Characterization and analysis of Ki-67-immunoreactivity in brain astrocytoma.

Authors

  • I. S. Shpon‘ka State institution “Dnipropetrovsk medical academy of the Ministry of Health of Ukraine”, Ukraine
  • T. V. Shynkarenko State institution “Dnipropetrovsk medical academy of the Ministry of Health of Ukraine”, Ukraine
  • O. V. Poslavska State institution “Dnipropetrovsk medical academy of the Ministry of Health of Ukraine”, Ukraine

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.26641/1997-9665.2016.1.96-101

Keywords:

glial tumor, proliferative index, immunohistochemistry, Ki-67, diagnostic

Abstract

Background. A significant problem of brain tumors diagnostics is the subjective histological criteria. A promising area of research is estimation of mitotic activity level, but counting mitotic figures can not be accurate in slides stained by hematoxylin and eosin and therefore immunohistochemical detection of expression Ki-67 is widely used. Despite considerable experience in using proliferative index, determined by using Ki-67-immunoreactivity, the technique requires further research for standardization and optimization. Objective. To determine the diagnostic value of the Ki-67 expression in astrocytomas. Methods. The study included 45 astrocytomas, which were received by biopsy or operation. Imunohistochemical determining of Ki-67-labeling was used for calculating of proliferation index. Statistical analysis was performed by nonparametric tests. Results. It was observed similar and relatively low levels of Ki-67 expression in astrocytoma Grade I and II (WHO), significantly lower than in groups III and IV levels. It was revealed significant differences between the results obtained by different researchers. Conclusion. The level of Ki-67 expression correlates with Grade of astrocytomas (p <0,05). Great overlaps of Ki-67 expression (between I and II, III and IV level) does not allow its use in the differentiation of Grades. Despite the strong statistically significant relationship (p <0,05) between the results obtained by different researchers, a significant difference between them requires consideration when comparing with other data.

References

  1. Louis DN, Ohgaki H, Wiestler OD, Cavenee WK, editors. World Health Organization Classifica-tion of Tumours of the Central Nervous System. 4th ed. Lyon: IARC; 2007. 312 p. ISBN 9283224302.
  2. Raizer J, Parsa A, editors. Current under-standing and treatment of gliomas. Springer Interna-tional Publishing; 2015. ISBN 3319120484.
  3. Skjulsvik AJ, Mørk JN, Torp MO, Torp SH. Ki-67/MIB-1 immunostaining in a cohort of human gliomas. International journal of clinical and exper-imental pathology. 2014;7(12):8905.
  4. Chen WJ, He DS, Tang RX, Ren FH, Chen G. Ki-67 is a valuable prognostic factor in gliomas: evidence from a systematic review and meta-analysis. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev. 2015;16(2):411-20. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.7314/APJCP. 2015.16.2.411.
  5. Abd El Atti RM, Abou Gabal HH, Osman WM, Saad AS. Insights into the prognostic value of DJ-1 and MIB-1 in astrocytic tumors. Diagn Pathol. 2013 Jul 31;8:126. doi: 10.1186/1746-1596-8-126.
  6. Varughese RK, Lind-Landström T, Habberstad AH, Salvesen Ø, Haug CS, Sundstrøm S, Torp SH. Mitosin and pHH3 predict poorer sur-vival in astrocytomas WHO grades II and III. J Clin Pathol. 2016 Jan;69(1):26-34. doi: 10.1136/jclinpath-2015-202983. Epub 2015 Jul 17.
  7. Rashed HE, Abdelbary EH, Ismail EI, Bary TH. Prognostic implications of GRP78, survivin, and Ki67 immunostaining in astrocytomas. Egyptian Journal of Pathology. 2013 Dec 1;33(2):220-9. doi: 10.1097/01.XEJ.0000436661.91397.3a
  8. Lv Q, Zhang J, Yi Y, Huang Y, Wang Y, Wang Y, Zhang W. proliferating cell nuclear antigen has an association with prognosis and risks factors of cancer patients: a systematic review. Mol Neurobiol. 2015 Nov 12. doi: 10.1007/s12035-015-9525-3.
  9. Qu DW, Xu HS, Han XJ, Wang YL, Ouyang CJ. Expression of cyclinD1 and Ki-67 proteins in gliomas and its clinical significance. Eur Rev Med Pharmacol Sci. 2014;18(4):516-9.
  10. Suren D, Isiksacan Ozen O. CDC25B, Ki-67, and p53 expressions in reactive gliosis and astrocytomas. J BUON. 2013 Oct-Dec;18(4):1006-11.
  11. Alomari YM, Abdullah SN, Zin RR, Omar K. Iterative randomized irregular circular algorithm for proliferation rate estimation in brain tumor Ki-67 histology images. Expert Systems with Applications. 2016 Apr 15;48:111-29. doi:10.1016/j.eswa. 2015.11.012.
  12. Surowka AD, Adamek D, Radwanska E, Lankosz M, Szczerbowska-Boruchowska M. A methodological approach to the characterization of brain gliomas, by means of semi-automatic mor-phometric analysis. Image Analysis & Stereology. 2014 Jan 1;33(3):201-18. doi: 10.5566/ias.1039.
  13. Markiewicz T, Kozlowski W, Osowski S. Computer systems for cell counting in histopathologic. Tumors of the Central Nervous System, Volume 13: Types of Tumors, Diagnosis, Ultrasonography, Surgery, Brain Metastasis, and General CNS Diseases. 2013 Dec 16;13:107. doi: 10.1007/978-94-007-7602-9_12.
  14. Ostrom QT, Gittleman H, Fulop J, Liu M, Blanda R, Kromer C, Wolinsky Y, Kruchko C, Barnholtz-Sloan JS. CBTRUS statistical report: pri-mary brain and central nervous system tumors diag-nosed in the United States in 2008-2012 Neuro Oncol. 2015 Oct;17 Suppl 4:iv1-iv62. doi: 10.1093/neuonc/nov189.
  15. Jakovlevs A, Vanags A, Balodis D, Gardovskis J, Strumfa I. Heterogeneity of Ki-67 and p53 Expression in Glioblastoma. Acta Chirurgica Latviensis. 2014 Jan 1;14(1):11-4. doi:10.2478/chilat-2014-0102.
  16. Thotakura M, Tirumalasetti N, Krishna R. Role of Ki-67 labeling index as an adjunct to the histopathological diagnosis and grading of astrocytomas. J Cancer Res Ther. 2014;10(3):641-5. doi: 10.4103/0973-1482.139154.
  17. Fu XR, Sun ZC, Chang Y. Expression and clinical significance of P53, O6-methylguanine-dna methyltransferase and epidermal growth factor re-ceptor in glioma. J Biol Regul Homeost Agents. 2015 Oct-Dec;29(4):853-8.

How to Cite

Shpon‘ka, I. S., Shynkarenko, T. V., & Poslavska, O. V. (2016). Characterization and analysis of Ki-67-immunoreactivity in brain astrocytoma. Морфологія / Morphologia / Morfologìâ, 10(1), 96–101. https://doi.org/10.26641/1997-9665.2016.1.96-101

Issue

Section

Статті