Cargando…
Three-tiered score for Ki-67 and p16(ink4a) improves accuracy and reproducibility of grading CIN lesions
AIMS: To investigate the accuracy and reproducibility of a scoring system for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN1–3) based on immunohistochemical (IHC) biomarkers Ki-67 and p16(ink4a). METHODS: 115 cervical tissue specimens were reviewed by three expert gynaecopathologists and graded according...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BMJ Publishing Group
2018
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6225805/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30012698 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/jclinpath-2018-205271 |
_version_ | 1783369852567683072 |
---|---|
author | van Zummeren, Marjolein Leeman, Annemiek Kremer, Wieke W Bleeker, Maaike C G Jenkins, David van de Sandt, Miekel Heideman, Daniëlle A M Steenbergen, Renske Snijders, Peter J F Quint, Wim G V Berkhof, Johannes Meijer, Chris J L M |
author_facet | van Zummeren, Marjolein Leeman, Annemiek Kremer, Wieke W Bleeker, Maaike C G Jenkins, David van de Sandt, Miekel Heideman, Daniëlle A M Steenbergen, Renske Snijders, Peter J F Quint, Wim G V Berkhof, Johannes Meijer, Chris J L M |
author_sort | van Zummeren, Marjolein |
collection | PubMed |
description | AIMS: To investigate the accuracy and reproducibility of a scoring system for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN1–3) based on immunohistochemical (IHC) biomarkers Ki-67 and p16(ink4a). METHODS: 115 cervical tissue specimens were reviewed by three expert gynaecopathologists and graded according to three strategies: (1) CIN grade based on H&E staining only; (2) immunoscore based on the cumulative score of Ki-67 and p16(ink4a) only (0–6); and (3) CIN grade based on H&E supported by non-objectified IHC 2 weeks after scoring 1 and 2. The majority consensus diagnosis of the CIN grade based on H&E supported by IHC was used as the Reference Standard. The proportion of test positives (accuracy) and the absolute agreements across pathologists (reproducibility) of the three grading strategies within each Reference Standard category were calculated. RESULTS: We found that immunoscoring with positivity definition 6 yielded the highest proportion of test positives for Reference Standard CIN3 (95.5%), in combination with the lowest proportion of test positives in samples with CIN1 (1.8%). The proportion of test positives for CIN3 was significantly lower for sole H&E staining (81.8%) or combined H&E and IHC grading (84.8%) with positivity definition ≥CIN3. Immunoscore 6 also yielded high absolute agreements for CIN3 and CIN1, but the absolute agreement was low for CIN2. CONCLUSIONS: The higher accuracy and reproducibility of the immunoscore opens the possibility of a more standardised and reproducible definition of CIN grade than conventional pathology practice, allowing a more accurate comparison of CIN-based management strategies and evaluation of new biomarkers to improve the understanding of progression of precancer from human papillomavirus infection to cancer. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-6225805 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2018 |
publisher | BMJ Publishing Group |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-62258052018-11-23 Three-tiered score for Ki-67 and p16(ink4a) improves accuracy and reproducibility of grading CIN lesions van Zummeren, Marjolein Leeman, Annemiek Kremer, Wieke W Bleeker, Maaike C G Jenkins, David van de Sandt, Miekel Heideman, Daniëlle A M Steenbergen, Renske Snijders, Peter J F Quint, Wim G V Berkhof, Johannes Meijer, Chris J L M J Clin Pathol Original Article AIMS: To investigate the accuracy and reproducibility of a scoring system for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN1–3) based on immunohistochemical (IHC) biomarkers Ki-67 and p16(ink4a). METHODS: 115 cervical tissue specimens were reviewed by three expert gynaecopathologists and graded according to three strategies: (1) CIN grade based on H&E staining only; (2) immunoscore based on the cumulative score of Ki-67 and p16(ink4a) only (0–6); and (3) CIN grade based on H&E supported by non-objectified IHC 2 weeks after scoring 1 and 2. The majority consensus diagnosis of the CIN grade