1
|
Seitz K, Goossens C, Huebner H, Gass P, Uhrig S, Heindl F, Emons J, Ruebner M, Anetsberger D, Hartmann A, Beckmann MW, Erber R, Hack CC, Fasching PA, Häberle L. Prognosis prediction with the IHC3 score in patients with node-negative, hormone receptor-positive, HER2-negative early breast cancer. ESMO Open 2024; 9:103963. [PMID: 39461262 PMCID: PMC11558624 DOI: 10.1016/j.esmoop.2024.103963] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/22/2024] [Revised: 09/23/2024] [Accepted: 09/24/2024] [Indexed: 10/29/2024] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Prognostication has been used to identify patient populations that could potentially benefit from treatment de-escalation. In patients with hormone receptor-positive (HRpos), human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative (HER2neg) early breast cancer (eBC), treatment de-escalation classically involved omitting chemotherapy. With recently developed specialized therapies that require hands-on side-effect management, the therapeutic landscape is changing and therapy decisions are no longer based only on prognosis, but also consider potential side-effects. Therefore, identification of patient groups based on prognostication has gained importance. MATERIALS AND METHODS In this retrospective analysis, a population of 2359 node-negative HRpos/HER2neg eBC patients was selected from all patients treated at the University Breast Center of Franconia, Germany between 2002 and 2021. The prognostic value of the IHC3 score (incorporating immunohistochemical measurements of the estrogen and progesterone receptor status and Ki-67) with clinical parameters (lymph node status, tumor stage, grading) regarding invasive disease-free survival (iDFS) and overall survival (OS) was assessed. RESULTS IHC3 positively correlated with Ki-67 expression and inversely correlated with hormone receptor expression. IHC3 categorized into quartiles identified patients with a more unfavorable prognosis: 5-year and 10-year iDFS rates for patients in the highest versus the lowest quartile were 84% versus 95% and 70% versus 88%, respectively. A sensitivity analysis of distant disease-free survival showed similar results to those of iDFS. Five-year and 10-year OS rates for patients in the highest versus the lowest quartile were, respectively, 92% versus 97% and 81% versus 92%. CONCLUSIONS IHC3 is able to define prognostic groups in patients with node-negative, HRpos/HER2neg eBC. Node-negative patients with a high IHC3 score had the worst prognosis, which was comparable to that of node-positive patients described in recent trials. This simple and cost-effective tool could thus potentially aid in identifying patient groups for innovative therapeutic approaches.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- K Seitz
- Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Universitätsklinikum Erlangen, Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg (FAU), Erlangen; Comprehensive Cancer Center Erlangen-EMN (CCC-ER-EMN), Erlangen
| | - C Goossens
- Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Universitätsklinikum Erlangen, Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg (FAU), Erlangen; Comprehensive Cancer Center Erlangen-EMN (CCC-ER-EMN), Erlangen
| | - H Huebner
- Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Universitätsklinikum Erlangen, Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg (FAU), Erlangen; Comprehensive Cancer Center Erlangen-EMN (CCC-ER-EMN), Erlangen
| | - P Gass
- Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Universitätsklinikum Erlangen, Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg (FAU), Erlangen; Comprehensive Cancer Center Erlangen-EMN (CCC-ER-EMN), Erlangen
| | - S Uhrig
- Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Universitätsklinikum Erlangen, Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg (FAU), Erlangen; Comprehensive Cancer Center Erlangen-EMN (CCC-ER-EMN), Erlangen
| | - F Heindl
- Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Universitätsklinikum Erlangen, Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg (FAU), Erlangen; Comprehensive Cancer Center Erlangen-EMN (CCC-ER-EMN), Erlangen
| | - J Emons
- Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Universitätsklinikum Erlangen, Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg (FAU), Erlangen; Comprehensive Cancer Center Erlangen-EMN (CCC-ER-EMN), Erlangen
| | - M Ruebner
- Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Universitätsklinikum Erlangen, Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg (FAU), Erlangen; Comprehensive Cancer Center Erlangen-EMN (CCC-ER-EMN), Erlangen
| | - D Anetsberger
- Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Universitätsklinikum Erlangen, Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg (FAU), Erlangen; Comprehensive Cancer Center Erlangen-EMN (CCC-ER-EMN), Erlangen
| | - A Hartmann
- Comprehensive Cancer Center Erlangen-EMN (CCC-ER-EMN), Erlangen; Institute of Pathology, Universitätsklinikum Erlangen, Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg (FAU), Erlangen
| | - M W Beckmann
- Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Universitätsklinikum Erlangen, Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg (FAU), Erlangen; Comprehensive Cancer Center Erlangen-EMN (CCC-ER-EMN), Erlangen
| | - R Erber
- Comprehensive Cancer Center Erlangen-EMN (CCC-ER-EMN), Erlangen; Institute of Pathology, Universitätsklinikum Erlangen, Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg (FAU), Erlangen
| | - C C Hack
- Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Universitätsklinikum Erlangen, Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg (FAU), Erlangen; Comprehensive Cancer Center Erlangen-EMN (CCC-ER-EMN), Erlangen
| | - P A Fasching
- Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Universitätsklinikum Erlangen, Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg (FAU), Erlangen; Comprehensive Cancer Center Erlangen-EMN (CCC-ER-EMN), Erlangen.
