Immunocytochemical diagnosis of hepatocellular carcinoma and identification of carcinomas of unknown primary metastatic to the liver on fine-needle aspiration cytologies

The strength of cytomorphology and efficacy of immuno-cytochemistry in distinguishing hepatocellular carcinoma from its mimics on fine-needle aspiration cytology

BACKGROUND

Cytomorphologic distinction of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) from its mimics on fine-needle aspiration cytology (FNAC) is often problematic. The present study evaluates the strength of cytomorphology and the utility of an immuno-panel of arginase-1, glypican-3, HepPar-1, thyroid transcription factor (TTF-1) and CK-19 in resolving this diagnostic issue.

METHODS

FNAC features of 71 nodular hepatic lesions were studied with an immunocyto/ histochemical (ICC/IHC) panel of arginase-1, glypican-3, HepPar-1, TTF-1 taking 10% positivity as "cut-off." Cytomorpholologic diagnoses were compared with diagnoses made on combined cytomorphologic and ICC/IHC approach.

RESULTS

Of 71 cases, 32, 10 and 29 had histopathologic, cell block and clinico-radiologic correlation respectively with 55 metastatic adenocarcinomas (MAC), 13 HCCs and one case each of hepatic adenoma (HA), cirrhotic nodule (CN) and intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (CC). Cytoplasmic positivity of HepPar-1 and glypican-3 were noted in 11/13 and 8/13 HCCs respectively; while only 3/13 and 1/13 HCCs revealed cytoplasmic positivity for arginase-1 and TTF-1 respectively. Benign hepatic lesions were negative for glypican-3 and TTF-1, but expressed both arginase-1and HepPar-1. Twenty-one of 55 MACs and the lone case of CC were positive for CK-19; however, all MACs and CC cases were negative for HepPar-1, arginase-1, glypican-3 and TTF-1. The immune-panel had sensitivity, specificity and diagnostic accuracy of 100%, 88.9% and 90.6%, respectively, for differentiating HCC from its morphologic mimics.

CONCLUSION

Though a meticulous cytologic evaluation in conjunction with clinicoradiologic profile helps in distinguishing HCC from its benign and malignant mimics; an immunopanel of arginase-1, glypican-3, HepPar-1, TTF-1 and CK-19 drastically improves the diagnostic accuracy.

The Role of Immunocytochemical Markers to Differentiate Primary from Secondary Neoplastic Hepatic Masses: A Diagnostic Challenge on Cytology

OBJECTIVE

It is challenging and difficult to differentiate primary from metastatic hepatic masses solely on cytology. The present study aimed to correlate cytomorphological spectrum of hepatic masses with immunocytochemical markers to differentiate primary from metastases in liver.

MATERIAL AND METHOD

The present study comprised of 30 clinico-radiologically suspicious cases of neoplastic hepatic masses. Ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration smears and cell blocks were prepared as per standard technique; two of the smears were air-dried and Giemsa stained to study cytomorphological features. A panel of markers (HepPar-1, CD 10, CK7, CK19, CD34, and MOC-31) were studied both in smears and cell blocks.

RESULTS

Cytomorphological features on smears were evaluated and correlated with immunocytochemistry in all cases; the final diagnosis was: Hepatocellular carcinoma (n=7), cholangiocarcinoma (n=2), hepatoblastoma (n=1) and metastatic carcinoma (n=20). HepPar-1, CD10 and CD34 demonstrated 86%, 72%, 86% sensitivity and 100% specificity respectively for hepatocellular carcinoma; CK7&CK19 showed 100% sensitivity for cholangiocarcinoma, MOC 31 showed 90% sensitivity and 100% specificity for metastatic carcinoma.

CONCLUSION

The present study recommends a panel of minimum three markers (HepPar-1, CD10, and MOC-31) which were helpful to differentiate hepatocellular carcinoma from metastatic carcinoma that was a major diagnostic challenge solely on cytomorphology. Correlating cytomorphology with these three markers, 100% of the cases could be diagnosed as primary malignancy and distinguished accurately from metastatic carcinoma.

Fine needle biopsy of malignant tumors of the liver: a retrospective study of 624 cases from a single institution experience

BACKGROUND

Liver is one of the most common organs involved by metastatic neoplasms. In addition, a number of primary tumors can arise in the liver. Fine needle biopsy (FNB) is the most commonly used method for diagnosis of liver masses. Not much literature is available during the past 10 years about FNB of liver tumors. All large studies were performed more than 15 years ago. With the introduction of new disease entities, new tumor classification systems, and new diagnostic methods, updated documentation of FNB of liver neoplasms is much needed.

