Head‐to‐head: Should Ki67 proliferation index be included in the formal classification of pulmonary neuroendocrine neoplasms?

Abstract

The reporting of lung neuroendocrine neoplasms (NENs) according to the 2021 World Health Organisation (WHO) is based on mitotic count per 2 mm2, necrosis assessment and a constellation of cytological and immunohistochemical details. Accordingly, typical carcinoid and atypical carcinoid are low‐ to intermediate‐grade neuroendocrine tumours (NETs), while large‐cell neuroendocrine carcinoma (NEC) and small‐cell lung carcinoma are high‐grade NECs. In small‐sized diagnostic material (cytology and biopsy), the noncommittal term of carcinoid tumour/NET not otherwise specified (NOS) and metastatic carcinoid NOS have been introduced with regard to primary and metastatic diagnostic settings, respectively. Ki‐67 antigen, a well‐known marker of cell proliferation, has been included in the WHO classification as a non‐essential but desirable criterion, especially to distinguish NETs from high‐grade NECs and to delineate the provisional category of carcinoid tumours/NETs with elevated mitotic counts (> 10 mitoses per mm2) and/or Ki‐67 proliferation index (≥ 30%). However, a wider use of this marker in the spectrum of lung NENs continues to be highly reported and debated, thus witnessing a never‐subsided attention. Therefore, the arguments for and against incorporating Ki‐67 in the classification and clinical practice of these neoplasms are discussed herein in detail.