| | - L Häberle
- Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Universitätsklinikum Erlangen, Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg (FAU), Erlangen; Comprehensive Cancer Center Erlangen-EMN (CCC-ER-EMN), Erlangen; Biostatistics Unit, Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Universitätsklinikum Erlangen, Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg (FAU), Erlangen, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Bocklage T, Cornea V, Hickey C, Miller J, Moss J, Chambers M, Bachert SE. Ki-67 Testing in Breast Cancer: Assessing Variability With Scoring Methods and Specimen Types and the Potential Subsequent Impact on Therapy Eligibility. Appl Immunohistochem Mol Morphol 2024; 32:119-124. [PMID: 38450704 PMCID: PMC11996037 DOI: 10.1097/pai.0000000000001188] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/04/2023] [Accepted: 01/26/2024] [Indexed: 03/08/2024]
Abstract
Abemaciclib was originally FDA approved for patients with ER-positive/HER2-negative breast cancer with Ki-67 expression ≥20%. However, there were no guidelines provided on which specimen to test or which scoring method to use. We performed a comprehensive study evaluating the variation in Ki-67 expression in breast specimens from 50 consecutive patients who could have been eligible for abemaciclib therapy. Three pathologists with breast expertise each performed a blinded review with 3 different manual scoring methods [estimated (EST), unweighted (UNW), and weighted (WT) (WT recommended by the International Ki-67 in Breast Cancer Working Group)]. Quantitative image analysis (QIA) using the HALO platform was also performed. Three different specimen types [core needle biopsy (CNB) (n=63), resection (RES) (n=52), and axillary lymph node metastasis (ALN) (n=50)] were evaluated for each patient. The average Ki-67 for all specimens was 14.68% for EST, 14.46% for UNW, 14.15% for WT, and 11.15% for QIA. For the manual methods, the range between the lowest and highest Ki-67 for each specimen between the 3 pathologists was 8.44 for EST, 5.94 for WT, and 5.93 for UNW. The WT method limited interobserver variability with ICC1=0.959 (EST ICC1=0.922 and UNW=0.949). Using the aforementioned cutoff of Ki-67 ≥20% versus <20% to determine treatment eligibility, the averaged EST method yields 20 of 50 patients (40%) who would have been treatment-eligible, versus 15 (30%) for the UNW, 17 (34%) for the WT, and 12 (24%) for the QIA. There was no statistically significant difference in Ki-67 among the 3 specimen types. The average Ki-67 difference was 4.36 for CNB vs RES, 6.95 for CNB versus ALN, and RES versus ALN (P=0.93, 0.99, and 0.94, respectively). Our study concludes that further refinement in Ki-67 scoring is advisable to reduce clinically significant variation.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | | | | | - Jessica Moss
- Departments ofInternal Medicine, Medical Oncology, University of Kentucky, Lexington, KY
| | - Mara Chambers
- Departments ofInternal Medicine, Medical Oncology, University of Kentucky, Lexington, KY
| | - S. Emily Bachert
- Department of Pathology, Brigham & Women’s Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Wu Y, Ma Q, Fan L, Wu S, Wang J. An Automated Breast Volume Scanner-Based Intra- and Peritumoral Radiomics Nomogram for the Preoperative Prediction of Expression of Ki-67 in Breast Malignancy. Acad Radiol 2024; 31:93-103. [PMID: 37544789 DOI: 10.1016/j.acra.2023.07.004] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/02/2023] [Revised: 07/04/2023] [Accepted: 07/05/2023] [Indexed: 08/08/2023]
Abstract
RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES This study aimed to create and verify a nomogram for preoperative prediction of Ki-67 expression in breast malignancy to assist in the development of personalized treatment strategies. MATERIALS AND METHODS This retrospective study received approval from the institutional review board and included a cohort of 197 patients with breast malignancy who were admitted to our hospital. Ki-67 expression was divided into two groups based on a 14% threshold: low and high. A radiomics signature was built utilizing 1702 radiomics features based on an intra- and peritumoral (10 mm) regions of interest. Using multivariate logistic regression, radiomics signature, and ultrasound (US) characteristics, the nomogram was developed. To evaluate the model's calibration, clinical application, and predictive ability, decision curve analysis (DCA), the calibration curve, and the receiver operating characteristic curve were used, respectively. RESULTS The final nomogram included three independent predictors: tumor size (P = .037), radiomics signature (P < .001), and US-reported lymph node status (P = .018). The nomogram exhibited satisfactory performance in the training cohort, demonstrating a specificity of 0.944, a sensitivity of 0.745, and an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.905. The validation cohort recorded a specificity of 0.909, a sensitivity of 0.727, and an AUC of 0.882. The DCA showed the nomogram's clinical utility, and the calibration curve revealed a high consistency among the expected and detected values. CONCLUSION The nomogram used in this investigation can accurately predict Ki-67 expression in people with malignant breast tumors, helping to develop personalized treatment approaches.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Yimin Wu
- Department of Ultrasound, WuHu Hospital, East China Normal University (The Second People's Hospital, WuHu), Wuhu, Anhui, PR China (Y.W., J.W.)
| | - Qianqing Ma
- Department of Ultrasound, The First Affiliated Hospital of Anhui Medical University, Hefei, Anhui, PR China (Q.M.)
| | - Lifang Fan
- Department of Medical Imaging, Wannan Medical College, Wuhu, Anhui, PR China (L.F.)
| | - Shujian Wu
- Yijishan Hospital Affiliated to Wannan Medical College, Wuhu, Anhui, PR China (S.W.)
| | - Junli Wang
- Department of Ultrasound, WuHu Hospital, East China Normal University (The Second People's Hospital, WuHu), Wuhu, Anhui, PR China (Y.W., J.W.).
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Terán S, Alva M, Tolosa P, Rey-Cárdenas M, Madariaga A, Lema L, Ruano Y, Manso L, Ciruelos E, Sánchez-Bayona R. Analysis of the association of HER-2 low carcinomas and PAM50 assay in hormone receptor positive early-stage breast cancer. Breast 2023; 71:42-46. [PMID: 37481795 PMCID: PMC10392598 DOI: 10.1016/j.breast.2023.07.009] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/26/2023] [Revised: 05/28/2023] [Accepted: 07/19/2023] [Indexed: 07/25/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND HER2-low has emerged as a new predictive biomarker in metastatic breast cancer. However, its prognostic value in early-stage carcinomas needs to be revisited. We aimed to evaluate the association of HER2-low carcinomas with PAM50 risk groups combined with clinicopathological variables in early breast cancer. METHODS We conducted a retrospective analysis of 332 patients with early-stage breast cancer that underwent PAM50 signature analysis between 2015 and 2021at Hospital Universitario 12 de Octubre (Madrid, Spain). Clinical and pathological variables were collected from medical records. After adjusting for potential confounders, we estimated Odds Ratio (OR) and 95% confidence interval for high-risk PAM50 subgroup, comparing HER2-low versus HER2-zero carcinomas by multivariable logistic regression. P values below 0.05 were deemed statistically significant. RESULTS 192 (57%) patients were classified as HER2-low carcinomas. Median follow-up was 34 months. Adjusted OR for high-risk PAM50 when comparing HER2-low versus HER2-zero carcinomas was 1.31 (95% CI: 0.75-2.30, p = 0.33). The multivariable model detected significant associations for Ki-67% (≥20% vs. <20%: OR = 4.03, 95% CI: 2.15-7.56, p < 0.001), T staging category (T2/T3 vs. T1: OR = 3.44, 95% CI: 1.96-6.04, p < 0.001), progesterone receptor (PR ≥ 20% vs. <20%: OR = 0.44, 95% CI: 0.23-0.83, p = 0.01), nodal staging category (N+ vs. N0: OR = 3.8, 95% CI: 1.89-7.62, p < 0.001) and histological grade (grade 2 vs. 1: OR = 2.41, 95% CI: 1.01-5.73, p = 0.04; grade 3 vs 1: OR = 5.40, 95%CI: 1.98-14.60, p = 0.001). CONCLUSIONS In this early-stage breast cancer cohort, HER2-low was not associated with a high-risk PAM50 compared to HER2-zero carcinomas. Ki-67 ≥ 20%, T2/T3, histological grade 2/3, N+ and PR<20% were significantly associated to a high-risk PAM50.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Santiago Terán