METHODS

Liver FNB cases that were diagnosed as "Positive for Malignancy" between 2010 and 2018 were retrieved from the cytopathology database in our institution. Patient medical records, cytopathology and surgical pathology reports, and slides from selected cases were retrieved and reviewed.

RESULTS

Over 30 different types of malignant tumors were identified in 624 malignant FNB cases, with the most common tumors being metastatic colorectal and pancreatic adenocarcinomas. Rare tumors include EBV-positive leiomyosarcoma, mesothelioma, and paraganglioma, among others. A subset of patients presented with widespread metastases involving liver with no known history. Identifying the primary sites in those cases can be challenging. We also found that in our practice, a significant number of hepatocellular carcinoma were diagnosed by FNB in recent years.

CONCLUSIONS

A tremendous variety of neoplasms can occur in liver. Accurate diagnosis is essential for proper patient management. Familiarization with morphological features and judicious usage of ancillary studies are essential for accurate diagnosis.

Useful Application of Immunostaining to Malignant Pleural Effusion among Lao People in Vientiane Capital, Lao PDR

Background: Pathology and laboratory medicine (PALM) services are limited in low-resource countries, such as Lao PDR. Patients with malignant pleural effusion (MPE) are not properly diagnosed and treated in these situations. The purpose of this study is to confirm the usefulness of immunocytochemistry in MPE to identify the histological type and probable primary site of cancer of MPE and to discuss its usefulness in low-resource countries, such as Laos. Methods: We retrospectively reviewed glass slides of pleural effusion sent to the Department of Pathology at the University of Health Sciences from the central hospitals for cytological screening from January 2012 to December 2016. The cytological review, cell transfer and immunocytochemical staining were performed at Tokyo Medical and Dental University. Among 81 cases of MPE from Laos, 66 cases of malignant tumors that contained enough tumor cells were included in this study, and the slides were screened with 14 primary antibodies to classify the histological type and identify the probable primary site of carcinoma. Results: Among the 66 cases, 34 cases (52%) were of female patients, and 32 cases (48%) were of male patients. The patients’ ages ranged from 28 to 88 years with an average of 58 years. The immunocytochemical study identified 32 cases (49%) of primary lung adenocarcinoma, two cases (3%) of malignant mesothelioma, one case (1.5%) of breast/gynecological carcinoma, one case (1.5%) of T cell lymphoma, and one case (1.5%) of B cell lymphoma. Twenty-nine cases (43.5%) were classified as carcinoma not otherwise specified. Pulmonary small cell carcinoma/squamous cell carcinoma and metastatic colon, prostate, and liver carcinoma were not identified among the cases. Conclusions: Immunocytochemistry is a useful ancillary method in MPE diagnostics. This method could be applied in the pathological laboratories in low- or middle-resource countries, such as Laos.

Precision medicine based on epigenomics: the paradigm of carcinoma of unknown primary

Epigenetic alterations are a common hallmark of human cancer. Single epigenetic markers are starting to be incorporated into clinical practice; however, the translational use of these biomarkers has not been validated at the 'omics' level. The identification of the tissue of origin in patients with cancer of unknown primary (CUP) is an example of how epigenomics can be incorporated in clinical settings, addressing an unmet need in the diagnostic and clinical management of these patients. Despite the great diagnostic advances made in the past decade, the use of traditional diagnostic procedures only enables the tissue of origin to be determined in ∼30% of patients with CUP. Thus, development of molecularly guided diagnostic strategies has emerged to complement traditional procedures, thereby improving the clinical management of patients with CUP. In this Review, we present the latest data on strategies using epigenetics and other molecular biomarkers to guide therapeutic decisions involving patients with CUP, and we highlight areas warranting further research to engage the medical community in this unmet need.

Expression of Markers of Hepatocellular Differentiation in Pancreatic Acinar Cell Neoplasms: A Potential Diagnostic Pitfall

OBJECTIVES

Pancreatic acinar cell carcinoma (ACC) is a rare tumor that frequently metastasizes to the liver and may present a diagnostic challenge due to its morphologic similarity to hepatocellular carcinoma. We investigated α-fetoprotein (AFP), hepatocyte paraffin antigen 1 (HepPar 1), glypican 3, arginase 1, and albumin messenger RNA (mRNA) in situ hybridization (ISH) in pancreatic neoplasms with ACC differentiation to assess their diagnostic value.

