Ki-67 Testing in Breast Cancer: Assessing Variability With Scoring Methods and Specimen Types and the Potential Subsequent Impact on Therapy Eligibility.

Abstract

Abemaciclib was originally FDA approved for patients with ER-positive/HER2-negative breast cancer with Ki-67 expression ≥20%. However, there were no guidelines provided on which specimen to test or which scoring method to use. We performed a comprehensive study evaluating the variation in Ki-67 expression in breast specimens from 50 consecutive patients who could have been eligible for abemaciclib therapy. Three pathologists with breast expertise each performed a blinded review with 3 different manual scoring methods [estimated (EST), unweighted (UNW), and weighted (WT) (WT recommended by the International Ki-67 in Breast Cancer Working Group)]. Quantitative image analysis (QIA) using the HALO platform was also performed. Three different specimen types [core needle biopsy (CNB) (n=63), resection (RES) (n=52), and axillary lymph node metastasis (ALN) (n=50)] were evaluated for each patient. The average Ki-67 for all specimens was 14.68% for EST, 14.46% for UNW, 14.15% for WT, and 11.15% for QIA. For the manual methods, the range between the lowest and highest Ki-67 for each specimen between the 3 pathologists was 8.44 for EST, 5.94 for WT, and 5.93 for UNW. The WT method limited interobserver variability with ICC1=0.959 (EST ICC1=0.922 and UNW=0.949). Using the aforementioned cutoff of Ki-67 ≥20% versus <20% to determine treatment eligibility, the averaged EST method yields 20 of 50 patients (40%) who would have been treatment-eligible, versus 15 (30%) for the UNW, 17 (34%) for the WT, and 12 (24%) for the QIA. There was no statistically significant difference in Ki-67 among the 3 specimen types. The average Ki-67 difference was 4.36 for CNB vs RES, 6.95 for CNB versus ALN, and RES versus ALN (P=0.93, 0.99, and 0.94, respectively). Our study concludes that further refinement in Ki-67 scoring is advisable to reduce clinically significant variation.