- Medical Oncology department, Hospital Universitario 12 de Octubre, Madrid, Spain
| | - Manuel Alva
- Medical Oncology department, Hospital Universitario 12 de Octubre, Madrid, Spain
| | - Pablo Tolosa
- Medical Oncology department, Hospital Universitario 12 de Octubre, Madrid, Spain
| | | | - Ainhoa Madariaga
- Medical Oncology department, Hospital Universitario 12 de Octubre, Madrid, Spain
| | - Laura Lema
- Medical Oncology department, Hospital Universitario 12 de Octubre, Madrid, Spain
| | - Yolanda Ruano
- Pathology department, Hospital Universitario 12 de Octubre, Madrid, Spain
| | - Luis Manso
- Medical Oncology department, Hospital Universitario 12 de Octubre, Madrid, Spain
| | - Eva Ciruelos
- Medical Oncology department, Hospital Universitario 12 de Octubre, Madrid, Spain
| | | |
Collapse
|
5
|
Kolberg HC, Hartkopf AD, Fehm TN, Welslau M, Müller V, Schütz F, Fasching PA, Janni W, Witzel I, Thomssen C, Beierlein M, Belleville E, Untch M, Thill M, Tesch H, Ditsch N, Lux MP, Aktas B, Banys-Paluchowski M, Kolberg-Liedtke C, Wöckel A, Harbeck N, Stickeler E, Bartsch R, Schneeweiss A, Ettl J, Krug D, Taran FA, Lüftner D, Würstlein R. Update Breast Cancer 2023 Part 3 - Expert Opinions of Early Stage Breast Cancer Therapies. Geburtshilfe Frauenheilkd 2023; 83:1117-1126. [PMID: 37706055 PMCID: PMC10497347 DOI: 10.1055/a-2143-8125] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/29/2023] [Accepted: 07/27/2023] [Indexed: 09/15/2023] Open
Abstract
The St. Gallen (SG) International Breast Cancer Conference is held every two years, previously in St. Gallen and now in Vienna. This year (2023) marks the eighteenth edition of this conference, which focuses on the treatment of patients with early-stage breast carcinoma. A panel discussion will be held at the end of this four-day event, during which a panel of experts will give their opinions on current controversial issues relating to the treatment of early-stage breast cancer patients. To this end, questions are generally formulated in such a way that clinically realistic cases are presented - often including poignant hypothetical modifications. This review reports on the outcome of these discussions and summarises the data associated with individual questions raised.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Andreas D. Hartkopf
- Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Ulm University Hospital, Ulm, Germany
| | - Tanja N. Fehm
- Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, University Hospital Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf, Germany
| | | | - Volkmar Müller
- Department of Gynecology, Hamburg-Eppendorf University Medical Center, Hamburg, Germany
| | - Florian Schütz
- Gynäkologie und Geburtshilfe, Diakonissen-Stiftungs-Krankenhaus Speyer, Speyer, Germany
| | - Peter A. Fasching
- Erlangen University Hospital, Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Comprehensive Cancer Center Erlangen-EMN, Friedrich-Alexander University Erlangen-Nuremberg, Erlangen,
Germany
| | - Wolfgang Janni
- Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Ulm University Hospital, Ulm, Germany
| | - Isabell Witzel
- Universitätsspital Zürich, Klinik für Gynäkologie, Zürich, Switzerland
| | - Christoph Thomssen
- Department of Gynaecology, Martin-Luther-University Halle-Wittenberg, Halle (Saale), Germany
| | - Milena Beierlein
- Erlangen University Hospital, Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Comprehensive Cancer Center Erlangen-EMN, Friedrich-Alexander University Erlangen-Nuremberg, Erlangen,
Germany
| | | | - Michael Untch