METHODS

AFP, HepPar 1, glypican 3, and arginase 1 immunohistochemical staining was performed on 28 ACCs using a tissue microarray. Albumin mRNA ISH was performed on full-faced sections.

RESULTS

Fifteen tumors were positive for at least one marker. Glypican 3 was positive in seven of 28, AFP in five 28, and albumin mRNA ISH in five of 20. None expressed arginase 1.

CONCLUSIONS

Hepatocellular differentiation markers, including albumin mRNA ISH, may be positive in ACC, but arginase 1 appears to be uniformly negative. Thus, its use may improve the accuracy in distinguishing these neoplasms from hepatocellular carcinoma. If ACC diagnosis is considered, acinar differentiation can be reliably demonstrated by trypsin/chymotrypsin.

Expression and diagnostic values of calretinin and CK5/6 in cholangiocarcinoma

BACKGROUND

Mesothelin, a mesothelial marker, has been found expressed in and as a potential treatment target of cholangioacarcinoma (CC). It is possible that CC may be derived from the cells sharing mesothelial markers. However, the expression of other mesothelial markers in CC is largely unknown.

METHODS

Thirty CC cases (10 extrahepatic and 20 intrahepatic) were retrieved from our institutional archive. The immunohistochemical study of Calretinin (DC8), WT1 (6F-H2), Lymphatic Endothelial Marker (D2-40), CK5/6 (D5/16 B4) and CK19 (b170) was done on formalin fixed paraffin embedded sections for 2-3 blocks of each case. We compared the expression levels between CC and normal bile duct (NBD) on the same block.

RESULTS

All of the CC and NBD are positive for CK19 (23/23) and negative for WT1 (0/23) and D2-40 (0/23), except one CC positive for D2-40(1/30, 3.3%) and one NBD positive for WT1 (1/23, 4.3%). Calretinin immunoreactivity was detected in 52.2% (12/23) of CC, but none in NBD (0/23). CK5/6 was also detectable in 73.3% (22/30) of CC and all NBD (30/30). Increased expression of calretinin and reduced expression of CK5/6 were more likely associated with CC than NBD (P < 0.001 and P = 0.002, respectively). The sequential staining pattern of positive calretinin and negative CK5/6 in calretinin negative cases has a sensitivity of 69.57% and a specificity of 100% for differentiating CC from NBD. CK5/6 expression was also more likely associated with well-differentiated CC (7/7 versus 12/20 in moderately differentiated, and 9/10 in poorly differentiated, P = 0.019) and extrahepatic CC (10/10 versus 12/20 in intrahepatic, P = 0.029), but there was no association between the calretinin expression and the CC grade or location.

CONCLUSION

Calretinin and CK5/6 immunohistochemical stains may be useful for diagnosing a CC. Their immunohistochemical results should be interpreted with caution in the cases with differential diagnoses of mesothelioma and CC. A full mesothelioma panel, including WT1 and/or D2-40, is recommended to better define a mesothelial lineage. The biology of calretinin and CK5/6 expression in CC is unclear, but might shed light on identifying therapeutic targets for CC.

TNFR1 determines progression of chronic liver injury in the IKKγ/Nemo genetic model

Death receptor-mediated hepatocyte apoptosis is implicated in a wide range of liver diseases including viral and alcoholic hepatitis, ischemia/reperfusion injury, fulminant hepatic failure, cholestatic liver injury, as well as cancer. Deletion of NF-κB essential modulator in hepatocytes (IKKγ/Nemo) causes spontaneous progression of TNF-mediated chronic hepatitis to hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Thus, we analyzed the role of death receptors including TNFR1 and TRAIL in the regulation of cell death and the progression of liver injury in IKKγ/Nemo-deleted livers. We crossed hepatocyte-specific IKKγ/Nemo knockout mice (Nemo(Δhepa)) with constitutive TNFR1(-/-) and TRAIL(-/-) mice. Deletion of TNFR1, but not TRAIL, decreased apoptotic cell death, compensatory proliferation, liver fibrogenesis, infiltration of immune cells as well as pro-inflammatory cytokines, and indicators of tumor growth during the progression of chronic liver injury. These events were associated with diminished JNK activation. In contrast, deletion of TNFR1 in bone-marrow-derived cells promoted chronic liver injury. Our data demonstrate that TNF- and not TRAIL signaling determines the progression of IKKγ/Nemo-dependent chronic hepatitis. Additionally, we show that TNFR1 in hepatocytes and immune cells have different roles in chronic liver injury-a finding that has direct implications for treating chronic liver disease.

