Utility of the manual hematology cell counter for Ki-67 assessment in gastrointestinal and pancreatobiliary well-differentiated neuroendocrine tumors

IF 1.5 4区 医学 Q3 PATHOLOGY
Arkar Htoo , Soe Htet Arker , Rose Sneha George , Lorene Chung , Anne Chen
{"title":"Utility of the manual hematology cell counter for Ki-67 assessment in gastrointestinal and pancreatobiliary well-differentiated neuroendocrine tumors","authors":"Arkar Htoo ,&nbsp;Soe Htet Arker ,&nbsp;Rose Sneha George ,&nbsp;Lorene Chung ,&nbsp;Anne Chen","doi":"10.1016/j.anndiagpath.2025.152443","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>In the World Health Organization (WHO) 5th edition, prognosis of gastrointestinal (GI) well-differentiated neuroendocrine tumors (WDNET) depends on proliferation rate, commonly assessed by ki-67 immunohistochemical stain. In daily practice, the gold standard for WHO grade assessment by ki-67 staining, printing a photo of a tumor hotspot, counting the number of ki-67-positive cells out of 500 tumor cells, and calculating a percentage, is time-consuming and many cases are eyeballed. This study investigates the utility of a common tool, the manual cell counter used in hematology smear cell counting, for GI WDNET ki-67 counting. Of 59 resections, the number of cases with a WHO grade difference between gold standard print-and-count and the original report, eyeballing, and hematology counter method, was 23 (39 %), 14 (24 %) and 7 (12 %) cases, respectively. Of 37 biopsies, the number of cases with a WHO grade difference between gold standard print-and-count and the original report, eyeballing, and hematology counter method, was 10 (27 %), 12 (32 %) and 7 (19 %) cases, respectively. For resections, Chi square analysis comparing hematology counter method versus original report, where many cases were likely eyeballed, showed statistically significantly less cases with differing WHO grades from gold standard print-and-count for hematology counter-assessed cases (P = 0.0007), and the same Chi square analysis was marginally not significant (P = 0.09) for hematology counter versus eyeballing. Times taken to perform hematology counter method were statistically significantly lower than times taken for print-and-count. This study suggests the hematology cell counter could strike a reasonable balance between time and accuracy for WDNET resections.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":50768,"journal":{"name":"Annals of Diagnostic Pathology","volume":"75 ","pages":"Article 152443"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Annals of Diagnostic Pathology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1092913425000085","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PATHOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

In the World Health Organization (WHO) 5th edition, prognosis of gastrointestinal (GI) well-differentiated neuroendocrine tumors (WDNET) depends on proliferation rate, commonly assessed by ki-67 immunohistochemical stain. In daily practice, the gold standard for WHO grade assessment by ki-67 staining, printing a photo of a tumor hotspot, counting the number of ki-67-positive cells out of 500 tumor cells, and calculating a percentage, is time-consuming and many cases are eyeballed. This study investigates the utility of a common tool, the manual cell counter used in hematology smear cell counting, for GI WDNET ki-67 counting. Of 59 resections, the number of cases with a WHO grade difference between gold standard print-and-count and the original report, eyeballing, and hematology counter method, was 23 (39 %), 14 (24 %) and 7 (12 %) cases, respectively. Of 37 biopsies, the number of cases with a WHO grade difference between gold standard print-and-count and the original report, eyeballing, and hematology counter method, was 10 (27 %), 12 (32 %) and 7 (19 %) cases, respectively. For resections, Chi square analysis comparing hematology counter method versus original report, where many cases were likely eyeballed, showed statistically significantly less cases with differing WHO grades from gold standard print-and-count for hematology counter-assessed cases (P = 0.0007), and the same Chi square analysis was marginally not significant (P = 0.09) for hematology counter versus eyeballing. Times taken to perform hematology counter method were statistically significantly lower than times taken for print-and-count. This study suggests the hematology cell counter could strike a reasonable balance between time and accuracy for WDNET resections.
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.90
自引率
5.00%
发文量
149
审稿时长
26 days
期刊介绍: A peer-reviewed journal devoted to the publication of articles dealing with traditional morphologic studies using standard diagnostic techniques and stressing clinicopathological correlations and scientific observation of relevance to the daily practice of pathology. Special features include pathologic-radiologic correlations and pathologic-cytologic correlations.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信