains a challenge. This is expected to be more pronounced in the digital pathology era. This study aims to refine the criteria of mitotic figure recognition, particularly in whole slide images (WSI). METHOD AND RESULTS: Haematoxylin and eosin (H&E)-stained BC sections (n = 506) were examined using light microscopy (LM) and WSI. A set of features for identifying mitosis in WSI and to distinguish true figures from mimickers was developed. Changes in the mitotic count between the two platforms was explored. Morphological features of mitoses were recorded separately, including absence of nuclear membrane, chromatin hairy-like projections, shape, cytoplasmic features, mitotic cell size and relationship to surrounding cells. Each mitotic phase has its own mimickers. Fifty-eight per cent of mitoses showed absent hairy-like projection in WSI; however, 89% retained their ragged nuclear border, which distinguished them from mimickers including apoptotic cells, lymphocytes and dark elongated hyperchromatic structures. Mitosis in WSI showed loss of fine details, and there was a 20% average reduction rate of mitotic counts when compared to the same area on LM. Using refined mitosis recognition criteria in WSI resulted in a twofold improvement of interobserver concordance. However, when compared to LM, 19% of cases were underscored in WSIs. CONCLUSIONS: All morphological features of mitosis should be considered to enable recognition and differentiation from their mimickers, particularly in WSI, to ensure reliable BC grading. Refining mitotic cut-offs per specific area when using WSI, based on the degree of reduction and association with outcome, is warranted.

Assessment of proliferation in breast cancer: cell cycle or mitosis? An observational study.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Proliferation is an important indicator of breast cancer (BC) prognosis, but is assessed using different approaches. Not all cells in the cell cycle are committed to division. This study aimed to characterise quantitative differences between BC cells in the cell cycle and those in mitosis and assess their relationship with other pathological parameters. METHODS AND RESULTS: A cohort of BC sections (n = 621) was stained with haematoxylin and eosin and immunohistochemistry for Ki-67. The proportion of mitotic cells and Ki-67-positive cells was assessed in the same areas. The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) BC cohort was used to assess MKI-67 transcriptome level and its association with the mitotic counts. The mean proportion of BC cells in the cell cycle was 24% (range = 1-90%), while the mean proportion of BC cells in mitosis was 5% (range = 0-73%). A low proportion of mitoses to whole cycling cells was associated with low histological grade tumours and the luminal A molecular subtype, while tumours with a high proportion of mitoses to the overall cycling cells were associated with triple-negative subtype, larger tumour size, grade 3 tumours and lymph node metastasis. The high mitosis/low Ki-67-positive cells tumours showed a significant association with variables of poor prognosis, including high-grade and triple-negative subtypes. CONCLUSION: The proportion of BC cells in the cell cycle and mitosis is variable. We show that not only the number of cells in the cell cycle or mitosis, but also the difference between them, provides valuable information on tumour aggressiveness.