Assessment of Ki67 in breast cancer: recommendations from the International Ki67 in Breast Cancer working group.

Uncontrolled proliferation is a hallmark of cancer. In breast cancer, immunohistochemical assessment of the proportion of cells staining for the nuclear antigen Ki67 has become the most widely used method for comparing proliferation between tumor samples. Potential uses include prognosis, prediction of relative responsiveness or resistance to chemotherapy or endocrine therapy, estimation of residual risk in patients on standard therapy and as a dynamic biomarker of treatment efficacy in samples taken before, during, and after neoadjuvant therapy, particularly neoadjuvant endocrine therapy. Increasingly, Ki67 is measured in these scenarios for clinical research, including as a primary efficacy endpoint for clinical trials, and sometimes for clinical management. At present, the enormous variation in analytical practice markedly limits the value of Ki67 in each of these contexts. On March 12, 2010, an international panel of investigators with substantial expertise in the assessment of Ki67 and in the development of biomarker guidelines was convened in London by the co-chairs of the Breast International Group and North American Breast Cancer Group Biomarker Working Party to consider evidence for potential applications. Comprehensive recommendations on preanalytical and analytical assessment, and interpretation and scoring of Ki67 were formulated based on current evidence. These recommendations are geared toward achieving a harmonized methodology, create greater between-laboratory and between-study comparability, and allow earlier valid applications of this marker in clinical practice.

[1]  M. Boon Microwave-antigen retrieval: the importance of pH of the retrieval solution for MIB-1 staining. , 1996, European journal of morphology.

[2]  D. Arber Effect of Prolonged Formalin Fixation on the Immunohistochemical Reactivity of Breast Markers , 2002, Applied immunohistochemistry & molecular morphology : AIMM.

[3]  Thomas Rüdiger,et al.  Inter‐laboratory and inter‐observer reproducibility of immunohistochemical assessment of the Ki‐67 labelling index in a large multi‐centre trial , 2002, The Journal of pathology.

[4]  Charles M. Perou,et al.  Ki67 Index, HER2 Status, and Prognosis of Patients With Luminal B Breast Cancer , 2009, Journal of the National Cancer Institute.

[5]  Mitch Dowsett,et al.  Prognostic value of Ki67 expression after short-term presurgical endocrine therapy for primary breast cancer. , 2007, Journal of the National Cancer Institute.

[6]  A. Chan,et al.  The contribution of bifunctional SkipDewax pretreatment solution, rabbit monoclonal antibodies, and polymer detection systems in immunohistochemistry. , 2007, Archives of pathology & laboratory medicine.

[7]  G. Hortobagyi,et al.  Prognostic value of pathologic complete response after primary chemotherapy in relation to hormone receptor status and other factors. , 2006, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[8]  M. Ellis,et al.  Letrozole inhibits tumor proliferation more effectively than tamoxifen independent of HER1/2 expression status. , 2003, Cancer research.

[9]  J. Olson,et al.  Improved surgical outcomes for breast cancer patients receiving neoadjuvant aromatase inhibitor therapy: results from a multicenter phase II trial. , 2009, Journal of the American College of Surgeons.

[10]  J. Forbes,et al.  Which patients benefit most from adjuvant aromatase inhibitors? Results using a composite measure of prognostic risk in the BIG 1-98 randomized trial. , 2011, Annals of oncology : official journal of the European Society for Medical Oncology.

[11]  M. Dowsett,et al.  Extreme loss of immunoreactive p-Akt and p-Erk1/2 during routine fixation of primary breast cancer , 2010, Breast Cancer Research.

[12]  C. Perou,et al.  Breast cancer subtypes and response to docetaxel in node-positive breast cancer: use of an immunohistochemical definition in the BCIRG 001 trial. , 2009, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[13]  S. Teutsch,et al.  The Evaluation of Genomic Applications in Practice and Prevention (EGAPP) initiative: methods of the EGAPP Working Group , 2009, Genetics in Medicine.