Cytokeratin 20-positive hepatocellular carcinoma

The differential diagnosis between hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), cholangiocarcinoma (CC) and metastatic colorectal adenocarcinoma (MCA) may be difficult when only based on morphology. For this purpose immunohistochemical analyses are often required, utilizing antibodies directed against CK8-18, Hep-Par1, glypican 3, CK7, CK19, CK20. Here we report a case of a 65-year-old man who presented with a clinical picture of decompensated cirrhosis. Ultrasonography revealed two nodular areas in the right liver lobe. Liver needle biopsy revealed micro-macronodular cirrhosis associated with HCC with trabecular and pseudoglandular patterns. Immunohistochemically, tumour cells were diffusely positive for CK8-18 and also diffusely immunostained by glypican 3 and Hep-Par1. Interestingly, a diffuse and strong staining for CK20 was detected in the vast majority of tumor cells, particularly in the areas showing a pseudo-glandular pattern. No immunostaining for CK7 and CK19 was found in the tumor cells. The tumor behaved aggressively, with a rapid diffusion to the whole liver. The patient died from the disease few months after presentation. These findings underline that the interpretation of the expression of CK20 alone in the differential diagnosis among HCC, CC and MCA should be done with caution because a diffuse immunoreactivity for CK20 alone may not rule out the diagnosis of HCC.

Arginase-1: a novel immunohistochemical marker of hepatocellular differentiation in fine needle aspiration cytology

BACKGROUND

Arginase-I is a key urea cycle metalloenzyme that has been used as an immunohistochemistry (IHC) marker for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Previous studies have demonstrated the efficacy of HepPar-1 and glypican-3 (GPC-3) IHC in liver fine needle aspiration (FNA) cytology.

METHODS

Arginase-1 IHC was performed on FNA cell blocks, and its performance characteristics were compared with HepPar-1 and GPC-3. Ninety-two formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded cell blocks were selected (HCC [n = 44], cirrhosis [n = 2], focal nodular hyperplasia [n = 3], hepatic adenomas [n = 2], dysplastic nodules [n = 6], and metastatic carcinomas [n = 35]). IHC staining with antibodies directed against arginase-1, HepPar-1, and GPC-3 was performed with appropriate positive and negative controls.

RESULTS

Arginase-1 positivity was demonstrated in 37 of 44 (84.1%) cases of HCC, compared with 32 of 44 cases (72.7%) and 25 of 44 cases (56.8%) for HepPar-1 and GPC-3, respectively. Arginase-1 and GPC-3 expression were not observed in any cases of metastatic carcinoma (0%), whereas HepPar-1 expression was present in 1 case of metastatic carcinoma. In addition, both arginase-1 and HepPar-1 expression were present in all 13 cases (100%) of nonmalignant hepatocellular lesions, whereas GPC-3 expression was absent in all 13 cases (0%).

CONCLUSION

This study demonstrates that both arginase-1 and HepPar-1 are effective IHC markers of hepatocellular differentiation. Furthermore, arginase-1 demonstrates superior sensitivity compared with GPC-3 and HepPar-1 in the diagnosis of HCC, whereas GPC-3 demonstrates superior specificity, as staining is not observed in benign hepatocellular lesions. Hence, use of arginase-1 with HepPar-1 and GPC-3 can aid in the diagnosis of HCC and separating from metastatic carcinoma.

A case of monocular blindness as the initial presentation of hepatocellular carcinoma with skull metastasis

A 52-year-old man suffering from monocular blindness, with light perception only, was admitted to our hospital. The symptom had begun as low vision and developed rapidly within 3 weeks into monocular blindness in the right eye, with no other systemic manifestations. Imaging examinations revealed multiple hepatocellular carcinomas in the cirrhotic liver, and tumors at the skull base and vertebra. A pathological and immunochemical study of specimens obtained by endoscopic transnasal tumor biopsy and laminectomy revealed them to be metastatic hepatocellular carcinomas (HCCs). Although the patient underwent radiation therapy and chemotherapy, he died 5 months after admission to our hospital. The cranial HCC, involving only the optic canal, may have disturbed the optic nerve in preference to the other cranial nerves. This is the first report of a HCC patient with monocular blindness as the initial presentation of the disease.

