Search

The article discusses a study in Denmark that examined if macroscopic examination of breast reduction specimens is a sufficient procedure for detection of cancer. Study highlights include study population and data processing, mapping of specimen examination method in the country, and histological details for women diagnosed with invasive breast cancer or ductal carcinoma in situ. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

Introduction: In 2011, the St. Gallen Consensus Conference introduced the use of pathology to define the intrinsic breast cancer subtypes by application of immunohistochemical (IHC) surrogate markers ER, PR, HER2 and Ki67 with a specified Ki67 cutoff (>14%) for luminal B-like definition. Reports concerning impaired reproducibility of Ki67 estimation and threshold inconsistency led to the initiation of this quality assurance study (2013–2015). The aim of the study was to investigate inter-observer variation for Ki67 estimation in malignant breast tumors by two different quantification methods (assessment method and count method) including measure of agreement between methods. Material and methods: Fourteen experienced breast pathologists from 12 pathology departments evaluated 118 slides from a consecutive series of malignant breast tumors. The staining interpretation was performed according to both the Danish and Swedish guidelines. Reproducibility was quantified by intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC) and Lights Kappa with dichotomization of observations at the larger than (>) 20% threshold. The agreement between observations by the two quantification methods was evaluated by Bland–Altman plot. Results: For the fourteen raters the median ranged from 20% to 40% by the assessment method and from 22.5% to 36.5% by the count method. Light’s Kappa was 0.664 for observation by the assessment method and 0.649 by the count method. The ICC was 0.82 (95% CI: 0.77–0.86) by the assessment method vs. 0.84 (95% CI: 0.80–0.87) by the count method. Conclusion: Although the study in general showed a moderate to good inter-observer agreement according to both ICC and Lights Kappa, still major discrepancies were identified in especially the midrange of observations. Consequently, for now Ki67 estimation is not implemented in the DBCG treatment algorithm. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Brain metastases are a major cause of morbidity and mortality in breast cancer. The aim of the current study was to evaluate the prediction of brain metastases based on serum S100B and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2). A total of 107 breast cancer patients were included in the current study from two prospective cohort studies with either elevated serum HER2 levels >15 ng/ml or brain metastases verified by magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) or computer tomography (CT). Following the exclusion of six patients, the remaining 101 patients were divided into two groups: Group 0 (n=55), patients with normal MRI results; and group 1 (n=46), patients with brain metastases. The levels of serum S100B and HER2 in the two groups were analyzed prior to MRI or CT of the brain, and no significant differences were identified in the serum HER2 (P=0.060) or S100B levels (P=0.623) between the groups. The univariate analysis of prognostic factors for brain metastases showed a significant correlation with systemic disease (P<0.001), axillary lymph node metastases (P=0.001) and serum HER2 >30 ng/ml (P=0.002). Only systemic disease (P<0.001) remained statistically significant in the multivariate analysis. In conclusion, serum levels of S100B and HER2 did not predict the risk of brain metastases. In the multivariate analysis, brain metastases were only found to correlate with systemic disease. However, in the univariate analysis, serum HER2 levels >30 ng/ml were identified to correlate with increased risk of brain metastases, which calls for further investigation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]