Digital Image Analysis of the Proliferation Markers Ki67 and Phosphohistone H3 in Gastroenteropancreatic Neuroendocrine Neoplasms: Accuracy of Grading Compared with Routine Manual Hot Spot Evaluation of the Ki67 Index

Gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasms (GEP-NENs) are rare epithelial neoplasms. Grading is based on mitotic activity or the percentage of Ki67-positive cells in a hot spot. Routine methods have poor intraobserver and interobserver consistency, and objective measurements are lacking. This study aimed to evaluate digital image analysis (DIA) as an objective assessment of proliferation markers in GEP-NENs. A consecutive cohort of patients with automated DIA measurement of Ki67 (DIA Ki67) and phosphohistone H3 (DIA PHH3) on immunohistochemical slides was analyzed using Visiopharm image analysis software (Hoersholm, Denmark). The results were compared with the Ki67 index from routine pathology reports (pathology Ki67). The study included 159 patients (57% males). The median pathology Ki67 was 2.0% and DIA Ki67 was 4.1%. The interclass correlation coefficient of the DIA Ki67 compared with the pathology Ki67 showed an excellent agreement of 0.96 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.94-0.96]. The observed kappa value was 0.86 (95% CI: 0.81-0.91) when comparing grades based on the same methods. PHH3 was measured in 145 (91.2%) cases. The observed kappa value was 0.74. (95% CI: 0.65-0.83) when comparing grade based on the DIA PHH3 and the pathology Ki67. The DIA Ki67 shows excellent agreement with the pathology Ki67. The DIA PHH3 measurements were more varied and cannot replace other methods for grading GEP-NENs.publishedVersio

Digital Image Analysis of the Proliferation Markers Ki67 and Phosphohistone H3 in Gastroenteropancreatic Neuroendocrine Neoplasms: Accuracy of Grading Compared with Routine Manual Hot Spot Evaluation of the Ki67 Index

Gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasms (GEP-NENs) are rare epithelial neoplasms. Grading is based on mitotic activity or the percentage of Ki67-positive cells in a hot spot. Routine methods have poor intraobserver and interobserver consistency, and objective measurements are lacking. This study aimed to evaluate digital image analysis (DIA) as an objective assessment of proliferation markers in GEP-NENs. A consecutive cohort of patients with automated DIA measurement of Ki67 (DIA Ki67) and phosphohistone H3 (DIA PHH3) on immunohistochemical slides was analyzed using Visiopharm image analysis software (Hoersholm, Denmark). The results were compared with the Ki67 index from routine pathology reports (pathology Ki67). The study included 159 patients (57% males). The median pathology Ki67 was 2.0% and DIA Ki67 was 4.1%. The interclass correlation coefficient of the DIA Ki67 compared with the pathology Ki67 showed an excellent agreement of 0.96 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.94-0.96]. The observed kappa value was 0.86 (95% CI: 0.81-0.91) when comparing grades based on the same methods. PHH3 was measured in 145 (91.2%) cases. The observed kappa value was 0.74. (95% CI: 0.65-0.83) when comparing grade based on the DIA PHH3 and the pathology Ki67. The DIA Ki67 shows excellent agreement with the pathology Ki67. The DIA PHH3 measurements were more varied and cannot replace other methods for grading GEP-NENs

Validation study of MARCKSL1 as a prognostic factor in lymph node-negative breast cancer patients.

Protein expression of Myristoylated alanine-rich C kinase substrate like-1 (MARCKSL1) has been identified as a prognostic factor in lymph-node negative (LN-) breast cancer patients. We aim to validate MARCKSL1 protein expression as a prognostic marker for distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS) in a new cohort of LN- breast cancer patients. MARCKSL1 expression was evaluated in 151 operable T1,2N0M0 LN- breast cancer patients by immunohistochemistry. Median follow-up time was 152 months, range 11-189 months. Results were compared with classical prognosticators (age, tumor diameter, grade, estrogen receptor, and proliferation) using single (Kaplan-Meier) and multivariate (Cox model) survival analysis. Thirteen patients (9%) developed distant metastases. With both single and multiple analysis of all features, MARCKSL1 did not show a significant prognostic value for DMFS (p = 0.498). Of the assessed classical prognosticators, only tumor diameter showed prognostic value (hazard ratio 9.3, 95% confidence interval 2.8-31.0, p <0.001). MARCKSL1 expression could not be confirmed as a prognostic factor in this cohort. Possible reasons include changes in diagnostic and treatment guidelines between the discovery and validation cohorts. Further studies are needed to reveal the potential biological role of this protein in breast cancer