- Clinic for Gynecology and Obstetrics, Breast Cancer Center, Gynecologic Oncology Center, Helios Klinikum Berlin Buch, Berlin, Germany
| | - Marc Thill
- Agaplesion Markus Krankenhaus, Department of Gynecology and Gynecological Oncology, Frankfurt am Main, Germany
| | - Hans Tesch
- Oncology Practice at Bethanien Hospital, Frankfurt am Main, Germany
| | - Nina Ditsch
- Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, University Hospital Augsburg, Augsburg, Germany
| | - Michael P. Lux
- Klinik für Gynäkologie und Geburtshilfe, Frauenklinik St. Louise, Paderborn, St. Josefs-Krankenhaus, Salzkotten, St. Vincenz Krankenhaus GmbH, Paderborn, Germany
| | - Bahriye Aktas
- Department of Gynecology, University of Leipzig Medical Center, Leipzig, Germany
| | - Maggie Banys-Paluchowski
- Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, University Hospital Schleswig-Holstein, Campus Lübeck, Lübeck, Germany
| | | | - Achim Wöckel
- Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, University Hospital Würzburg, Würzburg, Germany
| | - Nadia Harbeck
- Breast Center, Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics and CCC Munich LMU, LMU University Hospital, Munich, Germany
| | - Elmar Stickeler
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Center for Integrated Oncology (CIO Aachen, Bonn, Cologne, Düsseldorf), University Hospital of RWTH Aachen, Aachen, Germany
| | - Rupert Bartsch
- Medical University of Vienna, Department of Medicine I, Division of Oncology, Vienna, Austria
| | - Andreas Schneeweiss
- National Center for Tumor Diseases, University Hospital and German Cancer Research Center, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Johannes Ettl
- Klinikum Kempten, Klinikverbund Allgäu, Klinik für Frauenheilkunde und Gynäkologie, Kempten, Germany
| | - David Krug
- Universitätsklinikum Schleswig-Holstein, Campus Kiel, Klinik für Strahlentherapie, Kiel, Germany
| | - Florin-Andrei Taran
- Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, University Hospital Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany
| | - Diana Lüftner
- Immanuel Hospital Märkische Schweiz, Buckow, Germany
- Medical University of Brandenburg Theodor-Fontane, Brandenburg, Germany
| | - Rachel Würstlein
- Breast Center, Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics and CCC Munich LMU, LMU University Hospital, Munich, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Johnston S, Emde A, Barrios C, Srock S, Neven P, Martin M, Cameron D, Janni W, Gnant M. Cyclin-dependent kinase 4 and 6 (CDK4/6) inhibitors: existing and emerging differences. JNCI Cancer Spectr 2023; 7:pkad045. [PMID: 37369022 PMCID: PMC10415176 DOI: 10.1093/jncics/pkad045] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/23/2023] [Revised: 04/04/2023] [Accepted: 06/12/2023] [Indexed: 06/29/2023] Open
Abstract
The cyclin-dependent kinase 4 and 6 (CDK4/6) inhibitors palbociclib, ribociclib, and abemaciclib are standard-of-care therapy for hormone receptor-positive advanced or metastatic breast cancer, based on randomized trials showing improved progression-free survival for all 3 drugs and overall survival for ribociclib and abemaciclib. Results in early breast cancer are discordant, with sustained improvement in invasive disease-free survival demonstrated for abemaciclib but not other CDK4/6 inhibitors to date. We review nonclinical studies exploring mechanistic differences between the drugs, the impact of continuous dosing on treatment effect, and translational research into potential resistance mechanisms and prognostic and predictive markers. We focus particularly on how emerging findings may help us understand similarities and differences between the available CDK4/6 inhibitors. Even at late-stage clinical development, there remains much to learn about how agents in this class exert their varying effects.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | - Carlos Barrios
- Grupo Oncoclínicas, Hospital São Lucas, PUCRS, Latin American Cooperative Oncology Group (LACOG), Porto Alegre, RS, Brazil
| | | | | | - Miguel Martin