[Immunocytochemical identification of carcinomas of unknown primaries on fine-needle-aspiration-biopsies]

Clinical investigations with imaging- and endoscopic techniques in order to identify the primary tumor sites in patients with CUP syndrome generally entail a significant diagnostic effort. If costs exceed <euro> 800.00, a financial loss ensues for German hospitals, as public health insurance companies do not reimburse above this amount. Combined cytological/immunocytochemical investigation of metastatic cancer cells represents a cost-effective, minimally invasive procedure to identify the probable primary cancer site that can be applied on an outpatient basis. We report on 85 fine needle aspiration biopsies of metastases to the liver, 30 to the lymph nodes and over 180 serous effusions and/or ascites with metastatic cancer cells in CUP. After conventional microscopic inspection, a routine panel of six monoclonal antibodies was applied (CK 5/6, CK 7, CK 20, Cdx 2, TTF 1 and CA 125). We were thus able to correctly identify the primary tumor sites in 90.3%, 92.0% and 85.1%, respectively, within three days. In total, 23 primary hepatocellular carcinomas could all be classified correctly, applying the antibodies HepPar 1, BerEp 4, AFP, CD 31, CD 68 and Ki 67. In addition, 141 malignant epithelial mesotheliomas were typed correctly in 97.1%, using the antibodies BerEp 4, Calretinin, Mesothelin, EMA and WT. Therefore, immunocytochemical investigation of metastatic cancer cells from fine needle aspiration biopsies or in serous effusions offers an efficient, cost-effective diagnostic alternative to imaging and endoscopic techniques in the workup of patients with CUP syndrome.

Utility of glypican-3 and survivin in differentiating hepatocellular carcinoma from benign and preneoplastic hepatic lesions and metastatic carcinomas in liver fine-needle aspiration biopsies

Glypican-3 (GPC-3), a membrane-anchored heparin sulfate proteoglycan, has been shown to be expressed in approximately 80% of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) but not in benign hepatic lesions. Survivin, a novel inhibitor of apoptosis, and a prognostic marker, has also been expressed in HCC. We evaluated these two immunomarkers (GPC-3 and survivin) in differentiating HCC from benign and preneoplastic hepatic lesions and metastatic carcinomas, comparing them to HepPar-1 (hepatocyte paraffin-1) in liver fine-needle aspiration biopsies (FNAB).Immunohistochemistry for GPC-3, survivin and HepPar-1 was performed on 92 FNAB including HCC, hepatic cirrhosis, focal nodular hyperplasia (FNH), hepatic adenoma, dysplastic hepatic nodules and metastatic carcinomas. Immunostaining was scored as positive, if > or =10% of tumor cells stained.GPC-3 is immunoexpressed in 56.8% of HCC, but not in benign and preneoplastic hepatic lesions, or metastatic carcinomas; whereas survivin is expressed in HCC (86.4%), benign hepatic lesions (85.7%), dysplastic hepatic nodules (100%) and metastatic carcinomas (94.3%). HepPar-1 is immunoexpressed in HCC (72.7%), benign hepatic lesions (100%), dysplastic nodules (100%) and metastatic carcinomas (2.9%). The sensitivity and specificity of GPC-3, survivin and HepPar-1 for detection of HCC are 56.8 and 100%, 86.4 and 6.3%, 72.7 and 70.8%, respectively.GPC-3 is a reliable and more specific immunohistochemical marker than survivin for the diagnosis of HCC in FNAB. HepPar-1, although a more sensitive marker than GPC-3, has a lower specificity for detection of HCC. Our data supports the potentially significant diagnostic utility of GPC-3 in FNABs in differentiating primary malignant from benign and preneoplastic liver lesions, and metastatic carcinomas.

Surveillance and diagnosis of hepatocellular carcinoma in patients with cirrhosis

Early identification of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is more frequent because of surveillance programs for HCC worldwide. The optimal strategy of surveillance in cirrhosis is a current topical issue. In terms of diagnosis, recent advances in non-invasive imaging technology, including various techniques of harmonic ultrasound, new ultrasound contrast agents, multi-slice helical computed tomography and rapid high quality magnetic resonance, have all improved the accuracy of diagnosis. Consequently the role of liver biopsy in diagnosis of HCC has declined. The imaging diagnosis relies on the hallmark of arterial hypervascularity with portal venous washout. However, with recent advances in genomics and proteomics a great number of potential serum and tissue markers have been identified and are being developed as new candidate markers for both diagnosis and prognosis of hepatocellular carcinoma, and may increase the need for liver biopsy.