Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorAbubakar, Men_US
dc.contributor.authorOrr, Nen_US
dc.contributor.authorDaley, Fen_US
dc.contributor.authorCoulson, Pen_US
dc.contributor.authorAli, HRen_US
dc.contributor.authorBlows, Fen_US
dc.contributor.authorBenitez, Jen_US
dc.contributor.authorMilne, Ren_US
dc.contributor.authorBrenner, Hen_US
dc.contributor.authorStegmaier, Cen_US
dc.contributor.authorMannermaa, Aen_US
dc.contributor.authorChang-Claude, Jen_US
dc.contributor.authorRudolph, Aen_US
dc.contributor.authorSinn, Pen_US
dc.contributor.authorCouch, FJen_US
dc.contributor.authorDevilee, Pen_US
dc.contributor.authorTollenaar, RAEMen_US
dc.contributor.authorSeynaeve, Cen_US
dc.contributor.authorFigueroa, Jen_US
dc.contributor.authorSherman, MEen_US
dc.contributor.authorLissowska, Jen_US
dc.contributor.authorHewitt, Sen_US
dc.contributor.authorEccles, Den_US
dc.contributor.authorHooning, MJen_US
dc.contributor.authorHollestelle, Aen_US
dc.contributor.authorMartens, JWMen_US
dc.contributor.authorvan Deurzen, CHMen_US
dc.contributor.authorkConFab Investigatorsen_US
dc.contributor.authorBolla, MKen_US
dc.contributor.authorWang, Qen_US
dc.contributor.authorJones, Men_US
dc.contributor.authorSchoemaker, Men_US
dc.contributor.authorWesseling, Jen_US
dc.contributor.authorvan Leeuwen, FEen_US
dc.contributor.authorVan 't Veer, Len_US
dc.contributor.authorEaston, Den_US
dc.contributor.authorSwerdlow, AJen_US
dc.contributor.authorDowsett, Men_US
dc.contributor.authorPharoah, PDen_US
dc.contributor.authorSchmidt, MKen_US
dc.contributor.authorGarcia-Closas, Men_US
dc.date.accessioned2016-11-23T12:47:05Z
dc.date.issued2016-10-18en_US
dc.identifier.citationBreast cancer research : BCR, 2016, 18 (1), pp. 104 - ?en_US
dc.identifier.issn1465-5411en_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://repository.icr.ac.uk/handle/internal/244
dc.identifier.eissn1465-542Xen_US
dc.identifier.doi10.1186/s13058-016-0765-6en_US
dc.description.abstractBACKGROUND:The value of KI67 in breast cancer prognostication has been questioned due to concerns on the analytical validity of visual KI67 assessment and methodological limitations of published studies. Here, we investigate the prognostic value of automated KI67 scoring in a large, multicentre study, and compare this with pathologists' visual scores available in a subset of patients. METHODS:We utilised 143 tissue microarrays containing 15,313 tumour tissue cores from 8088 breast cancer patients in 10 collaborating studies. A total of 1401 deaths occurred during a median follow-up of 7.5 years. Centralised KI67 assessment was performed using an automated scoring protocol. The relationship of KI67 levels with 10-year breast cancer specific survival (BCSS) was investigated using Kaplan-Meier survival curves and Cox proportional hazard regression models adjusted for known prognostic factors. RESULTS:Patients in the highest quartile of KI67 (>12 % positive KI67 cells) had a worse 10-year BCSS than patients in the lower three quartiles. This association was statistically significant for ER-positive patients (hazard ratio (HR) (95 % CI) at baseline = 1.96 (1.31-2.93); P = 0.001) but not for ER-negative patients (1.23 (0.86-1.77); P = 0.248) (P-heterogeneity = 0.064). In spite of differences in characteristics of the study populations, the estimates of HR were consistent across all studies (P-heterogeneity = 0.941 for ER-positive and P-heterogeneity = 0.866 for ER-negative). Among ER-positive cancers, KI67 was associated with worse prognosis in both node-negative (2.47 (1.16-5.27)) and node-positive (1.74 (1.05-2.86)) tumours (P-heterogeneity = 0.671). Further classification according to ER, PR and HER2 showed statistically significant associations with prognosis among hormone receptor-positive patients regardless of HER2 status (P-heterogeneity = 0.270) and among triple-negative patients (1.70 (1.02-2.84)). Model fit parameters were similar for visual and automated measures of KI67 in a subset of 2440 patients with information from both sources. CONCLUSIONS:Findings from this large-scale multicentre analysis with centrally generated automated KI67 scores show strong evidence in support of a prognostic value for automated KI67 scoring in breast cancer. Given the advantages of automated scoring in terms of its potential for standardisation, reproducibility and throughput, automated methods appear to be promising alternatives to visual scoring for KI67 assessment.en_US
dc.formatElectronicen_US
dc.format.extent104 - ?en_US
dc.languageengen_US
dc.language.isoengen_US
dc.subjectkConFab Investigatorsen_US
dc.subjectHumansen_US
dc.subjectBreast Neoplasmsen_US
dc.subjectKi-67 Antigenen_US
dc.subjectNeoplasm Stagingen_US
dc.subjectPrognosisen_US
dc.subjectImmunohistochemistryen_US
dc.subjectPopulation Surveillanceen_US
dc.subjectProportional Hazards Modelsen_US
dc.subjectAdulten_US
dc.subjectAgeden_US
dc.subjectAged, 80 and overen_US
dc.subjectMiddle Ageden_US
dc.subjectFemaleen_US
dc.subjectYoung Adulten_US
dc.subjectKaplan-Meier Estimateen_US
dc.subjectNeoplasm Gradingen_US
dc.subjectBiomarkers, Tumoren_US
dc.titlePrognostic value of automated KI67 scoring in breast cancer: a centralised evaluation of 8088 patients from 10 study groups.en_US
dc.typeJournal Article
dcterms.dateAccepted2016-09-27en_US
rioxxterms.versionofrecord10.1186/s13058-016-0765-6en_US
rioxxterms.licenseref.urihttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0en_US
rioxxterms.licenseref.startdate2016-10-18en_US
rioxxterms.typeJournal Article/Reviewen_US
dc.relation.isPartOfBreast cancer research : BCRen_US
pubs.issue1en_US
pubs.notesNot knownen_US
pubs.organisational-group/ICR
pubs.organisational-group/ICR/Primary Group
pubs.organisational-group/ICR/Primary Group/ICR Divisions
pubs.organisational-group/ICR/Primary Group/ICR Divisions/Breast Cancer Research
pubs.organisational-group/ICR/Primary Group/ICR Divisions/Breast Cancer Research/Aetiological Epidemiology
pubs.organisational-group/ICR/Primary Group/ICR Divisions/Breast Cancer Research/Complex Trait Genetics
pubs.organisational-group/ICR/Primary Group/ICR Divisions/Breast Cancer Research/Endocrinology
pubs.organisational-group/ICR/Primary Group/ICR Divisions/Genetics and Epidemiology
pubs.organisational-group/ICR/Primary Group/ICR Divisions/Genetics and Epidemiology/Aetiological Epidemiology
pubs.organisational-group/ICR/Primary Group/ICR Divisions/Molecular Pathology
pubs.organisational-group/ICR/Primary Group/ICR Divisions/Molecular Pathology/Endocrinology
pubs.organisational-group/ICR/Primary Group/ICR Divisions/Molecular Pathology/Endocrinology/Endocrinology (hon.)
pubs.publication-statusPublisheden_US
pubs.volume18en_US
pubs.embargo.termsNot knownen_US
icr.researchteamComplex Trait Geneticsen_US
icr.researchteamAetiological Epidemiologyen_US
icr.researchteamEndocrinologyen_US
dc.contributor.icrauthorOrr, Nicholasen_US
dc.contributor.icrauthorDowsett, Mitchen_US
dc.contributor.icrauthorSwerdlow, Anthonyen_US
dc.contributor.icrauthorSchoemaker, Minouken_US
dc.contributor.icrauthorJones, Michaelen_US
dc.contributor.icrauthorAbubakar, Mustaphaen_US


Files in this item

Thumbnail
Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record