ArticleBMC cancer2015
Digital imaging in the immunohistochemical evaluation of the proliferation markers Ki67, MCM2 and Geminin, in early breast cancer, and their putative prognostic value.
Article in BMC cancer, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
20 citing papers in PubMed, 37 citations in OpenAlex.
- Prognostic biomarkers related to PANoptosis in esophageal cancer and their immune microenvironment: multi-omics analysis and therapeutic significance.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Article
- Mitochondrial calcium uniporter as biomarker and therapeutic target for breast cancer: Prognostication, immune microenvironment, epigenetic regulation and precision medicine.Journal of advanced research · 2025Article
- Proliferative Markers in Breast Cancer and Chemotherapy Implications: A Comprehensive Review.Health science reports · 2025Article
- Expression of minichromosome maintenance proteins in the exfoliated cells supplement sputum cytology in the diagnosis of lung cancer.CytoJournal · 2024Article
- Clinical Proteomics for Solid Organ Tissues.Molecular & cellular proteomics : MCP · 2023Article
- MCM-2 Levels as a Potential Biomarker for Predicting High-Risk Breast Cancer Patients According to TAILORx Classification.Breast cancer (Dove Medical Press) · 2023Article
- Varying outcomes of triple-negative breast cancer in different age groups-prognostic value of clinical features and proliferation.Breast cancer research and treatment · 2022Article
- MCM2 in human cancer: functions, mechanisms, and clinical significance.Molecular medicine (Cambridge, Mass.) · 2022Review
- PBK Enhances Cellular Proliferation With Histone H3 Phosphorylation and Suppresses Migration and Invasion With CDH1 Stabilization in Colorectal Cancer.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2021Article
- Article
- Review
- MCM2, MCM4, and MCM6 in Breast Cancer: Clinical Utility in Diagnosis and Prognosis.Neoplasia (New York, N.Y.) · 2019Article
- Article
- Article
- Minichromosome maintenance protein 2 correlates with the malignant status and regulates proliferation and cell cycle in lung squamous cell carcinoma.OncoTargets and therapy · 2018Article
- Reproducibility and Prognostic Potential of Ki-67 Proliferation Index when Comparing Digital-Image Analysis with Standard Semi-Quantitative Evaluation in Breast Cancer.Pathology oncology research : POR · 2018Article
- Profile of the breast cancer susceptibility marker rs4245739 identifies a role for miRNAs.Cancer biology & medicine · 2017Article
- A Compendium of Co-regulated Protein Complexes in Breast Cancer Reveals Collateral Loss Events.Cell systems · 2017Article
- MCM2: An alternative to Ki-67 for measuring breast cancer cell proliferation.Modern pathology : an official journal of the United States and Canadian Academy of Pathology, Inc · 2017Article
- Minichromosome Maintenance Expression Defines Slow-Growing Gastroenteropancreatic Neuroendocrine Neoplasms.Translational oncology · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundImmunohistochemical assessment of proliferation may provide additional prognostic information in early breast cancer. However, due to a lack of methodological standards proliferation markers are still not routinely used for determining therapy. Even for Ki67, one of the most widely-studied markers, disagreements over the optimal cutoff exist. Improvements in digital microscopy may provide new avenues to standardise and make data more reproducible.
methodsWe studied the immunohistochemical expression of three markers of proliferation: Ki67, Mini-Chromosome Maintenance protein 2 and Geminin, by conventional light microscope and digital imaging on triplicate TMAs from 309 consecutive cases of primary breast cancers. Differences between the average and the maximum percentage reactivity in tumour cell nuclei from the three TMA cores were investigated to assess the validity of the approach. Time-dependent Receiver Operating Characteristic curves were utilized to obtain optimal expression level cut-offs, which were then correlated with clinico-pathological features and survival.
resultsHigh concordance between conventional and digital scores was observed for all 3 markers (Ki67: rs = 0.87, P < 0.001; MCM2: rs = 0.94, P < 0.001; and Geminin: rs = 0.86, P < 0.001; Spearman's rank). There was no significant difference according to the number of TMA cores included for either Ki67 or MCM2; analysis of two or three cores produced comparable results. Higher levels of all three proliferation markers were significantly associated with higher grade (P < 0.001) and ER-negativity (P < 0.001). Optimal prognostic cut-offs for percentage expression in the tumour were 8 %, 12 and 2.33 % for Ki67, MCM2 and Geminin respectively. All 3 proliferation marker cutoffs were predictive of 15-year breast cancer-specific survival in univariable Cox regression analyses. In multivariable analysis only lymph node status (HR = 3.9, 95 % CI = 1.79-8.5, P = 0.0006) and histological grade (HR = 1.84, 95 % CI = 1-3.38, P = 0.05) remained significantly prognostic.
conclusionsHere we show that. MCM2 is a more sensitive marker of proliferation than Ki67 and should be examined in future studies, especially in the lymph node-negative, hormone receptor-positive subgroup. Further, digital microscopy can be used effectively as a high-throughput method to evaluate immunohistochemical expression.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.