Uncontrolled proliferation is a hallmark of cancer. In breast cancer, immunohistochemical assessment of the proportion of cells staining for the nuclear antigen Ki67 has become the most widely used method for comparing proliferation between tumor samples. Potential uses include prognosis, prediction of relative responsiveness or resistance to chemotherapy or endocrine therapy, estimation of residual risk in patients on standard therapy and as a dynamic biomarker of treatment efficacy in samples taken before, during, and after neoadjuvant therapy, particularly neoadjuvant endocrine therapy. Increasingly, Ki67 is measured in these scenarios for clinical research, including as a primary efficacy endpoint for clinical trials, and sometimes for clinical management. At present, the enormous variation in analytical practice markedly limits the value of Ki67 in each of these contexts. On March 12, 2010, an international panel of investigators with substantial expertise in the assessment of Ki67 and in the development of biomarker guidelines was convened in London by the cochairs of the Breast International Group and North American Breast Cancer Group Biomarker Working Party to consider evidence for potential applications. Comprehensive recommendations on preanalytical and analytical assessment, and interpretation and scoring of Ki67 were formulated based on current evidence. These recommendations are geared toward achieving a harmonized methodology, create greater between-laboratory and between-study comparability, and allow earlier valid applications of this marker in clinical practice.

In breast cancer, immunohistochemical assessment of proliferation using the marker Ki67 has potential use in both research and clinical management. However, lack of consistency across laboratories has limited Ki67’s value. A working group was assembled to devise a strategy to harmonize Ki67 analysis and increase scoring concordance. Toward that goal, we conducted a Ki67 reproducibility study. Eight laboratories received 100 breast cancer cases arranged into 1-mm core tissue microarrays—one set stained by the participating laboratory and one set stained by the central laboratory, both using antibody MIB-1. Each laboratory scored Ki67 as percentage of positively stained invasive tumor cells using its own method. Six laboratories repeated scoring of 50 locally stained cases on 3 different days. Sources of variation were analyzed using random effects models with log2-transformed measurements. Reproducibility was quantified by intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC), and the approximate two-sided 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for the true intraclass correlation coefficients in these experiments were provided. Intralaboratory reproducibility was high (ICC = 0.94; 95% CI = 0.93 to 0.97). Interlaboratory reproducibility was only moderate (central staining: ICC = 0.71, 95% CI = 0.47 to 0.78; local staining: ICC = 0.59, 95% CI = 0.37 to 0.68). Geometric mean of Ki67 values for each laboratory across the 100 cases ranged 7.1% to 23.9% with central staining and 6.1% to 30.1% with local staining. Factors contributing to interlaboratory discordance included tumor region selection, counting method, and subjective assessment of staining positivity. Formal counting methods gave more consistent results than visual estimation. Substantial variability in Ki67 scoring was observed among some of the world’s most experienced laboratories. Ki67 values and cutoffs for clinical decision-making cannot be transferred between laboratories without standardizing scoring methodology because analytical validity is limited.

Purpose: As survival in breast cancer patients is improving, brain metastases are becoming increasingly prevalent. The risk of brain metastases in newly diagnosed human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER-2) –overexpressing breast cancer patients is not yet fully defined. We aimed to analyze the risk of brain metastasis in newly diagnosed HER-2–positive breast cancer patients in comparison with HER-2–negative patients. Patients and Methods: To determine the incidence of brain metastases in HER-2–overexpressing patients, we analyzed a cohort of newly diagnosed 301 HER-2–positive and 363 HER-2–negative patients identified between January 1998 and December 2003. The association between histologic features and the occurrence of brain metastases was evaluated with univariate and multivariate Cox regression analysis. Results: Median follow-up was 3.9 years. Brain metastases were identified in 9% (27 patients) with HER-2–overexpressing breast cancer compared with only 1.9% (7 patients) in the HER-2 negative patients (hazard ratio 4.23 [1.84-9.74], P = .0007). HER-2 overexpression, tumor size larger than 2 cm, at least one positive node, and grade 2/3 disease were predictors of brain metastases in univariate analysis. In multivariate analysis, HER-2 overexpression, tumor size larger than 2 cm, and hormone-receptor negativity were independent prognostic factors for the development of brain metastases, whereas hormone-receptor expression was protective. Conclusion: Our study shows that newly diagnosed HER-2–overexpressing breast cancer patients are at increased risk for brain metastases. Because most brain metastases occur after the development of systemic disease, these findings prompt consideration of brain prophylaxis strategies with HER-2–inhibiting small molecules able to cross the blood-brain barrier and/or radiologic screening to detect asymptomatic brain metastases.

Purpose: We assessed the prognostic impact of genitourinary small cell carcinoma tumor and patient characteristics, and therapy.Materials and Methods: We retrospectively reviewed the record...