适用于乳腺癌的 Ki-67 免疫组化测定。

IF 5.1 2区 医学 Q1 MEDICINE, RESEARCH & EXPERIMENTAL
Emina E. Torlakovic , Nick Baniak , Penny J. Barnes , Keith Chancey , Liam Chen , Carol Cheung , Sylvie Clairefond , Jean-Claude Cutz , Hala Faragalla , Denis H. Gravel , Kelly Dakin Hache , Pratibha Iyengar , Michael Komel , Zuzana Kos , Magali Lacroix-Triki , Monna J. Marolt , Miralem Mrkonjic , Anna Marie Mulligan , Sharon Nofech-Mozes , Paul C. Park , Gilbert Bigras
{"title":"适用于乳腺癌的 Ki-67 免疫组化测定。","authors":"Emina E. Torlakovic ,&nbsp;Nick Baniak ,&nbsp;Penny J. Barnes ,&nbsp;Keith Chancey ,&nbsp;Liam Chen ,&nbsp;Carol Cheung ,&nbsp;Sylvie Clairefond ,&nbsp;Jean-Claude Cutz ,&nbsp;Hala Faragalla ,&nbsp;Denis H. Gravel ,&nbsp;Kelly Dakin Hache ,&nbsp;Pratibha Iyengar ,&nbsp;Michael Komel ,&nbsp;Zuzana Kos ,&nbsp;Magali Lacroix-Triki ,&nbsp;Monna J. Marolt ,&nbsp;Miralem Mrkonjic ,&nbsp;Anna Marie Mulligan ,&nbsp;Sharon Nofech-Mozes ,&nbsp;Paul C. Park ,&nbsp;Gilbert Bigras","doi":"10.1016/j.labinv.2024.102076","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>New therapies are being developed for breast cancer, and in this process, some “old” biomarkers are reutilized and given a new purpose. It is not always recognized that by changing a biomarker’s intended use, a new biomarker assay is created. The Ki-67 biomarker is typically assessed by immunohistochemistry (IHC) to provide a proliferative index in breast cancer. Canadian laboratories assessed the analytical performance and diagnostic accuracy of their Ki-67 IHC laboratory-developed tests (LDTs) of relevance for the LDTs’ clinical utility.</p><p>Canadian clinical IHC laboratories enrolled in the Canadian Biomarker Quality Assurance Pilot Run for Ki-67 in breast cancer by invitation. The Dako Ki-67 IHC pharmDx assay was employed as a study reference assay. The Dako central laboratory was the reference laboratory. Participants received unstained slides of breast cancer tissue microarrays with 32 cases and performed their in-house Ki-67 assays. The results were assessed using QuPath, an open-source software application for bioimage analysis. Positive percent agreement (PPA, sensitivity) and negative percent agreement (NPA, specificity) were calculated against the Dako Ki-67 IHC pharmDx assay for 5%, 10%, 20%, and 30% cutoffs.</p><p>Overall, PPA and NPA varied depending on the selected cutoff; participants were more successful with 5% and 10%, than with 20% and 30% cutoffs. Only 4 of 16 laboratories had robust IHC protocols with acceptable PPA for all cutoffs. The lowest PPA for the 5% cutoff was 85%, for 10% was 63%, for 20% was 14%, and for 30% was 13%. The lowest NPA for the 5% cutoff was 50%, for 10% was 33%, for 20% was 50%, and for 30% was 57%.</p><p>Despite many years of international efforts to standardize IHC testing for Ki-67 in breast cancer, our results indicate that Canadian clinical LDTs have a wide analytical sensitivity range and poor agreement for 20% and 30% cutoffs. The poor agreement was not due to the readout but rather due to IHC protocol conditions. International Ki-67 in Breast Cancer Working Group (IKWG) recommendations related to Ki-67 IHC standardization cannot take full effect without reliable fit-for-purpose reference materials that are required for the initial assay calibration, assay performance monitoring, and proficiency testing.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":17930,"journal":{"name":"Laboratory Investigation","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":5.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0023683724017549/pdfft?md5=2f86177cdea62c254ff9b20f2f42b706&pid=1-s2.0-S0023683724017549-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Fit-for-Purpose Ki-67 Immunohistochemistry Assays for Breast Cancer\",\"authors\":\"Emina E. Torlakovic ,&nbsp;Nick Baniak ,&nbsp;Penny J. Barnes ,&nbsp;Keith Chancey ,&nbsp;Liam Chen ,&nbsp;Carol Cheung ,&nbsp;Sylvie Clairefond ,&nbsp;Jean-Claude Cutz ,&nbsp;Hala Faragalla ,&nbsp;Denis H. Gravel ,&nbsp;Kelly Dakin Hache ,&nbsp;Pratibha Iyengar ,&nbsp;Michael Komel ,&nbsp;Zuzana Kos ,&nbsp;Magali Lacroix-Triki ,&nbsp;Monna J. Marolt ,&nbsp;Miralem Mrkonjic ,&nbsp;Anna Marie Mulligan ,&nbsp;Sharon Nofech-Mozes ,&nbsp;Paul C. Park ,&nbsp;Gilbert Bigras\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.labinv.2024.102076\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>New therapies are being developed for breast cancer, and in this process, some “old” biomarkers are reutilized and given a new purpose. It is not always recognized that by changing a biomarker’s intended use, a new biomarker assay is created. The Ki-67 biomarker is typically assessed by immunohistochemistry (IHC) to provide a proliferative index in breast cancer. Canadian laboratories assessed the analytical performance and diagnostic accuracy of their Ki-67 IHC laboratory-developed tests (LDTs) of relevance for the LDTs’ clinical utility.