ArticleBreast cancer research and treatment2024
Evaluation of the international Ki67 working group cut point recommendations for early breast cancer: comparison with 21-gene assay results in a large integrated health care system.
Article in Breast cancer research and treatment, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Evaluating an RNA-based test for proliferation assessment and recurrence prediction in early HR+/HER2- breast cancer.Pathology oncology research : POR · 2025Article
- High Ki67 expression, HER2 overexpression, and low progesterone receptor levels in high-grade DCIS: significant associations with clinical practice implications.Frontiers in oncology · 2025Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThe International Ki67 Working Group (IKWG) has developed training for immunohistochemistry (IHC) scoring reproducibility and recommends cut points of ≤ 5% and ≥ 30% for prognosis in ER+, HER2-, stage I/II breast cancer. We examined scoring reproducibility following IKWG training and evaluated these cut points for selecting patients for further testing with the 21-gene Recurrence Score (RS) assay.
methodsWe included 307 women aged 50+ years with node-negative, ER+PR+HER2- breast cancer and with available RS results. Slides from the diagnostic biopsy were stained for Ki67 and scored using digital image analysis (IA). Two IHC pathologists underwent IKWG training and visually scored slides, blinded to each other and IA readings. Interobserver reproducibility was examined using intraclass correlation (ICC) and Kappa statistics.
resultsDepending on reader, 8.8-16.0% of our cohort had Ki67 ≤ 5% and 11.4-22.5% had scores ≥ 30%. The ICC for Ki67 scores by the two pathologists was 0.82 (95% CI 0.78-0.85); it was 0.79 (95% CI 0.74-0.83) for pathologist 1 and IA and 0.76 (95% CI 0.71-0.80) for pathologist 2 and IA. For Ki67 scores ≤ 5%, the percentages with RS < 26 were 92.6%, 91.8%, and 90.9% for pathologist 1, pathologist 2, and IA, respectively. For Ki67 scores ≥ 30%, the percentages with RS ≥ 26 were 41.5%, 51.4%, and 27.5%, respectively.
conclusionThe IKWG's Ki67 training resulted in moderate to strong reproducibility across readers but cut points had only moderate overlap with RS cut points, especially for Ki67 ≥ 30% and RS ≥ 26; thus, their clinical utility for a 21-gene assay testing pathway remains unclear.
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.