based on H&E supported by IHC was used as the Reference Standard. The proportion of test positives (accuracy) and the absolute agreements across pathologists (reproducibility) of the three grading strategies within each Reference Standard category were calculated. RESULTS: We found that immunoscoring with positivity definition 6 yielded the highest proportion of test positives for Reference Standard CIN3 (95.5%), in combination with the lowest proportion of test positives in samples with CIN1 (1.8%). The proportion of test positives for CIN3 was significantly lower for sole H&E staining (81.8%) or combined H&E and IHC grading (84.8%) with positivity definition ≥CIN3. Immunoscore 6 also yielded high absolute agreements for CIN3 and CIN1, but the absolute agreement was low for CIN2. CONCLUSIONS: The higher accuracy and reproducibility of the immunoscore opens the possibility of a more standardised and reproducible definition of CIN grade than conventional pathology practice, allowing a more accurate comparison of CIN-based management strategies and evaluation of new biomarkers to improve the understanding of progression of precancer from human papillomavirus infection to cancer. BMJ Publishing Group 2018-11 2018-07-16 /pmc/articles/PMC6225805/ /pubmed/30012698 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/jclinpath-2018-205271 Text en © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2018. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ. This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited, appropriate credit is given, any changes made indicated, and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/. |
spellingShingle | Original Article van Zummeren, Marjolein Leeman, Annemiek Kremer, Wieke W Bleeker, Maaike C G Jenkins, David van de Sandt, Miekel Heideman, Daniëlle A M Steenbergen, Renske Snijders, Peter J F Quint, Wim G V Berkhof, Johannes Meijer, Chris J L M Three-tiered score for Ki-67 and p16(ink4a) improves accuracy and reproducibility of grading CIN lesions |
title | Three-tiered score for Ki-67 and p16(ink4a) improves accuracy and reproducibility of grading CIN lesions |
title_full | Three-tiered score for Ki-67 and p16(ink4a) improves accuracy and reproducibility of grading CIN lesions |
title_fullStr | Three-tiered score for Ki-67 and p16(ink4a) improves accuracy and reproducibility of grading CIN lesions |
title_full_unstemmed | Three-tiered score for Ki-67 and p16(ink4a) improves accuracy and reproducibility of grading CIN lesions |
title_short | Three-tiered score for Ki-67 and p16(ink4a) improves accuracy and reproducibility of grading CIN lesions |
title_sort | three-tiered score for ki-67 and p16(ink4a) improves accuracy and reproducibility of grading cin lesions |
topic | Original Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6225805/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30012698 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/jclinpath-2018-205271 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT vanzummerenmarjolein threetieredscoreforki67andp16ink4aimprovesaccuracyandreproducibilityofgradingcinlesions AT leemanannemiek threetieredscoreforki67andp16ink4aimprovesaccuracyandreproducibilityofgradingcinlesions AT kremerwiekew threetieredscoreforki67andp16ink4aimprovesaccuracyandreproducibilityofgradingcinlesions AT bleekermaaikecg threetieredscoreforki67andp16ink4aimprovesaccuracyandreproducibilityofgradingcinlesions AT jenkinsdavid threetieredscoreforki67andp16ink4aimprovesaccuracyandreproducibilityofgradingcinlesions AT vandesandtmiekel threetieredscoreforki67andp16ink4aimprovesaccuracyandreproducibilityofgradingcinlesions AT heidemandanielleam threetieredscoreforki67andp16ink4aimprovesaccuracyandreproducibilityofgradingcinlesions AT steenbergenrenske threetieredscoreforki67andp16ink4aimprovesaccuracyandreproducibilityofgradingcinlesions AT snijderspeterjf threetieredscoreforki67andp16ink4aimprovesaccuracyandreproducibilityofgradingcinlesions AT quintwimgv threetieredscoreforki67andp16ink4aimprovesaccuracyandreproducibilityofgradingcinlesions AT berkhofjohannes threetieredscoreforki67andp16ink4aimprovesaccuracyandreproducibilityofgradingcinlesions AT meijerchrisjlm threetieredscoreforki67andp16ink4aimprovesaccuracyandreproducibilityofgradingcinlesions |