Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27155668›Full record

ArticleBreast cancer research and treatment2016

Optimal Ki67 cut-off for luminal breast cancer prognostic evaluation: a large case series study with a long-term follow-up.

Sara Bustreo, Simona Osella-Abate, Paola Cassoni, Michela Donadio, Mario Airoldi, Fulvia Pedani, Mauro Papotti, Anna Sapino, Isabella Castellano

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Breast cancer research and treatment, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 112 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
112citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

112 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

52 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Sara BustreoDepartment of Medical Oncology 1, Città della Salute e della Scienza Hospital, Turin, Italy.
Simona Osella-AbateDivision of Pathology, Department of Medical Sciences, University of Torino, Via Santena 7, 10126, Turin, Italy.
Paola CassoniDivision of Pathology, Department of Medical Sciences, University of Torino, Via Santena 7, 10126, Turin, Italy.
Michela DonadioDepartment of Medical Oncology 1, Città della Salute e della Scienza Hospital, Turin, Italy.
Mario AiroldiDepartment of Medical Oncology 2, Città della Salute e della Scienza Hospital, Turin, Italy.
Fulvia PedaniDepartment of Medical Oncology 2, Città della Salute e della Scienza Hospital, Turin, Italy.
Mauro PapottiDepartment of Oncology, University of Torino, Turin, Italy.
Anna SapinoDivision of Pathology, Department of Medical Sciences, University of Torino, Via Santena 7, 10126, Turin, Italy.
Isabella CastellanoDivision of Pathology, Department of Medical Sciences, University of Torino, Via Santena 7, 10126, Turin, Italy. isabella.castellano@unito.it.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Although Ki67 index suffers from poor reproducibility, it is one of the most important prognostic markers used by oncologists to select the treatment of estrogen receptor (ER) positive breast cancer patients. In this study, we aim to establish the optimal Ki67 cut-offs for stratifying patient prognosis and to create a comprehensive prognostic index for clinical applications. A mono-institutional cohort of 1.577 human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 negative/ER+ breast cancer patients having complete clinical, histological, and follow-up data was collected. The 14 and 20 % Ki67 cut-offs were correlated to disease-free interval (DFI) and disease-specific survival (DSS). To create a comprehensive prognostic index, we used independent variables selected by uni/multivariate analyses. In terms of DFI and DSS, patients bearing tumors with Ki67 < 14 % proliferation index did not differ from those with Ki67 values between 14 and 20 %. Patients with tumor with Ki67 > 20 % showed the poorest prognosis. Moreover, to tumor size, the number of metastatic lymph nodes and Ki67 > 20 % was given a score value, varying depending on definite cut-offs and used to create a prognostic index, which was applied to the population. Patients with a prognostic index ≥3 were characterized by significant risk of relapse [DFI: Hazard Ratio (HR) = 4.74, p < 0.001] and death (DSS: HR = 5.03, p < 0.001). We confirm that the 20 % Ki67 cut-off is the best to stratify high-risk patients in luminal breast cancers, and we suggest to integrate it with other prognostic factors, to better stratify patients at risk of adverse outcome.

Indexed as

AdultAgedAged, 80 and overBreast NeoplasmsDisease-Free SurvivalErb-b2 Receptor Tyrosine KinasesFemaleHumansKi-67 AntigenLymphatic MetastasisMiddle AgedPrognosisReceptors, EstrogenSurvival AnalysisYoung AdultERBB2 protein, humanErb-b2 Receptor Tyrosine KinasesKi-67 AntigenReceptors, EstrogenKi67 cut-offsLuminal breast cancerPrognostic indexRelapse

Identifiers

PMID27155668
PMCPMC4875067

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.