Concordance between core needle biopsy and surgical excision specimens for Ki-67 in breast cancer - a systematic review of the literature

Morphological and molecular changes of oestrogen receptor-positive breast cancer following bridging endocrine therapy: a United Kingdom multicentre study

AIMS

Standard neoadjuvant endocrine therapy (NAET) is used for 6-9 months to downstage hormone-receptor-positive breast cancer. Bridging ET was introduced during the COVID-19 pandemic to delay surgical intervention. There are no data in the literature on the effect of short course therapy on tumour response. We aimed to analyse the effect of bridging ET and validate the previously proposed neoadjuvant ET pathological reporting criteria.

METHODS AND RESULTS

This was a multicentre cohort of 256 patients who received bridging ET between March and October 2020. Assessment of paired pre- and post-NAET hormone receptors and HER2 and posttherapy Ki67 expression was done. The median duration of NAET was 45 days. In all, 86% of cases achieved partial pathological response and 9% showed minimal residual disease. Histological response to ET was observed from as early as day 6 posttherapy. Central scarring was noted in 32.8% of cases and lymphocytic infiltrate was seen in 43.4% of cases. Significant changes associated with the duration of ET were observed in tumour grade (21%), with downgrading identified in 12% of tumours (P < 0.001), progesterone receptor (PR) expression with switch to PR-negative status in 26% of cases (P < 0.001), and HER2 status with a switch from HER2-low to HER2-negative status in 32% of cases (P < 0.001). The median patient survival was 475 days, with an overall survival rate of 99.6%.

CONCLUSIONS

Changes characteristic of tumour regression and significant changes in PR and HER2 occurred following a short course of NAET. The findings support biomarker testing on pretreatment core biopsies and retesting following therapy.

MRI-Based Radiomics Methods for Predicting Ki-67 Expression in Breast Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES

The purpose of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to assess the quality and diagnostic accuracy of MRI-based radiomics for predicting Ki-67 expression in breast cancer.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A systematic literature search was performed to find relevant studies published in different databases, including PubMed, Web of Science, and Embase up until March 10, 2023. All papers were independently evaluated for eligibility by two reviewers. Studies that matched research questions and provided sufficient data for quantitative synthesis were included in the systematic review and meta-analysis, respectively. The quality of the articles was assessed using Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies 2 (QUADAS-2) and Radiomics Quality Score (RQS) tools. The predictive value of MRI-based radiomics for Ki-67 antigen in patients with breast cancer was assessed using pooled sensitivity (SEN), specificity, and area under the curve (AUC). Meta-regression was performed to explore the cause of heterogeneity. Different covariates were used for subgroup analysis.

RESULTS

31 studies were included in the systematic review; among them, 21 reported sufficient data for meta-analysis. 20 training cohorts and five validation cohorts were pooled separately. The pooled sensitivity, specificity, and AUC of MRI-based radiomics for predicting Ki-67 expression in training cohorts were 0.80 [95% CI, 0.73-0.86], 0.82 [95% CI, 0.78-0.86], and 0.88 [95%CI, 0.85-0.91], respectively. The corresponding values for validation cohorts were 0.81 [95% CI, 0.72-0.87], 0.73 [95% CI, 0.62-0.82], and 0.84 [95%CI, 0.80-0.87], respectively. Based on QUADAS-2, some risks of bias were detected for reference standard and flow and timing domains. However, the quality of the included article was acceptable. The mean RQS score of the included articles was close to 6, corresponding to 16.6% of the maximum possible score. Significant heterogeneity was observed in pooled sensitivity and specificity of training cohorts (I2 > 75%). We found that using deep learning radiomic methods, magnetic field strength (3 T vs. 1.5 T), scanner manufacturer, region of interest structure (2D vs. 3D), route of tissue sampling, Ki-67 cut-off, logistic regression for model construction, and LASSO for feature reduction as well as PyRadiomics software for feature extraction had a great impact on heterogeneity according to our joint model analysis. Diagnostic performance in studies that used deep learning-based radiomics and multiple MRI sequences (e.g., DWI+DCE) was slightly higher. In addition, radiomic features derived from DWI sequences performed better than contrast-enhanced sequences in terms of specificity and sensitivity. No publication bias was found based on Deeks' funnel plot. Sensitivity analysis showed that eliminating every study one by one does not impact overall results.

CONCLUSION

This meta-analysis showed that MRI-based radiomics has a good diagnostic accuracy in differentiating breast cancer patients with high Ki-67 expression from low-expressing groups. However, the sensitivity and specificity of these methods still do not surpass 90%, restricting them from being used as a supplement to current pathological assessments (e.g., biopsy or surgery) to predict Ki-67 expression accurately.

Ki-67 Testing in Breast Cancer: Assessing Variability With Scoring Methods and Specimen Types and the Potential Subsequent Impact on Therapy Eligibility

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.

