Objective quantification of the ki67 proliferative index in neuroendocrine tumors of the gastroenteropancreatic system: A comparison of digital image analysis with manual methods

American Journal of Surgical Pathology

Volumn 36, Issue 12, 2012, Pages 1761-1770

  Tang, Laura H ^a   Gonen, Mithat ^a   Hedvat, Cyrus ^a   Modlin, Irvin M ^b   Klimstra, David S ^a  

^a MEMORIAL SLOAN KETTERING CANCER CENTER   (United States)

^b YALE UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

Author keywords

Ki67; MIB 1; NET; NET classification; NET grade; neuroendocrine tumor

Indexed keywords

KI 67 ANTIGEN;

ARTICLE; CANCER GRADING; CELL DIFFERENTIATION; CELL PROLIFERATION; CHEMISTRY; CLINICAL COMPETENCE; COMPARATIVE STUDY; DIAGNOSTIC PROCEDURE; HUMAN; IMAGE PROCESSING; IMMUNOHISTOCHEMISTRY; INTESTINE TUMOR; NEUROENDOCRINE TUMOR; OBSERVER VARIATION; PANCREAS TUMOR; PATHOLOGY; PREDICTIVE VALUE; PROGNOSIS; RECTUM TUMOR; REPRODUCIBILITY; SMALL INTESTINE; STANDARD;

CELL DIFFERENTIATION; CELL PROLIFERATION; CLINICAL COMPETENCE; CLINICAL LABORATORY TECHNIQUES; HUMANS; IMAGE PROCESSING, COMPUTER-ASSISTED; IMMUNOHISTOCHEMISTRY; INTESTINAL NEOPLASMS; INTESTINE, SMALL; KI-67 ANTIGEN; NEOPLASM GRADING; NEUROENDOCRINE TUMORS; OBSERVER VARIATION; PANCREATIC NEOPLASMS; PREDICTIVE VALUE OF TESTS; PROGNOSIS; RECTAL NEOPLASMS; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS;

EID: 84870060527     PISSN: 01475185     EISSN: 15320979     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/PAS.0b013e318263207c     Document Type: Article

References (70)