</p><p>Canadian clinical IHC laboratories enrolled in the Canadian Biomarker Quality Assurance Pilot Run for Ki-67 in breast cancer by invitation. The Dako Ki-67 IHC pharmDx assay was employed as a study reference assay. The Dako central laboratory was the reference laboratory. Participants received unstained slides of breast cancer tissue microarrays with 32 cases and performed their in-house Ki-67 assays. The results were assessed using QuPath, an open-source software application for bioimage analysis. Positive percent agreement (PPA, sensitivity) and negative percent agreement (NPA, specificity) were calculated against the Dako Ki-67 IHC pharmDx assay for 5%, 10%, 20%, and 30% cutoffs.</p><p>Overall, PPA and NPA varied depending on the selected cutoff; participants were more successful with 5% and 10%, than with 20% and 30% cutoffs. Only 4 of 16 laboratories had robust IHC protocols with acceptable PPA for all cutoffs. The lowest PPA for the 5% cutoff was 85%, for 10% was 63%, for 20% was 14%, and for 30% was 13%. The lowest NPA for the 5% cutoff was 50%, for 10% was 33%, for 20% was 50%, and for 30% was 57%.</p><p>Despite many years of international efforts to standardize IHC testing for Ki-67 in breast cancer, our results indicate that Canadian clinical LDTs have a wide analytical sensitivity range and poor agreement for 20% and 30% cutoffs. The poor agreement was not due to the readout but rather due to IHC protocol conditions. International Ki-67 in Breast Cancer Working Group (IKWG) recommendations related to Ki-67 IHC standardization cannot take full effect without reliable fit-for-purpose reference materials that are required for the initial assay calibration, assay performance monitoring, and proficiency testing.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":17930,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Laboratory Investigation\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":5.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-05-09\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0023683724017549/pdfft?md5=2f86177cdea62c254ff9b20f2f42b706&pid=1-s2.0-S0023683724017549-main.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Laboratory Investigation\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0023683724017549\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"MEDICINE, RESEARCH & EXPERIMENTAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Laboratory Investigation","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0023683724017549","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MEDICINE, RESEARCH & EXPERIMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目前正在开发治疗乳腺癌的新疗法,在此过程中,一些 "老 "生物标志物被重新利用,并被赋予了新的用途。人们并不总能意识到,通过改变生物标志物的预期用途,一种新的生物标志物检测方法应运而生。Ki-67 生物标记物通常通过免疫组化 (IHC) 进行评估,以提供乳腺癌的增殖指数。加拿大实验室对其 Ki-67 IHC 实验室开发检验 (LDT) 的分析性能和诊断准确性进行了评估,这与 LDT 的临床实用性息息相关。加拿大临床 IHC 实验室应邀参加了加拿大生物标志物质量保证 (CBQA) 乳腺癌 Ki-67 检测试运行。Dako Ki-67 IHC pharmDx 检测法被用作研究参考检测法。达科中心实验室(美国)是参考实验室。参与者收到包含 32 个病例的乳腺癌组织芯片(TMA)未染色切片,并进行了内部 Ki-67 检测。检测结果使用开源生物图像分析软件 QuPath 进行评估。根据 5%、10%、20% 和 30% 临界值,计算了与 Dako Ki-67 IHC pharmDx 检测法的阳性一致率(PPA,灵敏度)和阴性一致率(NPA,特异性)。总体而言,PPA 和 NPA 随所选截止值的不同而变化;参与者在使用 5% 和 10% 截止值时比使用 20% 和 30% 截止值时更成功。在 16 个实验室中,只有 4 个实验室有健全的 IHC 方案,所有截止值的 PPA 均可接受。5%截止值的最低PPA为85%,10%截止值的最低PPA为63%,20%截止值的最低PPA为14%,30%截止值的最低PPA为13%。5% 临界值的最低 NPA 为 50%,10% 临界值的最低 NPA 为 33%,20% 临界值的最低 NPA 为 50%,30% 临界值的最低 NPA 为 57%。尽管国际上多年来一直在努力实现乳腺癌 Ki-67 IHC 检测的标准化,但我们的研究结果表明,加拿大临床 LDT 的分析灵敏度范围较宽,20% 和 30% 临界值的一致性较差。一致性差的原因不在于读数,而在于IHC方案的条件。IKWG关于Ki-67 IHC标准化的建议如果没有可靠的、适用于初始检测校准、检测性能监测和能力验证所需的参考材料,就无法充分发挥作用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Fit-for-Purpose Ki-67 Immunohistochemistry Assays for Breast Cancer