The Biomarker Ki-67: Promise, Potential, and Problems in Breast Cancer

Ki-67 is a nuclear protein serendipitously discovered by monoclonal antibody selection in the early 1980s. While it has been applied for decades in the context of breast cancer as a putative prognostic and, more recently, predictive, biomarker, even after all this time there is incomplete agreement as to the validity of the immunohistochemical assays employed for Ki-67 assessment, given possible effects of the disparate methodologies employed and possible confounding preanalytical, analytical, and interpretive variables. In this brief review, the history of Ki-67 and the problems, particularly with the analytical and interpretive variables, are highlighted through a selective review of the published literature. The contributions of the International Ki-67 Breast Cancer Working Group are highlighted, and in particular, the recommendations made by this group are reviewed. The potential of Ki-67 as a biomarker for breast cancer has not yet been fully realized, but an understanding of the power as well as the limitations of the methods of Ki-67 assessment are important if this biomarker can realize its potential.

Amide proton transfer (APT) imaging of breast cancers and its correlation with biological status

PURPOSE

To assess the usefulness of amide proton transfer (APT) imaging to predict the biological status of breast cancers.

METHOD

Sixty-six patients (age range 31-85 years, mean 58.9 years) with histopathologically proven invasive ductal carcinomas of 2 cm or larger in diameter were included in this study. 3D APT weighted imaging was conducted on a 3 T scanner. Mean APT signal intensity (SI) was analyzed in relation to biological subtypes, Ki-67 labeling index, and nuclear grades (NGs).

RESULTS

The triple-negative (TN) cancers (n = 10; 2.75 ± 0.42%) showed significantly higher APT SI than the luminal type cancers (n = 48; 1.74 ± 0.83) and HER2 cancers (n = 8; 1.83 ± 0.21) (P = 0.0007, 0.03). APT SI had weakly positive correlation with the Ki-67 labeling index (r = 0.38, P = 0.002). The mean APT SIs were significantly higher for high-Ki-67 (>30%) (n = 31; 2.25 ± 0.70) than low-Ki-67 (≤30%) cancers (n = 35; 1.60 ± 0.79) (P = 0.0007). There was no significant difference in the APT SIs between NG 1-2 (n = 31; 1.71 ± 0.84) and NG 3 (n = 35; 2.08 ± 0.76%) cancers (P = 0.06).

CONCLUSIONS

TN and high-Ki-67 breast cancers showed high APT SIs. APT imaging can help to predict the biological status of breast cancers.

Ki67 in Breast Cancer Assay: An Ad Hoc Testing Recommendation from the Canadian Association of Pathologists Task Force

Ki67, a marker of cellular proliferation, is commonly assessed in surgical pathology laboratories. In breast cancer, Ki67 is an established prognostic factor with higher levels associated with worse long-term survival. However, Ki67 IHC is considered of limited clinical use in breast cancer management largely due to issues related to standardization and reproducibility of scoring across laboratories. Recently, both the American Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and Health Canada have approved the use of abemaciclib (CDK4/6 inhibitor) for patients with HR+/HER2: high-risk early breast cancers in the adjuvant setting. Health Canada and the FDA have included a Ki67 proliferation index of ≥20% in the drug monograph. The approval was based on the results from monarchE, a phase III clinical trial in early-stage chemotherapy-naïve, HR+, HER2 negative patients at high risk of early recurrence. The study has shown significant improvement in invasive disease-free survival (IDFS) with abemaciclib when combined with adjuvant endocrine therapy at two years. Therefore, there is an urgent need by the breast pathology and medical oncology community in Canada to establish national guideline recommendations for Ki67 testing as a predictive marker in the context of abemaciclib therapy consideration. The following recommendations are based on previous IKWG publications, available guidance from the monarchE trial and expert opinions. The current recommendations are by no means final or comprehensive, and their goal is to focus on its role in the selection of patients for abemaciclib therapy. The aim of this document is to guide Canadian pathologists on how to test and report Ki67 in invasive breast cancer. Testing should be performed upon a medical oncologist’s request only. Testing must be performed on treatment-naïve tumor tissue. Testing on the core biopsy is preferred; however, a well-fixed resection specimen is an acceptable alternative. Adhering to ASCO/CAP fixation guidelines for breast biomarkers is advised. Readout training is strongly recommended. Visual counting methods, other than eyeballing, should be used, with global rather than hot spot assessment preferred. Counting 100 cells in at least four areas of the tumor is recommended. The Ki67 scoring app developed to assist pathologists with scoring Ki67 proposed by the IKWG, available for free download, may be used. Automated image analysis is very promising, and laboratories with such technology are encouraged to use it as an adjunct to visual counting. A score of <5 or >30 is more robust. The task force recommends that the results are best expressed as a continuous variable. The appropriate antibody clone and staining protocols to be used may take time to address. For the time being, the task force recommends having tonsils/+pancreas on-slide control and enrollment in at least one national/international EQA program. Analytical validation remains a pending goal. Until the data become available, using local ki67 protocols is acceptable. The task force recommends participation in upcoming calibration and technical validation initiatives.