1. Chetty R. An overview of practical issues in the diagnosis of gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine pathology. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2008;132:1285-1289.
2. Modlin IM, Oberg K, Chung DC, et al. Gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine tumours. Lancet Oncol. 2008;9:61-72.
3. Tang LH, Klimstra DS. Conundrums and caveats in neuroendocrine tumors of the pancreas. Surg Pathol Clin. 2011;4:589-625.
4. Garcia-Carbonero R, Capdevila J, Crespo-Herrero G, et al. Incidence, patterns of care and prognostic factors for outcome of gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (GEP-NETs): results from the National Cancer Registry of Spain (RGETNE). Ann Oncol. 2010;21:1794-1803.
5. Ito T, Sasano H, Tanaka M, et al. Epidemiological study of gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine tumors in Japan. J Gastro-enterol. 2010;45:234-243.
6. Modlin IM, Lye KD, Kidd M. A 5-decade analysis of 13, 715 carcinoid tumors. Cancer. 2003;97:934-959.
7. Yao JC, Hassan M, Phan A, et al. One hundred years after "carcinoid": epidemiology of and prognostic factors for neuroendocrine tumors in 35, 825 cases in the United States. J Clin Oncol. 2008;26:3063-3072.
8. Klimstra DS, Modlin IR, Adsay NV, et al. Pathology reporting of neuroendocrine tumors: application of the Delphic consensus process to the development of a minimum pathology data set. Am J Surg Pathol. 2010;34:300-313.
9. Kloppel G, Rindi G, Perren A, et al. The ENETS and AJCC/UICC TNM classifications of the neuroendocrine tumors of the gastrointestinal tract and the pancreas: a statement. Virchows Arch. 2010;456:595-597.
10. Rindi G, Kloppel G, Alhman H, et al. TNM staging of foregut (neuro)endocrine tumors: a consensus proposal including a grading system. Virchows Arch. 2006;449:395-401.
11. Rindi G, Kloppel G, Couvelard A, et al. TNM staging of midgut and hindgut (neuro) endocrine tumors: a consensus proposal including a grading system. Virchows Arch. 2007;451:757-762.
12. Bosman F, Carneiro F, Hruban R, Theise N. WHO Classification of Tumours of the Digestive System. Lyon, France: IARC Press; 2010.
13. La Rosa S, Klersy C, Uccella S, et al. Improved histologic and clinicopathologic criteria for prognostic evaluation of pancreatic endocrine tumors. Hum Pathol. 2009;40:30-40.
14. Strosberg J, Nasir A, Coppola D, et al. Correlation between grade and prognosis in metastatic gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine tumors. Hum Pathol. 2009;40:1262-1268.
15. Pelosi G, Bresaola E, Bogina G, et al. Endocrine tumors of the pancreas: Ki-67 immunoreactivity on paraffin sections is an independent predictor for malignancy: a comparative study with proliferating-cell nuclear antigen and progesterone receptor protein immunostaining, mitotic index, and other clinicopathologic variables. Hum Pathol. 1996;27:1124-1134.
16. Pelosi G, Zamboni G. Proliferation markers and their uses in the study of endocrine tumors. Endocr Pathol. 1996;7:103-119.
17. Pelosi G, Zamboni G, Doglioni C, et al. Immunodetection of proliferating cell nuclear antigen assesses the growth fraction and predicts malignancy in endocrine tumors of the pancreas. Am J Surg Pathol. 1992;16:1215-1225.
18. Bettini R, Boninsegna L, Mantovani W, et al. Prognostic factors at diagnosis and value of WHO classification in a mono-institutional series of 180 non-functioning pancreatic endocrine tumours. Ann Oncol. 2008;19:903-908.
19. Goto A, Niki T, Terado Y, et al. Prevalence of CD99 protein expression in pancreatic endocrine tumours (PETs). Histopathology. 2004;45:384-392.
20. Hotta K, Shimoda T, Nakanishi Y, et al. Usefulness of Ki-67 for predicting the metastatic potential of rectal carcinoids. Pathol Int. 2006;56:591-596.
21. La Rosa S, Sessa F, Capella C, et al. Prognostic criteria in nonfunctioning pancreatic endocrine tumours. Virchows Arch. 1996;429:323-333.
22. Moyana TN, Xiang J, Senthilselvan A, et al. The spectrum of neuroendocrine differentiation among gastrointestinal carcinoids: importance of histologic grading, MIB-1, p53, and bcl-2 immunor-eactivity. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2000;124:570-576.
23. Ohike N, Morohoshi T. Pathological assessment of pancreatic endocrine tumors for metastatic potential and clinical prognosis. Endocr Pathol. 2005;16:33-40.
