ArticleBreast (Edinburgh, Scotland)2020
An interobserver reproducibility analysis of size-set semiautomatic counting for Ki67 assessment in breast cancer.
Article in Breast (Edinburgh, Scotland), 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 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
14 citing papers in PubMed, 32 citations in OpenAlex.
- Optimization of Ki67 digital image analysis in breast cancer by automated tumor area identification.Virchows Archiv : an international journal of pathology · 2026Article
- Determination of Ki-67 indices in neuroendocrine tumours of the gastrointestinal tract: the past, the present, and the future.Virchows Archiv : an international journal of pathology · 2025Article
- Integrated machine learning to predict the prognosis of lung adenocarcinoma patients based on SARS-COV-2 and lung adenocarcinoma crosstalk genes.Cancer science · 2025Article
- A comprehensive analysis of the prognostic value, expression characteristics and immune correlation of MKI67 in cancers.Frontiers in immunology · 2025Article
- Article
- Quantitative immunohistochemistry analysis of breast Ki67 based on artificial intelligence.Open life sciences · 2024Article
- The Role of Ki-67 in HR+/HER2- Breast Cancer: A Real-World Study of 956 Patients.Breast cancer (Dove Medical Press) · 2024Article
- Spatial transcriptomics analysis of esophageal squamous precancerous lesions and their progression to esophageal cancer.Nature communications · 2023Article
- Molecular biological features of cyst wall of adamantinomatous craniopharyngioma.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- Diagnostic and therapeutic biomarkers in colorectal cancer: a review.American journal of cancer research · 2022Review
- Midazolam increases cisplatin-sensitivity in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) via the miR-194-5p/HOOK3 axis.Cancer cell international · 2021Article
- Exosomes secreted by chronic hepatitis B patients with PNALT and liver inflammation grade ≥ A2 promoted the progression of liver cancer by transferring miR-25-3p to inhibit the co-expression of TCF21 and HHIP.Cell proliferation · 2020Article
- Independent Prognostic Value of Intratumoral Heterogeneity and Immune Response Features by Automated Digital Immunohistochemistry Analysis in Early Hormone Receptor-Positive Breast Carcinoma.Frontiers in oncology · 2020Article
- The Inhibitory Effect of Carboplatin Injection on Human Neuroblastoma SK-N-SH.Cell transplantationArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThe proliferation marker Ki67 has prognostic and predictive values in breast cancer, and the cutoff of the Ki67 label index (LI) is a key index for chemotherapy. However, poor interobserver consistency in Ki67 assessment has limited the clinical use of Ki67, especially in luminal cancers. Here, we reported a modified Ki67 assessment method, size-set semiautomatic counting (SSSAC) and investigated its interobserver reproducibility.
methodsOne hundred invasive breast cancer tissues were set immunostained for Ki67 in one laboratory, scanned as digital slides, and sent to 41 pathologists at the laboratories of 16 hospitals for Ki67 LI assessment using size-set semiautomatic counting (SSSAC), size-set visual assessment (SSVA) and size-set digital image analysis (SSDIA) with a specific image viewing software (Aperio Image Scope, Leica, Germany). The intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and Bland-Altman plot were used to evaluate interobserver reproducibility. The Wilcoxon signed-rank test was used to analyze the difference in the Ki67 values assessed by SSSAC and SSDIA.
resultsSSSAC demonstrated better interobserver reproducibility (ICC = 0.942) than SSVA (ICC = 0.802). The interobserver reproducibility was better in Ki67 homogeneously stained slides and centralized hot-spot slides than in scattered hot-spot slides. The Ki67 value assessed with SSSAC was obviously higher than that assessed with SSDIA (negative ranks (SSDIA < SSSAC): N = 80, sum of ranks = 4274.50; positive ranks (SSDIA > SSSAC): N = 17, sum of ranks = 478.50; Z = -6.837; P < 0.001).
conclusionSSSAC shows satisfactory interobserver reproducibility in the Ki67 assessment of breast cancer and may be a candidate standard method for Ki67 LI assessment in breast cancer and other malignancies.
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.