Skip to main content

Main menu

  • Home
  • About
    • About CBM
    • Editorial Board
    • Announcement
  • Articles
    • Ahead of print
    • Current Issue
    • Archive
    • Collections
    • Cover Story
  • For Authors
    • Instructions for Authors
    • Resources
    • Submit a Manuscript
  • For Reviewers
    • Become a Reviewer
    • Instructions for Reviewers
    • Resources
    • Outstanding Reviewer
  • Subscription
  • Alerts
    • Email Alerts
    • RSS Feeds
    • Table of Contents
  • Contact us
  • Other Publications
    • cbm

User menu

  • My alerts

Search

  • Advanced search
Cancer Biology & Medicine
  • Other Publications
    • cbm
  • My alerts
Cancer Biology & Medicine

Advanced Search

 

  • Home
  • About
    • About CBM
    • Editorial Board
    • Announcement
  • Articles
    • Ahead of print
    • Current Issue
    • Archive
    • Collections
    • Cover Story
  • For Authors
    • Instructions for Authors
    • Resources
    • Submit a Manuscript
  • For Reviewers
    • Become a Reviewer
    • Instructions for Reviewers
    • Resources
    • Outstanding Reviewer
  • Subscription
  • Alerts
    • Email Alerts
    • RSS Feeds
    • Table of Contents
  • Contact us
  • Follow cbm on Twitter
  • Visit cbm on Facebook
Research ArticleOriginal Article
Open Access

Prognostic significance of grade of malignancy based on histopathological differentiation and Ki-67 in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma

Yuexiang Liang, Guannan Sheng, Yu Guo, Yiping Zou, Hanhan Guo, Zhifei Li, Shaofei Chang, Quan Man, Song Gao and Jihui Hao
Cancer Biology & Medicine May 2024, 21 (5) 416-432; DOI: https://doi.org/10.20892/j.issn.2095-3941.2023.0363
Yuexiang Liang
1Department of Pancreatic Cancer, Tianjin Medical University Cancer Institute & Hospital, National Clinical Research Center for Cancer, Key Laboratory of Cancer Prevention and Therapy, Tianjin, Tianjin’s Clinical Research Center for Cancer, Tianjin 300060, China
2Department of Gastrointestinal Oncology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Hainan Medical University, Haikou 570102, China
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Guannan Sheng
1Department of Pancreatic Cancer, Tianjin Medical University Cancer Institute & Hospital, National Clinical Research Center for Cancer, Key Laboratory of Cancer Prevention and Therapy, Tianjin, Tianjin’s Clinical Research Center for Cancer, Tianjin 300060, China
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Yu Guo
1Department of Pancreatic Cancer, Tianjin Medical University Cancer Institute & Hospital, National Clinical Research Center for Cancer, Key Laboratory of Cancer Prevention and Therapy, Tianjin, Tianjin’s Clinical Research Center for Cancer, Tianjin 300060, China
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Yiping Zou
1Department of Pancreatic Cancer, Tianjin Medical University Cancer Institute & Hospital, National Clinical Research Center for Cancer, Key Laboratory of Cancer Prevention and Therapy, Tianjin, Tianjin’s Clinical Research Center for Cancer, Tianjin 300060, China
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Hanhan Guo
2Department of Gastrointestinal Oncology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Hainan Medical University, Haikou 570102, China
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Zhifei Li
1Department of Pancreatic Cancer, Tianjin Medical University Cancer Institute & Hospital, National Clinical Research Center for Cancer, Key Laboratory of Cancer Prevention and Therapy, Tianjin, Tianjin’s Clinical Research Center for Cancer, Tianjin 300060, China
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Shaofei Chang
1Department of Pancreatic Cancer, Tianjin Medical University Cancer Institute & Hospital, National Clinical Research Center for Cancer, Key Laboratory of Cancer Prevention and Therapy, Tianjin, Tianjin’s Clinical Research Center for Cancer, Tianjin 300060, China
3Department of Gastrointestinal Pancreatic Surgery, Shanxi Provincial People’s Hospital, Taiyuan 030012, China
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Quan Man
1Department of Pancreatic Cancer, Tianjin Medical University Cancer Institute & Hospital, National Clinical Research Center for Cancer, Key Laboratory of Cancer Prevention and Therapy, Tianjin, Tianjin’s Clinical Research Center for Cancer, Tianjin 300060, China
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Song Gao
1Department of Pancreatic Cancer, Tianjin Medical University Cancer Institute & Hospital, National Clinical Research Center for Cancer, Key Laboratory of Cancer Prevention and Therapy, Tianjin, Tianjin’s Clinical Research Center for Cancer, Tianjin 300060, China
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Song Gao
  • For correspondence: songgao1984{at}sina.com haojihui{at}tjmuch.com
Jihui Hao
1Department of Pancreatic Cancer, Tianjin Medical University Cancer Institute & Hospital, National Clinical Research Center for Cancer, Key Laboratory of Cancer Prevention and Therapy, Tianjin, Tianjin’s Clinical Research Center for Cancer, Tianjin 300060, China
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Jihui Hao
  • For correspondence: songgao1984{at}sina.com haojihui{at}tjmuch.com
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • References
  • PDF
Loading

