Ki-67: level of evidence and methodological considerations for its role in the clinical management of breast cancer: analytical and critical review

Élisabeth Luporsi(Inserm), Fabrice André(Institut Gustave Roussy), Frédérique Spyratos(Hôpital René Huguenin), Pierre‐Marie Martin, Jocelyne Jacquemier(Institut Paoli-Calmettes), Frédérique Penault‐Llorca(Centre Jean Perrin), N. Tubiana-Mathieu(Hôpital Dupuytren), Brigitte Sigal‐Zafrani(Institut Curie), Laurent Arnould(Centre Georges François Leclerc), Anne Gompel(Inserm), C. Egelé(Hôpitaux Universitaires de Strasbourg), B. Poulet, Krishna B. Clough(Breast Center), H. Crouet(Centre François Baclesse), Alain Fourquet(Institut Curie), Jean‐Pierre Lefranc(Sorbonne Université), Carole Mathelin(Université de Strasbourg), N. Rouyer, Daniel Serin(Institut Sainte Catherine), M. Spielmann(Institut Gustave Roussy), Margaret Haugh, Marie‐Pierre Chenard(Hôpitaux Universitaires de Strasbourg), Étienne Brain(Hôpital René Huguenin), Patricia de Crémoux(Assistance Publique – Hôpitaux de Paris), Jean‐Pierre Bellocq(Hôpitaux Universitaires de Strasbourg)
Breast Cancer Research and Treatment
November 2, 2011
Cited by 319Open Access
Full Text

Abstract

Clinicians can use biomarkers to guide therapeutic decisions in estrogen receptor positive (ER+) breast cancer. One such biomarker is cellular proliferation as evaluated by Ki-67. This biomarker has been extensively studied and is easily assayed by histopathologists but it is not currently accepted as a standard. This review focuses on its prognostic and predictive value, and on methodological considerations for its measurement and the cut-points used for treatment decision. Data describing study design, patients' characteristics, methods used and results were extracted from papers published between January 1990 and July 2010. In addition, the studies were assessed using the REMARK tool. Ki-67 is an independent prognostic factor for disease-free survival (HR 1.05-1.72) in multivariate analyses studies using samples from randomized clinical trials with secondary central analysis of the biomarker. The level of evidence (LOE) was judged to be I-B with the recently revised definition of Simon. However, standardization of the techniques and scoring methods are needed for the integration of this biomarker in everyday practice. Ki-67 was not found to be predictive for long-term follow-up after chemotherapy. Nevertheless, high KI-67 was found to be associated with immediate pathological complete response in the neoadjuvant setting, with an LOE of II-B. The REMARK score improved over time (with a range of 6-13/20 vs. 10-18/20, before and after 2005, respectively). KI-67 could be considered as a prognostic biomarker for therapeutic decision. It is assessed with a simple assay that could be standardized. However, international guidelines are needed for routine clinical use.


Related Papers

No related papers found

Powered by citation graph analysis