Article | Published:

Ki-67 is an independent predictor of prostate cancer death in routine needle biopsy samples: proving utility for routine assessments


Standard clinical parameters fail to accurately differentiate indolent from aggressive prostate cancer. Our previous studies showed that immunohistochemical testing for Ki-67 improved prediction of prostate cancer death in a previous cohort of conservatively treated clinically localized prostate cancer. However there is a need for validation of usage with whole biopsy sections rather than tissue micro-arrays for use in routine diagnostics. Prostate cancer biopsy cases were identified in the UK, between 1990 and 2003, treated conservatively. Tumor extent and prostate-specific antigen (PSA) serum measurements were available. Biopsy cases were centrally reviewed by three uropathologists and Gleason conformed to contemporary ISUP 2014 criteria. Follow-up was through cancer registries up until 2012. Deaths were divided into those from prostate cancer and those from other causes. The percentage of Ki-67 in tumor cells was evaluated by immunohistochemistry on whole biopsy sections and was available for 756 patients. This percentage was used in analysis of cancer specific survival using a Cox proportional hazards model. In univariate analysis, the interquartile hazard ratio (HR) (95% confidence intervals) for continuous Ki-67 was 1.68 (1.49, 1.89), χ12 = 47.975, P < 0.001. In grade groups 1 and 2, continuous Ki-67 was a statistically significant predictor of time to death from prostate cancer, HR (95% CI) = 1.97 (1.34, 2.88), χ12 = 9.017, p = 0.003. In multivariate analysis, continuous Ki-67 added significant predictive information to that provided by grade groups, extent of disease and serum PSA, HR (95% CI) = 1.34 (1.16, 1.54), Δχ12 = 13.703, P < 0.001. We now advocate the introduction of Ki-67 as a viable and practicable prognostic biomarker in clinical practice. The association of Ki-67 with mortality was highest in grade groups 1 and 2, showing that Ki-67 can be used as a routine biomarker in patients being considered for active surveillance.

Access optionsAccess options

Rent or Buy article

Get time limited or full article access on ReadCube.


All prices are NET prices.

Additional information

Publisher’s note: Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.


  1. 1.

    Wilt TJ, Brawer MK, Jones KM, Barry MJ, Aronson WJ, Fox S, et al. Radical prostatectomy versus observation for localized prostate cancer. N Engl J Med. 2012;367:203–13.

  2. 2.

    Hamdy FC, Donovan JL, Lane JA, Mason M, Metcalfe C, Holding P, et al. 10-Year Outcomes after Monitoring, Surgery, or Radiotherapy for Localized Prostate Cancer. N Engl J Med. 2016;375:1415–24.

  3. 3.

    Wiegel T, Bartkowiak D, Bottke D, Bronner C, Steiner U, Siegmann A, et al. Adjuvant radiotherapy versus wait-and-see after radical prostatectomy: 10-year follow-up of the ARO 96-02/AUO AP 09/95 trial. Eur Urol. 2014;66:243–50.

  4. 4.

    Berlin A, Castro-Mesta JF, Rodriguez-Romo L, Hernandez-Barajas D, Gonzalez-Guerrero JF, Rodriguez-Fernandez IA, et al. Prognostic role of Ki-67 score in localized prostate cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Urol Oncol. 2017;35:499–506.

  5. 5.

    Berney DM, Gopalan A, Kudahetti S, Fisher G, Ambroisine L, Foster CS, et al. Ki-67 and outcome in clinically localised prostate cancer: analysis of conservatively treated prostate cancer patients from the Trans-Atlantic Prostate Group study. Br J Cancer. 2009;100:888–93.

  6. 6.

    Fisher G, Yang ZH, Kudahetti S, Moller H, Scardino P, Cuzick J, et al. Prognostic value of Ki-67 for prostate cancer death in a conservatively managed cohort. Br J Cancer. 2013;108:271–7.

  7. 7.

    Epstein JI. An update of the Gleason grading system. J Urol. 2010;183:433–40.

  8. 8.

    Epstein JI, Zelefsky MJ, Sjoberg DD, Nelson JB, Egevad L, Magi-Galluzzi C, et al. A Contemporary Prostate Cancer Grading System: A Validated Alternative to the Gleason Score. Eur Urol. 2016;69:428–35.

  9. 9.

    Dowsett M, Nielsen TO, A'Hern R, Bartlett J, Coombes RC, Cuzick J, et al. Assessment of Ki67 in breast cancer: recommendations from the International Ki67 in Breast Cancer working group. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2011;103:1656–64.

  10. 10.

    Raap M, Liessem S, Ruschoff J, Fisseler-Eckhoff A, Reiner A, Dirnhofer S, et al. Quality assurance trials for Ki67 assessment in pathology. Virchows Arch: Int J Pathol. 2017;471:501–8.

  11. 11.

    Hoogland AM, Kweldam CF, van Leenders GJ. Prognostic histopathological and molecular markers on prostate cancer needle-biopsies: a review. Biomed Res Int. 2014;2014:341324.

  12. 12.