24. Rigaud G, Missiaglia E, Moore PS, et al. High resolution allelotype of nonfunctional pancreatic endocrine tumors: identification of two molecular subgroups with clinical implications. Cancer Res. 2001;61:285-292.
25. Schmitt AM, Anlauf M, Rousson V, et al. WHO 2004 criteria and CK19 are reliable prognostic markers in pancreatic endocrine tumors. Am J Surg Pathol. 2007;31:1677-1682.
26. Sokmensuer C, Gedikoglu G, Uzunalimoglu B. Importance of proliferation markers in gastrointestinal carcinoid tumors: a clinicopathologic study. Hepatogastroenterology. 2001;48:720-723.
27. Jamali M, Chetty R. Predicting prognosis in gastroentero-pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors: an overview and the value of ki-67 immunostaining. Endocr Pathol. 2008;19:282-288.
28. Yang Z, Tang LH, Klimstra DS. Effect of tumor heterogeneity on the assessment of Ki67 labeling index in well-differentiated neuroendocrine tumors metastatic to the liver: implications for prognostic stratification. Am J Surg Pathol. 2011;35:853-860.
29. Oberg K, Jelic S. Neuroendocrine gastroenteropancreatic tumors: ESMO clinical recommendations for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up. Ann Oncol. 2008;19(suppl 2):ii104-ii105.
30. Rindi G, de Herder WW, O'Toole D, et al. Consensus guidelines for the management of patients with digestive neuroendocrine tumors: the second event and some final considerations. Neuroendocrinology. 2008;87:5-7.
31. Hedvat CV. Digital microscopy: past, present, and future. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2010;134:1666-1670.
32. Schaffel R, Hedvat CV, Teruya-Feldstein J, et al. Prognostic impact of proliferative index determined by quantitative image analysis and the International Prognostic Index in patients with mantle cell lymphoma. Ann Oncol. 2010;21:133-139.
33. Fleiss JL, Levin B, Paik MC. Statistical Methods for Rates and Proportions. New York: John Wiley & Sons; 2003.
34. Light RJ. Measures of response agreement for qualitative data: Some generalizations and alternatives. Psychol Bull. 1971;76:365-377.
35. Ostertag CB, Volk B, Shibata T, et al. The monoclonal antibody Ki-67 as a marker for proliferating cells in stereotactic biopsies of brain tumours. Acta Neurochir (Wien). 1987;89:117-121.
36. Shibata T, Burger PC, Kleihues P. Ki-67 immunoperoxidase stain as marker for the histological grading of nervous system tumours. Acta Neurochir Suppl (Wien). 1988;43:103-106.
37. Allegranza A, Girlando S, Arrigoni GL, et al. Proliferating cell nuclear antigen expression in central nervous system neoplasms. Virchows Arch A Pathol Anat Histopathol. 1991;419:417-423.
38. Bubendorf L, Sauter G, Moch H, et al. Ki67 labelling index: an independent predictor of progression in prostate cancer treated by radical prostatectomy. J Pathol. 1996;178:437-441.
39. Gunia S, Albrecht K, Koch S, et al. Ki67 staining index and neuroendocrine differentiation aggravate adverse prognostic parameters in prostate cancer and are characterized by negligible interobserver variability. World J Urol. 2008;26:243-250.
40. Karamitopoulou E, Perentes E, Diamantis I, et al. Ki-67 immunor-eactivity in human central nervous system tumors: a study with MIB 1 monoclonal antibody on archival material. Acta neuropathol. 1994;87:47-54.
41. Karamitopoulou E, Perentes E, Melachrinou M, et al. Proliferating cell nuclear antigen immunoreactivity in human central nervous system neoplasms. Acta neuropathol. 1993;85:316-322.
42. Luukkaa H, Klemi P, Leivo I, et al. Prognostic significance of Ki-67 and p53 as tumor markers in salivary gland malignancies in Finland: an evaluation of 212 cases. Acta oncol (Stockholm, Sweden). 2006;45:669-675.
43. Molino A, Micciolo R, Turazza M, et al. Ki-67 immunostaining in 322 primary breast cancers: associations with clinical and pathological variables and prognosis. Int J Cancer. 1997;74:433-437.
44. Preusser M, Heinzl H, Gelpi E, et al. Ki67 index in intracranial ependymoma: a promising histopathological candidate biomarker. Histopathology. 2008;53:39-47.
45. Suri VS, Tatke M, Singh D, et al. Histological spectrum of ependymomas and correlation of p53 and Ki-67 expression with ependymoma grade and subtype. Indian J Cancer. 2004;41:66-71.
46. Grzybicki DM, Liu Y, Moore SA, et al. Interobserver variability associated with the MIB-1 labeling index: high levels suggest limited prognostic usefulness for patients with primary brain tumors. Cancer. 2001;92:2720-2726.