[14]  W. Sauerbrei,et al.  Confidence intervals for the effect of a prognostic factor after selection of an ‘optimal’ cutpoint , 2004, Statistics in medicine.

[15]  B. Calvo,et al.  Short preoperative treatment with erlotinib inhibits tumor cell proliferation in hormone receptor-positive breast cancers. , 2008, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[16]  Mitch Dowsett,et al.  Endocrine therapy, new biologicals, and new study designs for presurgical studies in breast cancer. , 2011, Journal of the National Cancer Institute. Monographs.

[17]  Robin L. Jones,et al.  Relationship between oestrogen receptor status and proliferation in predicting response and long-term outcome to neoadjuvant chemotherapy for breast cancer , 2009, Breast Cancer Research and Treatment.

[18]  Jingqin Luo,et al.  Outcome Prediction for Estrogen Receptor–Positive Breast Cancer Based on Postneoadjuvant Endocrine Therapy Tumor Characteristics , 2008, Journal of the National Cancer Institute.

[19]  Johannes Gerdes,et al.  The Ki‐67 protein: From the known and the unknown , 2000, Journal of cellular physiology.

[20]  J. Olson,et al.  Randomized phase II neoadjuvant comparison between letrozole, anastrozole, and exemestane for postmenopausal women with estrogen receptor-rich stage 2 to 3 breast cancer: clinical and biomarker outcomes and predictive value of the baseline PAM50-based intrinsic subtype--ACOSOG Z1031. , 2011, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[21]  J. R. Reeves,et al.  Outcome and human epidermal growth factor receptor (HER) 1–4 status in invasive breast carcinomas with proliferation indices evaluated by bromodeoxyuridine labelling , 2004, Breast Cancer Research.

[22]  S. Pilotti,et al.  Immunoreactivity to MIB‐1 in breast cancer: methodological assessment and comparison with other proliferation indices , 1997, Cell proliferation.

[23]  K. Gelmon,et al.  Ki67 in breast cancer: prognostic and predictive potential. , 2010, The Lancet. Oncology.

[24]  M. Dowsett,et al.  Short-term changes in Ki-67 during neoadjuvant treatment of primary breast cancer with anastrozole or tamoxifen alone or combined correlate with recurrence-free survival. , 2005, Clinical cancer research : an official journal of the American Association for Cancer Research.

[25]  Robin L. Jones,et al.  The prognostic significance of Ki67 before and after neoadjuvant chemotherapy in breast cancer , 2009, Breast Cancer Research and Treatment.

[26]  J. Hendricks,et al.  Effect of fixation time and microwave oven heating time on retrieval of the Ki-67 antigen from paraffin-embedded tissue. , 1993, The journal of histochemistry and cytochemistry : official journal of the Histochemistry Society.

[27]  J. Cuzick,et al.  Prognostic Value of a Combined ER, PgR, Ki67, HER2 Immunohistochemical (IHC4) Score and Comparison with the GHI Recurrence Score – Results from TransATAC. , 2009 .

[28]  M. Dowsett,et al.  Comparison of the Short-Term Biological Effects of 7α-[9-(4,4,5,5,5-pentafluoropentylsulfinyl)-nonyl]estra-1,3,5, (10)-triene-3,17β-diol (Faslodex) versus Tamoxifen in Postmenopausal Women with Primary Breast Cancer , 2001 .

[29]  F. Penault-Llorca,et al.  Ki67 expression and docetaxel efficacy in patients with estrogen receptor-positive breast cancer. , 2009, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[30]  D. Rimm,et al.  Long-term preservation of antigenicity on tissue microarrays , 2004, Laboratory Investigation.

[31]  Anthony Rhodes,et al.  American Society of Clinical Oncology/College of American Pathologists guideline recommendations for immunohistochemical testing of estrogen and progesterone receptors in breast cancer. , 2010, Archives of pathology & laboratory medicine.