HER2-Low Status Is Not Accurate in Breast Cancer Core Needle Biopsy Samples: An Analysis of 5610 Consecutive Patients

Background: HER2-Low status is found in approximately half of breast cancer patients and shows potential benefits from novel antibody−drug conjugates (ADCs). Data on the accuracy of HER2-Low status between core needle biopsy (CNB) and surgical excision specimen (SES) samples are lacking. We aimed to investigate the accuracy of HER2-Low status diagnosis between CNB and SES samples. Methods: Consecutive early-stage breast cancer patients who underwent surgery from January 2009 to March 2022 with paired CNB and SES samples were retrospectively reviewed. HER2-Low was defined as IHC 1+ or IHC2+ and FISH-negative. Concordance rates were analyzed by the Kappa test. Further clinicopathological characteristics were compared among different HER2 status and their changes. Results: A total of 5610 patients were included, of whom 3209 (57.2%) and 3320 (59.2%) had HER2-Low status in CNB and SES samples, respectively. The concordance rate of HER2 status in the whole population was 82.37% (Kappa = 0.684, p < 0.001), and was 76.87% in the HER2-Negative patients (Kappa = 0.372, p < 0.001). Among 1066 HER2-0 cases by CNB, 530 patients were classified as HER2-Low tumors. On the contrary, in 3209 patients with HER2-Low tumor by CNB, 387 were scored as HER2-0 on the SES samples. ER-negative or Ki67 high expression tumor by CNB had a high concordance rate of HER2-Low status. Conclusions: A relatively low concordance rate was found when evaluating HER2-Low status between CNB and SES samples in HER2-Negative breast cancer patients, indicating the necessity of retesting HER2 low status at surgery, which may guide further therapy in the era of anti-HER2 ADCs.

Systematically higher Ki67 scores on core biopsy samples compared to corresponding resection specimen in breast cancer: a multi-operator and multi-institutional study

Ki67 has potential clinical importance in breast cancer but has yet to see broad acceptance due to inter-laboratory variability. Here we tested an open source and calibrated automated digital image analysis (DIA) platform to: (i) investigate the comparability of Ki67 measurement across corresponding core biopsy and resection specimen cases, and (ii) assess section to section differences in Ki67 scoring. Two sets of 60 previously stained slides containing 30 core-cut biopsy and 30 corresponding resection specimens from 30 estrogen receptor-positive breast cancer patients were sent to 17 participating labs for automated assessment of average Ki67 expression. The blocks were centrally cut and immunohistochemically (IHC) stained for Ki67 (MIB-1 antibody). The QuPath platform was used to evaluate tumoral Ki67 expression. Calibration of the DIA method was performed as in published studies. A guideline for building an automated Ki67 scoring algorithm was sent to participating labs. Very high correlation and no systematic error (p = 0.08) was found between consecutive Ki67 IHC sections. Ki67 scores were higher for core biopsy slides compared to paired whole sections from resections (p ≤ 0.001; median difference: 5.31%). The systematic discrepancy between core biopsy and corresponding whole sections was likely due to pre-analytical factors (tissue handling, fixation). Therefore, Ki67 IHC should be tested on core biopsy samples to best reflect the biological status of the tumor.

Concordance between core needle biopsy and surgical excision for breast cancer tumor grade and biomarkers

PURPOSE

Histopathological biomarkers guide breast cancer management. Testing histopathological biomarkers on both core needle biopsy (CNB) and surgical excision (SE) in patients who are treated with upfront surgery is unnecessary and costly if there is high concordance between the two. This study investigated the concordance between CNB and SE for estrogen receptor (ER), progesterone receptor (PR), human epidermal growth factor-2 (HER2), tumor grade and Ki-67.

METHODS

Histopathological biomarker information were retrospectively collected from preoperative CNB and SE on patients diagnosed with breast cancer through the BreastScreen Sydney West program over a four-year period between January 2017 and December 2020. Data were then analyzed to calculate percentage of agreement and concordance using kappa values for ER, PR, HER2, tumor grade and Ki-67.

RESULTS

A total of 504 cases of invasive breast cancers were analyzed. There was substantial level of concordance for ER 96.7% (κ = 0.687) and PR 93.2% (κ = 0.69). Concordance for HER2 negative (IHC 0, IHC 1 +) or positive (IHC 3 +) tumor on CNB was 100% (κ = 1.00). Grade and Ki-67 showed moderate level of concordance, 72.6% (κ = 0.545) and 70.5% (κ = 0.453), respectively.

CONCLUSION

ER, PR and HER2 show high level of concordance. CNB is reliable in determining histopathological biomarkers for ER, PR positive and HER2 positive or negative tumors indicating that retesting these on SE may not be necessary.