Article Figures & Data

Figures

  • Tables
  • Supplementary Materials
  • Figure 1
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 1

    Kaplan–Meier curves of overall survival (OS) and recurrence-free survival (RFS) according to the Ki-67 index or histopathological differentiation. (A) OS curves according to Ki-67 expression level. (B) RFS curves according to Ki-67 expression level. (C) OS curves according to histopathological differentiation. (D) RFS curves according to histopathological differentiation.

  • Figure 2
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 2

    Survival curves based on histological differentiation and Ki-67 index. The survival of patients with well and moderately differentiated tumors with high expression of Ki-67 was comparable to that of patients with poorly differentiated tumors with low expression of Ki-67. (A) Overall survival. (B) Recurrence-free survival.

  • Figure 3
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 3

    The proposed malignancy grading system and its algorithm.

  • Figure 4
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 4

    Ki-67 immunohistochemical staining in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma. (A) Well-differentiated tumor with a Ki-67 index of 20%. (B) Moderately differentiated tumor with a Ki-67 index of 60%. (C) Poorly differentiated tumor with a Ki-67 index of 5%. (D) Poorly differentiated tumor with a Ki-67 index of 70% (X+number).

  • Figure 5
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 5

    Survival curves according to the grade of malignancy (GOM). The GOM stratified patients into 3 distinct groups with significantly differing prognosis. (A) Overall survival. (B) Recurrence-free survival.

  • Figure 6
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 6

    Survival curves based on TNM stage and the grade of malignancy (GOM). Survival was comparable between patients with stage II low-grade and stage I middle-grade disease. No statistically significant differences in survival were observed between patients with stage III middle-grade and stage II high-grade disease. Similarly, no significant disparities in survival were observed among patients with stage III low-grade, stage II middle-grade, and stage I high-grade disease. (A) Overall survival. (B) Recurrence-free survival.

  • Figure 7
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 7

    Proposed tumor-node-metastasis-grade of malignancy (TNMG) staging system for PDAC and its algorithm.

  • Figure 8
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 8

    Survival curves according to the TNMG stage. (A) Overall survival. (B) Recurrence-free survival.

  • Figure 9
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 9

    Receiver operating characteristic curves, demonstrating superior AUC values for the proposed TNMG stages compared with the TNM stages for OS and RFS at 1-, 3-, and 5-year after surgery. (A) OS at 1 year, (B) OS at 3 years, (C) OS at 5 years, (D) RFS at 1 year, (E) RFS at 3 years, and (F) RFS at 5 years.

Tables

  • Figures
  • Supplementary Materials
    • View popup
    Table 1

    Characteristics of the 520 patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma

    CharacteristicCases, n (%)Ki-67 expression levelχ2/ZP
    Low-expression group, n (%)High-expression group, n (%)
    Gender2.0820.149
     Male295 (56.7)153 (53.9)142 (60.2)
     Female225 (43.3)131 (46.1)94 (39.8)
    Age (years)0.1410.707
     < 70444 (85.4)244 (85.9)200 (84.7)
     ≥ 7076 (14.6)40 (14.1)36 (15.3)
    Preoperative serum CA19-9 (U/mL)−1.7440.081
     < 200284 (54.6)165 (50.4)119 (50.4)
     200–1000157 (30.2)80 (32.6)77 (32.6)
     > 100079 (15.2)39 (13.7)40 (16.9)
    Preoperative serum CEA (ng/mL)4.2930.038
     ≤ 5361 (69.4)208 (73.2)153 (64.8)
     > 5159 (30.6)76 (26.8)83 (35.2)
    Tumor location3.4180.064
     Head350 (67.3)201 (70.8)149 (63.1)
     Body and tail170 (32.7)83 (29.2)87 (36.9)
    Type of pancreatectomy3.0590.080
     PD351 (67.5)201 (70.8)150 (63.6)
     DP169 (32.5)83 (29.2)86 (36.4)
    Histopathologic differentiation1.0140.314
     Well and moderate208 (40.0)108 (38.0)100 (42.4)
     Poor312 (60.0)176 (62.0)136 (57.6)
    T stage3.2850.350
     T179 (15.2)48 (16.9)31 (13.1)
     T2278 (53.5)155 (54.6)123 (52.1)
     T3149 (28.7)73 (25.7)76 (32.2)
     T414 (2.7)8 (2.8)6 (2.5)
    N stage2.9790.225
     N0244 (46.9)143 (50.4)101 (42.8)
     N1124 (23.8)64 (22.5)60 (25.4)
     N2152 (29.2)77 (27.1)75 (31.8)
    TNM stage4.4890.106
     I168 (32.3)103 (36.3)65 (27.5)
     II191 (36.7)98 (34.5)93 (39.4)
     III161 (31.0)83 (29.2)78 (33.1)
    Perineural invasion0.5590.455
     Absent183 (35.2)104 (36.6)79 (33.5)
     Present337 (64.8)180 (63.4)157 (66.5)
    Lymphovascular invasion3.8950.048
     Absent381 (73.3)218 (76.8)163 (69.1)
     Present139 (26.7)66 (23.2)73 (30.9)
    Postoperative complications0.5900.442
     Present134 (25.8)77 (27.1)57 (24.2)
     Absent386 (74.2)207 (72.9)179 (75.8)
    Postoperative adjuvant chemotherapy regimens4.4390.350
     None255 (49.0)131 (46.1)124 (52.5)
     mFOLFIRINOX66 (12.7)41 (14.4)25 (10.6)
     GS/GX109 (21.0)58 (20.4)51 (21.6)
     S-145 (8.7)25 (8.8)20 (8.5)
     Gemcitabine45 (8.7)29 (10.2)16 (6.8)

    CA19-9, carbohydrate antigen 19-9; CEA, carcinoembryonic antigen; DP, distal pancreatectomy; PD, pancreaticoduodenectomy.

      • View popup
      Table 2

      Univariate and multivariate analyses of factors associated with OS

      CharacteristicsnMST5-year OS (%)Univariate analysisMultivariate analysis
      HR (95% CI)PHR (95% CI)P
      Gender
       Male29520.019.51 (ref)
       Female22524.018.80.912 (0.736–1.130)0.400
      Age at surgery
       < 7044422.020.31 (ref)1 (ref)
       ≥ 707616.012.41.421 (1.067–1.892)0.0161.611 (1.199–2.167)0.002
      Preoperative serum CA19-9 (U/mL)
       < 200.028425.021.81 (ref)1 (ref)
       200.0–1000.015720.018.11.322 (1.041–1.680)0.0221.323 (1.033–1.695)0.027
       > 1000.07916.015.01.875 (1.398–2.514)< 0.0011.524 (1.114–2.084)0.008
      Preoperative serum CEA (ng/mL)
       ≤ 536124.022.01 (ref)1 (ref)
       > 515918.012.11.386 (1.105–1.738)0.0051.154 (0.898–1.483)0.264
      Tumor location
       Head35021.020.21 (ref)
       Body and tail17021.017.41.021 (0.813–1.282)0.859
      Type of pancreatectomy
       PD35121.020.01 (ref)
       DP16921.017.71.049 (0.836–1.318)0.678
      Histopathologic differentiation
       Well and moderate20832.027.01 (ref)1 (ref)
       Poor31216.014.11.852 (1.481–2.318)< 0.0011.875 (1.488–2.363)< 0.001
      TNM stage
       I16835.030.71 (ref)1 (ref)
       II19120.018.01.665 (1.269–2.184)< 0.0011.371 (1.036–1.816)0.027
       III16114.08.02598 (1.98–3.407)< 0.0012.496 (1.84–3.375)< 0.001
      Perineural invasion
       Absent18328.824.01 (ref)1 (ref)
       Present33712.220.01.377 (1.098–1.727)0.0061.123 (0.890–1.417)0.329
      Lymphovascular invasion
       Absent38120.424.01 (ref)1 (ref)
       Present13916.017.01.383 (1.097–1.743)0.0061.160 (0.893–1.506)0.266
      Ki-67 expression level
       Low expression28425.025.01 (ref)1 (ref)
       High expression23611.817.01.669 (1.350–2.063)< 0.0011.707 (1.371–2.126)< 0.001
      Postoperative adjuvant chemotherapy
       No26516.027.11 (ref)1 (ref)
       Yes25526.011.41.813 (1.466–2.242)< 0.0010.573 (0.432–0.667)< 0.001
      Postoperative complications
       Absent38624.021.41 (ref)1 (ref)
       Present13416.012.21.539 (1.215–1.950)< 0.0011.434 (1.120–1.837)0.004

      CA19-9, carbohydrate antigen 19-9; CEA, carcinoembryonic antigen; DP, distal pancreatectomy; PD, pancreaticoduodenectomy; ref, reference category; HR, hazard ratio; OS, overall survival.

