ArticleVirchows Archiv : an international journal of pathology2026
Optimization of Ki67 digital image analysis in breast cancer by automated tumor area identification.
Article in Virchows Archiv : an international journal of pathology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
23 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Accurate assessment of Ki67, a marker of cellular proliferation, is critical for breast cancer diagnostics and treatment decision-making. This study evaluates an automated Ki67-area identification approach, combined with digital image analysis (DIA) for exact Ki67 quantification. A total of 61 tissue samples from breast cancer patients from two clinical trials (GeparSixto and GeparSepto) were analyzed. The supervised DIA workflow employed automated Ki67-stained tumor area identification, followed by automated Ki67 scoring and was quality-controlled by trained pathologists. Comparisons with manual assessments were conducted to evaluate concordance and scoring precision. The DIA approach identified 232 tumor areas across 61 whole slide images (WSIs). The supervised system demonstrated a high correlation with manual scores (r = 0.78), and improved precision (standard deviation between evaluated tumor areas) was noted in therapy-naïve samples (p < 0.001). While manual assessments predominantly employed stepwise increments (5%), DIA provided finer, more continuous scoring, optimally reflecting the continuous nature of tumor proliferation. Overall, DIA scoring was more robust, with reduced inter-ROI variability and improved reproducibility compared with manual assessment. In conclusion, the study highlights the potential of supervised DIA to enhance Ki67 scoring accuracy and standardization. The methodology's effectiveness in addressing standardized Ki67 scoring suggests its utility in clinical diagnostic workflows. This approach contributes towards improved integration of computational pathology into routine practice for improved breast cancer management.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42024163What 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.