Ki67 can be used as a predictive factor for the effectiveness of neoadjuvant chemotherapy in breast cancer patients

Cell proliferation, as measured by Ki67, is considered a significant predictive factor for the success of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) in breast cancer. However, its clinical utility remains debated. This study aimed to determine the optimal cut-off value for Ki67 and evaluate its predictive potential in this context. This study analyzed 74 patients with locally advanced breast cancer undergoing NACT. The response to NACT was assessed using the pathological complete response (pCR) rate and the neoadjuvant response index (NRI). All patients had centrally evaluated Ki67 levels alongside other tumor characteristics. The optimal cut-off value for Ki67 was determined using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis, and its predictive potential was confirmed through univariate and multivariate analyses. A Ki67 cut-off value of 50% was identified as optimal for predicting both pCR rate and NRI. Patients with high Ki67 (≥50%) achieved an NRI of 0.49, compared to 0.32 in patients with Ki67 <50% (p < 0.01). Similarly, the pCR rate was 19.4% in the high Ki67 group versus 5.3% in the low Ki67 group, although this difference did not reach statistical significance (p = 0.06). The independent predictive value of the Ki67 cut-off was confirmed through multivariate analysis. Cell proliferation measured by Ki67 serves as a critical predictor of response to NACT. A cut-off value of 50% can effectively identify patients more likely to achieve favorable outcomes and a higher probability of pCR.

Breast cancer; Ki67; Neoadjuvant chemotherapy; Neoadjuvant response index; Pathological complete response

[1] Shen SJ, Liu CM. Chemotherapy for early-stage breast cancer: the more the better? The Lancet. 2023; 401: 1243–1245.

[2] Provenzano E. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy for breast cancer: moving beyond pathological complete response in the molecular age. Acta Medica Academica. 2021; 50: 88–109.

[3] Zhang A, Wang X, Fan C, Mao X. The role of Ki67 in evaluating neoadjuvant endocrine therapy of hormone receptor-positive breast cancer. Frontiers in Endocrinology. 2021; 12: 687244.

[4] van den Ende NS, Nguyen AH, Jager A, Kok M, Debets R, van Deurzen CHM. Triple-negative breast cancer and predictive markers of response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy: a systematic review. International Journal of Molecular Sciences. 2023; 24: 2969.

[5] Wajid S, Samad FA, Syed AS, Kazi F. Ki-67 and its relation with complete pathological response in patients with breast cancer. Cureus. 2021; 13: e16788.

[6] Li F, Zhou X, Hu W, Du Y, Sun J, Wang Y. Prognostic predictive value of Ki-67 in stage I–II triple-negative breast cancer. Future Science OA. 2024; 10: FSO936.

[7] Burstein HJ, Curigliano G, Thürlimann B, Weber WP, Poortmans P, Regan MM, et al; Panelists of the St Gallen Consensus Conference. Customizing local and systemic therapies for women with early breast cancer: the St. Gallen international consensus guidelines for treatment of early breast cancer 2021. Annals of Oncology. 2021; 32: 1216–1235.

[8] Ács B, Zámbó V, Vízkeleti L, Szász AM, Madaras L, Szentmártoni G, et al. Ki-67 as a controversial predictive and prognostic marker in breast cancer patients treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Diagnostic Pathology. 2017; 12: 20.

[9] Rewcastle E, Skaland I, Gudlaugsson E, Fykse SK, Baak JPA, Janssen EAM. The Ki67 dilemma: investigating prognostic cut-offs and reproducibility for automated Ki67 scoring in breast cancer. Breast Cancer Research and Treatment. 2024; 207: 1–12.

[10] Aebi S, Karlsson P, Wapnir IL. Locally advanced breast cancer. The Breast. 2022; 62: S58–S62.

[11] Rodenhuis S, Mandjes IAM, Wesseling J, van de Vijver MJ, Peeters MTDFV, Sonke GS, et al. A simple system for grading the response of breast cancer to neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Annals of Oncology. 2010; 21: 481–487.

[12] Moslemi A, Osapoetra LO, Dasgupta A, Alberico D, Trudeau M, Gandhi S, et al. Apriori prediction of chemotherapy response in locally advanced breast cancer patients using CT imaging and deep learning: transformer versus transfer learning. Frontiers in Oncology. 2024; 14: 1359148.

[13] Inwald EC, Klinkhammer-Schalke M, Hofstädter F, Zeman F, Koller M, Gerstenhauer M, et al. Ki-67 is a prognostic parameter in breast cancer patients: Results of a large population-based cohort of a cancer registry. Breast Cancer Research and Treatment. 2013; 139: 539–552.

[14] Najjar S, Allison KH. Updates on breast biomarkers. Virchows Archiv. 2022; 480: 163–176.

[15] Sánchez-Muñoz A, Navarro-Perez V, Plata-Fernández Y, Santonja A, Moreno I, Ribelles N, et al. Proliferation determined by Ki-67 defines different pathologic response to neoadjuvant trastuzumab-based chemotherapy in HER2-positive breast cancer. Clinical Breast Cancer. 2015; 15: 343–347.

[16] Wang M, Wei Z, Kong J, Zhao H. Comprehensive evaluation of the relationship between biomarker profiles and neoadjuvant chemotherapy outcomes for breast cancer patients. Diagnostic Pathology. 2024; 19: 53.

[17] Alba E, Lluch A, Ribelles N, Anton-Torres A, Sanchez-Rovira P, Albanell J, et al. High proliferation predicts pathological complete response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy in early breast cancer. The Oncologist. 2016; 21: 150–155.

[18] Chen X, He C, Han D, Zhou M, Wang Q, Tian J, et al. The predictive value of Ki-67 before neoadjuvant chemotherapy for breast cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Future Oncology. 2017; 13: 843–857.

[19] Ács B, Kulka J, Kovács KA, Teleki I, Tőkés AM, Meczker Á, et al. Comparison of 5 Ki67 antibodies regarding reproducibility and capacity to predict prognosis in breast cancer: does the antibody matter? Human Pathology. 2017; 65: 31–40.

[20] Khosravi S, Khayyamfar A, Karimi J, Tutuni M, Negahi A, Akbari ME, et al. Machine learning approach for the determination of the best cut-off points for Ki67 proliferation index in adjuvant and neo-adjuvant therapy breast cancer patients. Clinical Breast Cancer. 2023; 23: 519–526.

[21] Dave S, Choudhury A, Alurkar SS, Shah AM. Is Ki-67 really useful as a predictor for response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy in locally advanced breast cancer? Indian Journal of Surgical Oncology. 2024; 15: 44–52.

[22] Burcombe R, Wilson G.D, Dowsett M, Khan I, Richman PI, Daley F, et al. Evaluation of Ki-67 proliferation and apoptotic index before, during and after neoadjuvant chemotherapy for primary breast cancer. Breast Cancer Research. 2006; 8: R31.

[23] Lips EH, Mulder L, De Ronde JJ, Mandjes IA, Vincent A, Vrancken Peeters MT, et al. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy in ER+ HER2− breast cancer: response prediction based on immunohistochemical and molecular characteristics. Breast Cancer Research and Treatment. 2012; 131: 827–836.

[24] Baba, M, Takahashi M, Yamashiro K, Yokoo H, Fukai M, Sato M, et al. Strong cytoplasmic expression of NF-κB/p65 correlates with a good prognosis in patients with triple-negative breast cancer. Surgery Today. 2016; 46: 843–851.