ArticleCancers2026
Does Automated Versus Manual Ki67 Labeling Index Assessment Influence Risk Stratification in Patients with Localized Adrenocortical Carcinoma? Lessons from the ADIUVO Trial.
Article in Cancers, 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
15 authors.
Funding
Abstract
BACKGROUND/
objectivesAdrenocortical carcinoma (ACC) is a rare tumor. Diagnosis relies on combined histopathological criteria that, in a multifactorial scoring system, may suggest malignancy. The recent ADIUVO trial, a multicenter trial randomizing ACC patients between mitotane treatment or surveillance only, demonstrated that patients with localized, low-grade ACC (Ki67 labeling index (LI) ≤ 10%) have a better prognosis than historically anticipated, questioning the routine use of adjuvant mitotane. This post hoc analysis aimed to investigate whether automated, centralized Ki67 LI assessment improves prognostic stratification beyond expert manual assessment in low-risk ACC patients enrolled in the original ADIUVO trial.
methodsKi67 LI was centrally reassessed in 70 ADIUVO patients by digitizing slides and applying an automated algorithm to manually selected hotspots. Primary endpoints were correlation between methods and the impact of automated scoring on recurrence-free survival (RFS) and overall survival (OS).
resultsAutomated Ki67 LI assessment was feasible in 47 patients. Manual and automated Ki67 LI values showed good agreement (mean 5.6 ± 3.1% vs. 5.4 ± 5.3%). Automated scoring identified eight patients with KI67 LI > 10%. In this subgroup, RFS and OS did not differ significantly between patients treated with mitotane and those under surveillance. Patients with an automated Ki67 LI > 10% had larger tumors (median 16.0 cm vs. 7.0 cm,
conclusionsOur findings support the original ADIUVO results and support continued use of manual expert Ki67 LI scoring. This traditional approach remains robust and pragmatic for most clinical settings, especially where automated systems are not readily accessible.
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.