        • View popup
        Table 3

        Univariate and multivariate analyses of factors associated with RFS

        CharacteristicsnMRT5-year RFS (%)Univariate analysisMultivariate analysis
        HR (95% CI)PHR (95% CI)P
        Gender
         Male29510.012.91 (ref)
         Female22512.014.50.931 (0.763–1.136)0.483
        Age at surgery
         < 7044411.013.61 (ref)
         ≥ 70768.014.51.142 (0.864–1.509)0.352
        Preoperative serum CA19-9 (U/mL)
         < 200.028414.018.61 (ref)1 (ref)
         200.0–1000.015710.08.91.363 (1.090–1.703)0.0071.310 (1.041–1.649)0.021
         ≥ 1000.0796.0–2.182 (1.658–2.871)< 0.0011.806 (1.346–2.423)< 0.001
        Preoperative serum CEA (ng/mL)
         ≤ 536112.015.21 (ref)1 (ref)
         > 51598.09.81.382 (1.118–1.708)0.0031.158 (0.915–1.464)0.222
        Tumor location
         Head35010.013.51 (ref)
         Body and tail17010.012.90.993 (0.804–1.227)0.951
        Type of pancreatectomy
         PD35111.013.51 (ref)
         DP16910.013.11.027 (0.831–1.268)0.808
        Histopathologic differentiation
         Well and moderate20816.016.81 (ref)1 (ref)
         Poor3128.011.11.705 (1.388–2.095)< 0.0011.632 (1.323–2.012)< 0.001
        TNM stage
         I16820.022.21 (ref)1 (ref)
         II19111.015.31.448 (1.128–1.858)0.0041.191 (0.921–1.540)0.182
         III1616.03.42.519 (1.960–3.237)< 0.0012.141 (1.623–2.826)< 0.001
        Perineural invasion
         Absent18313.021.11 (ref)1 (ref)
         Present3379.08.51.404 (1.136–1.736)0.0021.154 (0.929–1.435)0.196
        Lymphovascular invasion
         Absent38112.015.71 (ref)1 (ref)
         Present1396.08.41.596 (1.289–1.977)< 0.0011.061 (0.936–1.349)0.625
        Ki-67 expression level
         Low expression28414.016.51 (ref)1 (ref)
         High expression2368.010.01.489 (1.222–1.816)< 0.0011.453 (1.185–1.781)< 0.001
        Postoperative adjuvant chemotherapy
         No2658.010.91 (ref)1 (ref)
         Yes25513.016.21.367 (1.123–1.663)0.0020.734 (0.601–0.896)0.002
        Postoperative complications
         Absent38612.015.21 (ref)1 (ref)
         Present1347.08.61.380 (1.105–1.723)0.0041.198 (0.952–1.507)0.124

        CA19-9, carbohydrate antigen 19-9; CEA, carcinoembryonic antigen; DP, distal pancreatectomy; PD, pancreaticoduodenectomy; ref, reference category; HR, hazard ratio; RFS, recurrence-free survival.

          • View popup
          Table 4

          Multivariate survival analysis examining the prognostic value of the malignancy grading system in the context of known independent prognostic factors

          VariableCategoryHR (95% CI)P
          Multivariate analysis for OS
          GOMHigh vs. low3.302 (2.350–4.641)< 0.001
          Middle vs. low1.967 (1.433–2.700)< 0.001
          TNM stageIII vs. I2.370 (1.791–3.137)< 0.001
          II vs. I1.401 (1.065–1.843)0.016
          Preoperative serum CA19-9 (U/mL)≥ 1000.0 vs. < 2001.622 (1.207–2.180)0.001
          200–1000 vs. < 2001.364 (1.068–1.741)0.013
          Postoperative adjuvant chemotherapyYes vs. no0.539 (0.434–0.669)< 0.001
          Age at surgery≥ 70 vs. < 701.657 (1.235–2.223)0.001
          Postoperative complicationsPresent vs. absent1.443 (1.126–1.849)0.004
          Multivariate analysis for RFS
          GOMHigh vs. low2.596 (1.904–3.538)< 0.001
          Middle vs. low1.751 (1.324–2.315)< 0.001
          TNM stageIII vs. I2.244 (1.736–2.901)< 0.001
          II vs. I1.233 (0.957–1.588)0.106
          Preoperative serum CA19-9 (U/mL)≥ 1000.0 vs. < 2001.905 (1.442–2.516)< 0.001
          200–1000 vs. < 2001.350 (1.078–1.693)0.009
          Postoperative adjuvant chemotherapyYes vs. no0.748 (0.613–0.913)0.004
          Age at surgery≥ 70 vs. < 701.226 (0.924–1.625)0.157
          Postoperative complicationPresent vs. absent1.207 (0.958–1.520)0.110