- Instituto de Investigación Sanitaria Gregorio Marañon, CIBERONC, Universidad Complutense, Madrid, Spain
| | - David Cameron
- Edinburgh Cancer Centre, Institute of Genetics and Cancer, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK
| | - Wolfgang Janni
- Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, University of Ulm, Ulm, Germany
| | - Michael Gnant
- Comprehensive Cancer Center, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Finkelman BS, Zhang H, Hicks DG, Turner BM. The Evolution of Ki-67 and Breast Carcinoma: Past Observations, Present Directions, and Future Considerations. Cancers (Basel) 2023; 15:808. [PMID: 36765765 PMCID: PMC9913317 DOI: 10.3390/cancers15030808] [Citation(s) in RCA: 14] [Impact Index Per Article: 7.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/03/2022] [Revised: 01/19/2023] [Accepted: 01/24/2023] [Indexed: 01/31/2023] Open
Abstract
The 1983 discovery of a mouse monoclonal antibody-the Ki-67 antibody-that recognized a nuclear antigen present only in proliferating cells represented a seminal discovery for the pathologic assessment of cellular proliferation in breast cancer and other solid tumors. Cellular proliferation is a central determinant of prognosis and response to cytotoxic chemotherapy in patients with breast cancer, and since the discovery of the Ki-67 antibody, Ki-67 has evolved as an important biomarker with both prognostic and predictive potential in breast cancer. Although there is universal recognition among the international guideline recommendations of the value of Ki-67 in breast cancer, recommendations for the actual use of Ki-67 assays in the prognostic and predictive evaluation of breast cancer remain mixed, primarily due to the lack of assay standardization and inconsistent inter-observer and inter-laboratory reproducibility. The treatment of high-risk ER-positive/human epidermal growth factor receptor-2 (HER2) negative breast cancer with the recently FDA-approved drug abemaciclib relies on a quantitative assessment of Ki-67 expression in the treatment decision algorithm. This further reinforces the urgent need for standardization of Ki-67 antibody selection and staining interpretation, which will hopefully lead to multidisciplinary consensus on the use of Ki-67 as a prognostic and predictive marker in breast cancer. The goals of this review are to highlight the historical evolution of Ki-67 in breast cancer, summarize the present literature on Ki-67 in breast cancer, and discuss the evolving literature on the use of Ki-67 as a companion diagnostic biomarker in breast cancer, with consideration for the necessary changes required across pathology practices to help increase the reliability and widespread adoption of Ki-67 as a prognostic and predictive marker for breast cancer in clinical practice.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | | | - Bradley M. Turner
- Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, University of Rochester Medical Center, 601 Elmwood Ave., Rochester, NY 14620, USA
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Dowsett M, Nielsen TO, Rimm DL, Hayes DF. Ki67 as a Companion Diagnostic: Good or Bad News? J Clin Oncol 2022; 40:3796-3799. [PMID: 35816627 DOI: 10.1200/jco.22.00581] [Citation(s) in RCA: 9] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/24/2022] Open
Affiliation(s)
| | - Torsten O Nielsen
- Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada
| | - David L Rimm
- Department of Pathology, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, CT
| | - Daniel F Hayes
- University of Michigan Rogel Cancer Center, Ann Arbor, MI
| | | |
Collapse
|
9
|
Fehm TN, Welslau M, Müller V, Lüftner D, Schütz F, Fasching PA, Janni W, Thomssen C, Witzel I, Belleville E, Untch M, Thill M, Tesch H, Ditsch N, Lux MP, Aktas B, Banys-Paluchowski M, Schneeweiss A, Kolberg-Liedtke C, Hartkopf AD, Wöckel A, Kolberg HC, Harbeck N, Stickeler E. Update Breast Cancer 2022 Part 3 - Early-Stage Breast Cancer. Geburtshilfe Frauenheilkd 2022; 82:912-921. [PMID: 36110894 PMCID: PMC9470293 DOI: 10.1055/a-1912-7105] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/20/2022] [Accepted: 07/31/2022] [Indexed: 11/01/2022] Open
