Significance of Staining Intensity in Ki-67 Proliferation Index in Meningiomas, and a Critical Review of the Literature on Proliferation Index Assessment.

IF 1.1 4区 医学 Q4 MEDICAL LABORATORY TECHNOLOGY Annals of clinical and laboratory science Pub Date : 2024-03-01
Olivia C Brasher, James S Nix, Murat Gokden
{"title":"Significance of Staining Intensity in Ki-67 Proliferation Index in Meningiomas, and a Critical Review of the Literature on Proliferation Index Assessment.","authors":"Olivia C Brasher, James S Nix, Murat Gokden","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Meningioma is the most common primary adult intracranial neoplasm, and proliferation indices (PI) rise with increasing grade from WHO CNS grade 1 to 3. Ki-67 immunohistochemistry (IHC) poses a variety of technical and interpretative challenges. Here, we specifically investigated the staining intensity and its effect on interpretation and final diagnosis.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>124 high and low-grade meningiomas of various grades were blindly evaluated using different counting strategies (CS) based on the staining intensity of the nuclei as darkest (CS1), darkest+intermediate (CS2), and any staining (CS3) in hot-spots (HS) and in the context of overall proliferative activity (OPA).</p><p><strong>Result: </strong>CSs in HS, OPA, and their average results were significantly different between low-grade and high-grade groups. PI obtained using CS3 yielded results that matched best with values expected for the corresponding WHO grade. CS had a profound impact on whether a LG meningioma would be diagnosed as one with a \"high proliferation index.\"</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>A large body of work exists on the counting methods, clinically significant cut-off values, and inter- and intra-observer variability for Ki-67 PI interpretation. We show that Ki-67 IHC staining intensity, which to our knowledge has not been previously systematically investigated, can have a significant effect on PI interpretation in settings that influence diagnostic and clinical management decisions.</p>","PeriodicalId":8228,"journal":{"name":"Annals of clinical and laboratory science","volume":"54 2","pages":"170-178"},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Annals of clinical and laboratory science","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"MEDICAL LABORATORY TECHNOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: Meningioma is the most common primary adult intracranial neoplasm, and proliferation indices (PI) rise with increasing grade from WHO CNS grade 1 to 3. Ki-67 immunohistochemistry (IHC) poses a variety of technical and interpretative challenges. Here, we specifically investigated the staining intensity and its effect on interpretation and final diagnosis.

Methods: 124 high and low-grade meningiomas of various grades were blindly evaluated using different counting strategies (CS) based on the staining intensity of the nuclei as darkest (CS1), darkest+intermediate (CS2), and any staining (CS3) in hot-spots (HS) and in the context of overall proliferative activity (OPA).

Result: CSs in HS, OPA, and their average results were significantly different between low-grade and high-grade groups. PI obtained using CS3 yielded results that matched best with values expected for the corresponding WHO grade. CS had a profound impact on whether a LG meningioma would be diagnosed as one with a "high proliferation index."

Conclusion: A large body of work exists on the counting methods, clinically significant cut-off values, and inter- and intra-observer variability for Ki-67 PI interpretation. We show that Ki-67 IHC staining intensity, which to our knowledge has not been previously systematically investigated, can have a significant effect on PI interpretation in settings that influence diagnostic and clinical management decisions.

分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
脑膜瘤 Ki-67 增殖指数染色强度的意义,以及关于增殖指数评估的文献综述。
目的:脑膜瘤是成人颅内最常见的原发性肿瘤,其增殖指数(PI)随WHO CNS 1级至3级的级别升高而升高。Ki-67免疫组化(IHC)带来了各种技术和解释上的挑战。方法:采用不同的计数策略(CS)对124个不同级别的高级别和低级别脑膜瘤进行盲法评估,计数策略的依据是热点(HS)中最暗(CS1)、最暗+中间(CS2)和任何染色(CS3)的核染色强度,以及整体增殖活性(OPA):结果:HS、OPA 中的 CSs 及其平均结果在低级别组和高级别组之间存在显著差异。使用 CS3 得出的 PI 结果与相应的 WHO 分级的预期值最为吻合。CS对LG脑膜瘤是否被诊断为 "高增殖指数 "有深远影响:关于Ki-67 PI的计数方法、具有临床意义的临界值以及观察者之间和观察者内部的差异性,目前已有大量研究。我们的研究表明,据我们所知,Ki-67 IHC染色强度以前从未进行过系统的研究,但在影响诊断和临床管理决策的情况下,Ki-67 IHC染色强度会对PI判读产生重大影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Annals of clinical and laboratory science
Annals of clinical and laboratory science 医学-医学实验技术
CiteScore
1.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
112
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: The Annals of Clinical & Laboratory Science welcomes manuscripts that report research in clinical science, including pathology, clinical chemistry, biotechnology, molecular biology, cytogenetics, microbiology, immunology, hematology, transfusion medicine, organ and tissue transplantation, therapeutics, toxicology, and clinical informatics.
期刊最新文献
Communication: 4-Hydroxynonenal and Fracture Risk in the Community-Dwelling Older People. Letter to the Editor. Evaluation of Swab: Direct Extraction Kit, Comparing with AdvanSure E3 System for Nucleic Acid Extraction in Identification of SARS-CoV-2. A Case of Hb Phnom Penh Showing Different HbA1c Levels Depending on the High-Performance Liquid Chromatography System. Application of IdyllaTM System for Rapid Evaluation of EGFR Mutation Status in Formalin-Fixed and Paraffin-Embedded Samples of Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer. Biomarkers Identification of Early Rheumatoid Arthritis via Bioinformatics Approach and Experimental Verification.
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1