New therapies are being developed for breast cancer, and in this process, some “old” biomarkers are reutilized and given a new purpose. It is not always recognized that by changing a biomarker’s intended use, a new biomarker assay is created. The Ki-67 biomarker is typically assessed by immunohistochemistry (IHC) to provide a proliferative index in breast cancer. Canadian laboratories assessed the analytical performance and diagnostic accuracy of their Ki-67 IHC laboratory-developed tests (LDTs) of relevance for the LDTs’ clinical utility.

Canadian clinical IHC laboratories enrolled in the Canadian Biomarker Quality Assurance Pilot Run for Ki-67 in breast cancer by invitation. The Dako Ki-67 IHC pharmDx assay was employed as a study reference assay. The Dako central laboratory was the reference laboratory. Participants received unstained slides of breast cancer tissue microarrays with 32 cases and performed their in-house Ki-67 assays. The results were assessed using QuPath, an open-source software application for bioimage analysis. Positive percent agreement (PPA, sensitivity) and negative percent agreement (NPA, specificity) were calculated against the Dako Ki-67 IHC pharmDx assay for 5%, 10%, 20%, and 30% cutoffs.

Overall, PPA and NPA varied depending on the selected cutoff; participants were more successful with 5% and 10%, than with 20% and 30% cutoffs. Only 4 of 16 laboratories had robust IHC protocols with acceptable PPA for all cutoffs. The lowest PPA for the 5% cutoff was 85%, for 10% was 63%, for 20% was 14%, and for 30% was 13%. The lowest NPA for the 5% cutoff was 50%, for 10% was 33%, for 20% was 50%, and for 30% was 57%.

Despite many years of international efforts to standardize IHC testing for Ki-67 in breast cancer, our results indicate that Canadian clinical LDTs have a wide analytical sensitivity range and poor agreement for 20% and 30% cutoffs. The poor agreement was not due to the readout but rather due to IHC protocol conditions. International Ki-67 in Breast Cancer Working Group (IKWG) recommendations related to Ki-67 IHC standardization cannot take full effect without reliable fit-for-purpose reference materials that are required for the initial assay calibration, assay performance monitoring, and proficiency testing.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Laboratory Investigation
Laboratory Investigation 医学-病理学
CiteScore
8.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
125
审稿时长
2 months
期刊介绍: Laboratory Investigation is an international journal owned by the United States and Canadian Academy of Pathology. Laboratory Investigation offers prompt publication of high-quality original research in all biomedical disciplines relating to the understanding of human disease and the application of new methods to the diagnosis of disease. Both human and experimental studies are welcome.
×
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