47. Lejeune M, Jaen J, Pons L, et al. Quantification of diverse subcellular immunohistochemical markers with clinicobiological relevancies: validation of a new computer-assisted image analysis procedure. J Anat. 2008;212:868-878.
48. Lopez C, Lejeune M, Salvado MT, et al. Automated quantification of nuclear immunohistochemical markers with different complexity. Histochem Cell Biol. 2008;129:379-387.
49. Mengel M, von Wasielewski R, Wiese B, et al. Inter-laboratory and inter-observer reproducibility of immunohistochemical assessment of the Ki-67 labelling index in a large multi-centre trial. J Pathol. 2002;198:292-299.
50. Lloyd RV. Utility of Ki-67 as a prognostic marker in pancreatic endocrine neoplasms. Am J Clin Pathol. 1998;109:245-247.
51. Rose DS, Maddox PH, Brown DC. Which proliferation markers for routine immunohistology? A comparison of five antibodies. J Clin Pathol. 1994;47:1010-1014.
52. Sawhney N, Hall PA. Ki67-structure function, and new antibodies. J Pathol. 1992;168:161-162.
53. Brown DC, Gatter KC. Ki67 protein: the immaculate deception? Histopathology. 2002;40:2-11.
54. Cho CS, Labow DM, Tang L, et al. Histologic grade is correlated with outcome after resection of hepatic neuroendocrine neoplasms. Cancer. 2008;113:126-134.
55. Ferrone CR, Tang LH, Tomlinson J, et al. Determining prognosis in patients with pancreatic endocrine neoplasms: can the WHO classification system be simplified? J Clin Oncol. 2007;25:5609-5615.
56. Cross SS, Start RD, Smith JH. Does delay in fixation affect the number of mitotic figures in processed tissue? J Clin Pathol. 1990;43:597-599.
57. Edwards JL, Donalson JT. The time of fixation and the mitotic index. Am J Clin Pathol. 1964;41:158-162.
58. Start RD, Cross SS, Smith JF. Effect of delayed fixation in the assessment of tumour cell proliferation. J Pathol. 1990;161:183-184.
59. Yachida S, Vakiani E, White CM, et al. Small cell and large cell neuroendocrine carcinomas of the pancreas are genetically similar and distinct from well-differentiated pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors. Am J Surg Pathol. 2012;36:173-184.
60. Collan Y, Haapasalo H. The value of mitotic counting in the assessment of prognosis and proliferation in human tumours. J Pathol. 1991;163:361-364.
61. Quinn CM, Wright NA. The clinical assessment of proliferation and growth in human tumours: evaluation of methods and applications as prognostic variables. J Pathol. 1990;160:93-102.
62. Scholzen T, Gerdes J. The Ki-67 protein: from the known and the unknown. J Cell Physiol. 2000;182:311-322.
63. Bohm J, Koch S, Gais P, et al. Prognostic value of MIB-1 in neuroendocrine tumours of the lung. J Pathol. 1996;178:402-409.
64. Leuverink EM, Brennan BA, Crook ML, et al. Prognostic value of mitotic counts and Ki-67 immunoreactivity in adult-type granulosa cell tumour of the ovary. J Clin Pathol. 2008;61:914-919.
65. Louis DN, Ohgaki H, Wiestler OD, et al. The 2007 WHO classification of tumours of the central nervous system. Acta neuropathol. 2007;114:97-109.
66. Costa MJ, Walls J, Ames P, et al. Transformation in recurrent ovarian granulosa cell tumors: Ki67 (MIB-1) and p53 immunohis-tochemistry demonstrates a possible molecular basis for the poor histopathologic prediction of clinical behavior. Hum Pathol. 1996; 27:274-281.
67. Tang L, Shia J, Vakiani E, et al. High grade transformation of differentiated neuroendocrine neoplasms (NENs) of the enter-opancreatic system-a unique entity distinct from de novo high grade neuroendocrine carcinoma (HGNECa) in pathogenesis and clinical behavior. Mod Pathol. 2008;21:137A.
68. Parkins CS, Darling JL, Gill SS, et al. Cell proliferation in serial biopsies through human malignant brain tumours: measurement using Ki67 antibody labelling. Br J Neurosurg. 1991;5:289-298.
69. Torp SH, Alsaker M. Ki-67 immunoreactivity, basic fibroblastic growth factor (bFGF) expression, and microvessel density as supplementary prognostic tools in low-grade astrocytomas. An immunohistochemical study with special reference to the reliability of different Ki-67 antibodies. Pathol Res Pract. 2002;198:261-265.
70. Torp SH, Granli US. Proliferative activity in human glioblastomas assessed by various techniques. Apmis. 2001;109:865-869.