    Cuzick J, Swanson GP, Fisher G, Brothman AR, Berney DM, Reid JE, et al. Prognostic value of an RNA expression signature derived from cell cycle proliferation genes in patients with prostate cancer: a retrospective study. Lancet Oncol. 2011;12:245–55.

  13. 13.

    Stattin P, Damber JE, Karlberg L, Bergh A. Cell proliferation assessed by Ki-67 immunoreactivity on formalin fixed tissues is a predictive factor for survival in prostate cancer. J Urol. 1997;157:219–22.

  14. 14.

    Li R, Heydon K, Hammond ME, Grignon DJ, Roach M, 3rd, Wolkov HB, et al. Ki-67 staining index predicts distant metastasis and survival in locally advanced prostate cancer treated with radiotherapy: an analysis of patients in radiation therapy oncology group protocol 86-10. Clin Cancer Res. 2004;10:4118–24.

  15. 15.

    Pollack A, DeSilvio M, Khor LY, Li R, Al-Saleem TI, Hammond ME, et al. Ki-67 staining is a strong predictor of distant metastasis and mortality for men with prostate cancer treated with radiotherapy plus androgen deprivation: Radiation Therapy Oncology Group Trial 92-02. J Clin Oncol. 2004;22:2133–40.

  16. 16.

    Khor LY, Bae K, Paulus R, Al-Saleem T, Hammond ME, Grignon DJ, et al. MDM2 and Ki-67 predict for distant metastasis and mortality in men treated with radiotherapy and androgen deprivation for prostate cancer: RTOG 92-02. J Clin Oncol. 2009;27:3177–84.

  17. 17.

    Tollefson MK, Karnes RJ, Kwon ED, Lohse CM, Rangel LJ, Mynderse LA, et al. Prostate cancer Ki-67 (MIB-1) expression, perineural invasion, and gleason score as biopsy-based predictors of prostate cancer mortality: the Mayo model. Mayo Clin Proc. 2014;89:308–18.

  18. 18.

    Tretiakova MS, Wei W, Boyer HD, Newcomb LF, Hawley S, Auman H, et al. Prognostic value of Ki67 in localized prostate carcinoma: a multi-institutional study of >1000 prostatectomies. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis. 2016;19:264–70.

  19. 19.

    Lobo J, Rodrigues A, Antunes L, Graca I, Ramalho-Carvalho J, Vieira FQ, et al. High immunoexpression of Ki67, EZH2, and SMYD3 in diagnostic prostate biopsies independently predicts outcome in patients with prostate cancer. Urol Oncol. 2018;36:161 e7–e17.

  20. 20.

    Green WJ, Ball G, Hulman G, Johnson C, Van Schalwyk G, Ratan HL, et al. KI67 and DLX2 predict increased risk of metastasis formation in prostate cancer-a targeted molecular approach. Br J Cancer. 2016;115:236–42.

  21. 21.

    Epstein JI, Egevad L, Amin MB, Delahunt B, Srigley JR, Humphrey PA, et al. The 2014 International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) Consensus Conference on Gleason Grading of Prostatic Carcinoma: Definition of Grading Patterns and Proposal for a New Grading System. Am J Surg Pathol. 2016;40:244–52.

  22. 22.

    Tramm T, Kyndi M, Sorensen FB, Overgaard J, Alsner J. Influence of intra-tumoral heterogeneity on the evaluation of BCL2, E-cadherin, EGFR, EMMPRIN, and Ki-67 expression in tissue microarrays from breast cancer. Acta Oncol. 2018;57:102–6.

  23. 23.

    Yang Z, Tang LH, Klimstra DS. Effect of tumor heterogeneity on the assessment of Ki67 labeling index in well-differentiated neuroendocrine tumors metastatic to the liver: implications for prognostic stratification. Am J Surg Pathol. 2011;35:853–60.

  24. 24.

    Leon P, Cancel-Tassin G, Drouin S, Audouin M, Varinot J, Comperat E, et al. Comparison of cell cycle progression score with two immunohistochemical markers (PTEN and Ki-67) for predicting outcome in prostate cancer after radical prostatectomy. World J Urol. 2018.

  25. 25.

    Briganti A, Fossati N, Catto JWF, Cornford P, Montorsi F, Mottet N, et al. Active Surveillance for Low-risk Prostate Cancer: The European Association of Urology Position in 2018. Eur Urol. 2018;74:357–68.

  26. 26.

    Richardsen E, Andersen S, Al-Saad S, Rakaee M, Nordby Y, Pedersen MI, et al. Evaluation of the proliferation marker Ki-67 in a large prostatectomy cohort. PLoS ONE 2017;12:e0186852.

Download references


We gratefully acknowledge the support from Cancer Research UK, ORCHID, a SPORE grant from the US National Cancer Institute (P50CA09629), the David H. Koch Fund and Myriad Genetics. We thank investigators and staff in the cancer registries and participating hospitals for their support.

Author information

Conflict of interest

There are no conflicts of interest to disclose.

Correspondence to Solène-Florence Kammerer-Jacquet.

Supplementary information

Suplementary Figure

Suplementary Figure Legend

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark
Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4