Abstract
This review summarizes recent developments in the prevention and treatment of patients with early-stage breast cancer. The individual disease risk for different molecular subtypes was investigated in a large epidemiological study. With regard to treatment, new data are available from long-term follow-up of the Aphinity study, as well as new data on neoadjuvant therapy with atezolizumab in HER2-positive patients. Biomarkers, such as residual cancer burden, were investigated in the context of pembrolizumab therapy. A Genomic Grade Index study in elderly patients is one of a group of studies investigating the use of modern multigene tests to identify patients with an excellent prognosis in whom chemotherapy may be avoided. These and other aspects of the latest developments in the diagnosis and treatment of breast cancer are described in this review.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Tanja N. Fehm
- Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, University Hospital Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf, Germany
| | | | - Volkmar Müller
- Department of Gynecology, Hamburg-Eppendorf University Medical Center, Hamburg, Germany
| | - Diana Lüftner
- Immanuel Hospital Märkische Schweiz & Medical University of Brandenburg Theodor-Fontane, Brandenburg, Buckow, Germany
| | - Florian Schütz
- Gynäkologie und Geburtshilfe, Diakonissen-Stiftungs-Krankenhaus Speyer, Speyer, Germany
| | - Peter A. Fasching
- Erlangen University Hospital, Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Comprehensive Cancer Center Erlangen-EMN, Friedrich-Alexander University Erlangen-Nuremberg, Erlangen,
Germany,Correspondence/Korrespondenzadresse Peter A. Fasching, MD Erlangen University Hospital, Department of Gynecology and ObstetricsComprehensive Cancer
Center Erlangen EMNFriedrich Alexander University of Erlangen-NurembergUniversitätsstraße 21 – 2391054
ErlangenGermany
| | - Wolfgang Janni
- Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Ulm University Hospital, Ulm, Germany
| | - Christoph Thomssen
- Department of Gynaecology, Martin-Luther-University Halle-Wittenberg, Halle (Saale), Germany
| | - Isabell Witzel
- Department of Gynecology, Hamburg-Eppendorf University Medical Center, Hamburg, Germany
| | | | - Michael Untch
- Clinic for Gynecology and Obstetrics, Breast Cancer Center, Gynecologic Oncology Center, Helios Klinikum Berlin Buch, Berlin, Germany
| | - Marc Thill
- Agaplesion Markus Krankenhaus, Department of Gynecology and Gynecological Oncology, Frankfurt am Main, Germany
| | - Hans Tesch
- Oncology Practice at Bethanien Hospital, Frankfurt am Main, Germany
| | - Nina Ditsch
- Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, University Hospital Augsburg, Augsburg, Germany
| | - Michael P. Lux
- Klinik für Gynäkologie und Geburtshilfe, Frauenklinik St. Louise, Paderborn, St. Josefs-Krankenhaus, Salzkotten, St. Vincenz Krankenhaus GmbH, Germany
| | - Bahriye Aktas
- Department of Gynecology, University of Leipzig Medical Center, Leipzig, Germany
| | - Maggie Banys-Paluchowski
- Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, University Hospital Schleswig-Holstein, Campus Lübeck, Lübeck, Germany
| | - Andreas Schneeweiss
- National Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT), Heidelberg University Hospital and German Cancer Research Center, Heidelberg, Germany
| | | | - Andreas D. Hartkopf
- Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Ulm University Hospital, Ulm, Germany
| | - Achim Wöckel
- Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, University Hospital Würzburg, Würzburg, Germany
| | | | - Nadia Harbeck
- Breast Center, Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics and CCC Munich LMU, LMU University Hospital, Munich, Germany
| | - Elmar Stickeler
- Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, RWTH University Hospital Aachen, Aachen, Germany
| |
Collapse
|