Correlation of mitotic activity and Ki 67 with BR score and molecular classification in carcinoma breast

Satyajit Singh Gill; Nutan Jumle; Aleena Babu; Saumya Lal; Ritu Sharma; Rohit Singh Rajput; Dnyanesh Limaye

doi:10.18203/2320-6012.ijrms20231018

Authors

Satyajit Singh Gill Jehangir Hospital, Pune, Maharashtra, India https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7264-9210
Nutan Jumle Department of Pathology, Jehangir Hospital, Pune, Maharashtra, India
Aleena Babu Department of Pathology, Jehangir Hospital, Pune, Maharashtra, India
Saumya Lal Jahangir Clinical Development Centre, Pune, Maharashtra, India
Ritu Sharma Jahangir Clinical Development Centre, Pune, Maharashtra, India
Rohit Singh Rajput Jahangir Clinical Development Centre, Pune, Maharashtra, India
Dnyanesh Limaye Learning and Development, Jahangir Clinical Development Centre, Pune, Maharashtra, India

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.18203/2320-6012.ijrms20231018

Keywords:

Breast cancer, KI 67, Carcinoma, Breast biopsy, Mitosis

Abstract

Background: To determine if mitotic activity played a role in classifying breast cancer in terms of its biological behaviour. We investigated the prospect of identifying a more meaningful cell proliferation marker for categorising treatment-naive breast cancer.

Methods: The 150 cases diagnosed as invasive breast carcinoma in the histopathology section were systematically studied for the clinical, gross, and microscopic features.

Results: the 50% patients were grade 2 (75), 41% were grade 3 (71) and 9% (14) were grade 1 in present study. The distribution of intrinsic subtypes was luminal A 25% (38), luminal B 59% (88), HER2 enriched 10% (15), basal 6% (9). Out of 150 cases, 29% (43) cases were T1, T2 were 65% (97), T3 were 2% (4), T4 were 4% (6). Mean Ki 67 was 15.6±8.8 in grade 1, 23.3±15.4 and 38.2± in grade 3. There was significant difference between I and III, and II and III (p<0.05). Mean mitotic count in grade 1 was 5.4±2.7, in grade 2 it was 9.7±13.5, in grade 3 it was 16.1±6.9. There was significant difference between grade 1 and 2, grade 2 and 3, grade 1 and 3 (p<0.05). There was significant difference between T stages (p<0.05).

Conclusions: Ki 67 showed a more significant statistical correlation with prognostic factors as compared to mitotic count; we feel Ki 67 is more superior to mitotic count as a prognostic factor.

Metrics

Metrics Loading ...

References

Łukasiewicz S, Czeczelewski M, Forma A, Baj J, Sitarz R, Stanisławek A. Breast Cancer-Epidemiology, Risk Factors, Classification, Prognostic Markers, and Current Treatment Strategies-An Updated Review. Cancers. 2021;13(17):4287.

Sancho-Garnier H, Colonna M. Épidémiologie des cancers du sein. La Presse Médicale. 2019;48(10):1076-84.

Momenimovahed Z, Salehiniya H. Epidemiological characteristics of and risk factors for breast cancer in the world. Breast cancer (Dove Medical Press), 2019;11:151-64.

Daly AA, Rolph R, Cutress RI, Copson ER. A Review of Modifiable Risk Factors in Young Women for the Prevention of Breast Cancer. Breast cancer (Dove Medical Press), 2021;13:241-57.

Yi-Sheng S. Risk Factors and Preventions of Breast Cancer. Int J Biological Sci. 2017;13(11):1387-97.

Kamińska M, Ciszewski T, Łopacka-Szatan K, Miotła P, Starosławska E. Breast cancer risk factors. Przeglad menopauzalny Menopause Rev. 2015;14(3):196-202.

Sayed S, Fan S, Moloo Z. Breast Cancer Risk factors in Relation to Molecular Subtypes in Breast Cancer Patients from Kenya. Research Square. Risk Factors and Prevention for Breast Cancer. ZenOnco.io. 2021.

Lуndіn M, Hyriavenko N, Sikora V, Lуndіna Y, Soroka Y, Romaniuk A. Invasive Breast Carcinoma of No Special Type with Medullary Pattern: Morphological and Immunohistochemical Features. Turk Patoloji Derg. 2021;12.

Agaimy A. Pleomorphic (giant cell) carcinoma revisited: A historical perspective and conceptual reappraisal. Semin Diagn Pathol. 2021;38(6):187-92.

Peña-Jaimes L, González-García I, Reguero-Callejas ME, Pinilla-Pagnon I, Pérez-Mies B, Albarrán-Artahona V, et al. Pleomorphic lobular carcinoma of the breast with osteoclast-like giant cells: a case report and review of the literature. Diagn Pathol. 2018;13(1):62.

McCart Reed AE, Kalinowski L, Simpson PT, Lakhani SR. Invasive lobular carcinoma of the breast: the increasing importance of this special subtype. Breast Cancer Res. 2021;23(1):6.

Metzger-Filho O, Ferreira AR, Jeselsohn R, Barry WT, Dillon DA, Brock JE. Mixed Invasive Ductal and Lobular Carcinoma of the Breast: Prognosis and the Importance of Histologic Grade. Oncologist. 2019;24(7):e441-9.

Limaiem F, Ahmad F. Mucinous Breast Carcinoma. In: StatPearls. Treasure Island (FL): StatPearls Publishing. 2022.

Dai D, Shi R, Wang Z, Zhong Y, Shin VY, Jin H, Wang X. Competing Risk Analyses of Medullary Carcinoma of Breast in Comparison to Infiltrating Ductal Carcinoma. Scientific Rep. 2020;10(1):560.

Reddy TP, Rosato RR, Li X, Moulder S, Piwnica-Worms H, Chang JC. A comprehensive overview of metaplastic breast cancer: clinical features and molecular aberrations. Breast Cancer Res. 2020;22(1):121.

Oddó D, Domínguez F, Gómez N. Granulomatous lobular mastitis associated with ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast. SAGE Open Med Case Rep. 2019;7:1-5.

Aziz S, Wik E, Knutsvi G. Evaluation of Tumour Cell Proliferation by Ki-67 Expression and Mitotic Count in Lymph Node Metastases from Breast Cancer. PLoS ONE. 2010;11(3):e0150979.

Thangaraj S, Shyamsundar V, Krishnamurthy A. Deregulation of extracellular matrix modeling with molecular prognostic markers revealed by transcriptome sequencing and validations in Oral Tongue squamous cell carcinoma. Sci Rep. 2021;11:250.

Liang Q, Ma D, Gao R. Effect of Ki-67 Expression Levels and Histological Grade on Breast Cancer Early Relapse in Patients with Different Immunohistochemical-based Subtypes. Sci Rep. 2020;10(1):7648.