          CA19-9, carbohydrate antigen 19-9; HR, hazard ratio; OS, overall survival; RFS, recurrence-free survival; GOM, grade of malignancy.

          Supplementary Materials

          • Figures
          • Tables
          • [cbm-21-416-s001.pdf]
          PreviousNext
          Back to top

          In this issue

          Cancer Biology & Medicine: 21 (5)
          Cancer Biology & Medicine
          Vol. 21, Issue 5
          15 May 2024
          • Table of Contents
          • Index by author
          Print
          Download PDF
          Email Article

          Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on Cancer Biology & Medicine.

          NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

          Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
          Prognostic significance of grade of malignancy based on histopathological differentiation and Ki-67 in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma
          (Your Name) has sent you a message from Cancer Biology & Medicine
          (Your Name) thought you would like to see the Cancer Biology & Medicine web site.
          Citation Tools
          Prognostic significance of grade of malignancy based on histopathological differentiation and Ki-67 in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma
          Yuexiang Liang, Guannan Sheng, Yu Guo, Yiping Zou, Hanhan Guo, Zhifei Li, Shaofei Chang, Quan Man, Song Gao, Jihui Hao
          Cancer Biology & Medicine May 2024, 21 (5) 416-432; DOI: 10.20892/j.issn.2095-3941.2023.0363

          Citation Manager Formats

          • BibTeX
          • Bookends
          • EasyBib
          • EndNote (tagged)
          • EndNote 8 (xml)
          • Medlars
          • Mendeley
          • Papers
          • RefWorks Tagged
          • Ref Manager
          • RIS
          • Zotero
          Share
          Prognostic significance of grade of malignancy based on histopathological differentiation and Ki-67 in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma
          Yuexiang Liang, Guannan Sheng, Yu Guo, Yiping Zou, Hanhan Guo, Zhifei Li, Shaofei Chang, Quan Man, Song Gao, Jihui Hao
          Cancer Biology & Medicine May 2024, 21 (5) 416-432; DOI: 10.20892/j.issn.2095-3941.2023.0363
          Twitter logo Facebook logo Mendeley logo
          • Tweet Widget
          • Facebook Like
          • Google Plus One

          Jump to section

          • Article
            • Abstract
            • Introduction
            • Materials and methods
            • Results
            • Discussion
            • Conclusions
            • Supporting Information
            • Conflicts of interest statement
            • Author contributions
            • Data availability statement
            • Footnotes
            • References
          • Figures & Data
          • Info & Metrics
          • References
          • PDF

          Related Articles

          • No related articles found.
          • PubMed
          • Google Scholar

          Cited By...

          • Clinical outcomes of second-line chemotherapy in patients with advanced pancreatic adenocarcinoma: a real-world study
          • Google Scholar

          More in this TOC Section

          • SPRED2 suppresses the stemness of hepatocellular carcinoma through the p53/miR-506-3p/KLF4 pathway
          • Migration and invasion inhibitory protein inhibits M2 macrophage polarization to suppress colorectal cancer progression through the STING–NFκB2–IL10 axis
          • Temporal radiomics for non-invasive preoperative prediction of pathologic complete response to neoadjuvant chemoimmunotherapy in non-small cell lung cancer
          Show more Original Article

          Similar Articles

          Subjects

          • Hepatobiliary and pancreatic cancer

          Keywords

          • pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma
          • prognosis
          • Ki-67
          • differentiation
          • TNM stage

          Navigate

          • Home
          • Current Issue

          More Information

          • About CBM
          • About CACA
          • About TMUCIH
          • Editorial Board
          • Subscription

          For Authors

          • Instructions for authors
          • Journal Policies
          • Submit a Manuscript

          Journal Services

          • Email Alerts
          • Facebook
          • RSS Feeds
          • Twitter

           

          © 2026 Cancer Biology & Medicine

          Powered by HighWire