[32]  R. Gelber,et al.  Predictive value of tumor Ki-67 expression in two randomized trials of adjuvant chemoendocrine therapy for node-negative breast cancer. , 2008, Journal of the National Cancer Institute.

[33]  S. Lakhani,et al.  Oestrogen receptor status, pathological complete response and prognosis in patients receiving neoadjuvant chemotherapy for early breast cancer , 2004, British Journal of Cancer.

[34]  Quynh-Thu Le,et al.  Cetuximab-Based Immunotherapy and Radioimmunotherapy of Head and Neck Squamous Cell Carcinoma , 2010, Clinical Cancer Research.

[35]  D. Rimm,et al.  Quantitative Assessment Shows Loss of Antigenic Epitopes as a Function of Pre-analytic Variables , 2011, Laboratory Investigation.

[36]  J. Cuzick,et al.  Anastrozole alone or in combination with tamoxifen versus tamoxifen alone for adjuvant treatment of postmenopausal women with early breast cancer: first results of the ATAC randomised trial , 2002, The Lancet.

[37]  R. Bast,et al.  American Society of Clinical Oncology 2007 update of recommendations for the use of tumor markers in breast cancer. , 2007, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[38]  J. Bartlett,et al.  Membranous and cytoplasmic staining of Ki67 is associated with HER2 and ER status in invasive breast carcinoma , 2009, Histopathology.

[39]  J. Forbes,et al.  A comparison of letrozole and tamoxifen in postmenopausal women with early breast cancer. , 2005, The New England journal of medicine.

[40]  W. McGuire,et al.  Evaluation of a modeling system for S-phase estimation in breast cancer by flow cytometry. , 1987, Cancer research.

[41]  M. Ellis,et al.  Abstract S1-1: Final Analysis of NCIC CTG MA.27: A Randomized Phase III Trial of Exemestane Versus Anastrozole in Postmenopausal Women with Hormone Receptor Positive Primary Breast Cancer , 2010 .

[42]  M. Dowsett,et al.  Comparative validation of the SP6 antibody to Ki67 in breast cancer , 2010, Journal of Clinical Pathology.

[43]  D. Rimm,et al.  Validation of Tissue Microarray Technology in Breast Carcinoma , 2000, Laboratory Investigation.

[44]  H Stein,et al.  Cell cycle analysis of a cell proliferation-associated human nuclear antigen defined by the monoclonal antibody Ki-67. , 1984, Journal of immunology.

[45]  Johannes Gerdes,et al.  Monoclonal antibodies against recombinant parts of the Ki‐67 antigen (MIB 1 and MIB 3) detect proliferating cells in microwave‐processed formalin‐fixed paraffin sections , 1992, The Journal of pathology.

[46]  C Caldas,et al.  Proliferation markers and survival in early breast cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis of 85 studies in 32,825 patients. , 2008, Breast.

[47]  M. Dowsett,et al.  A phase II placebo-controlled trial of neoadjuvant anastrozole alone or with gefitinib in early breast cancer. , 2007, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[48]  M. Dowsett,et al.  Effect of raloxifene on breast cancer cell Ki67 and apoptosis: a double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized clinical trial in postmenopausal patients. , 2001, Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology.

[49]  T. Powles,et al.  Studies of the Potential Utility of Ki67 as a Predictive Molecular Marker of Clinical Response in Primary Breast Cancer , 2003, Breast Cancer Research and Treatment.

[50]  P. Hall,et al.  The relevance of antibody concentration to the immunohistological quantification of cell proliferation‐associated antigens , 1993, Histopathology.

[51]  M. Tubiana,et al.  The long‐term prognostic significance of the thymidine labelling index in breast cancer , 1984, International journal of cancer.

[52]  Mitch Dowsett,et al.  Proliferation marker Ki-67 in early breast cancer. , 2005, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.