Diagnostic value of HepPar1, pCEA, CD10, and CD34 expression in separating hepatocellular carcinoma from metastatic carcinoma in fine-needle aspiration cytology

Hepatocyte paraffin-1, CD10, and CD34 immunostaining as a diagnostic aid in cytologic diagnosis of hepatic cancer

Background

Cytomorphological distinction between hepatocellular carcinoma and metastatic tumors to the liver may be difficult, especially when these have poor differentiation. The present study was done to assess the diagnostic utility of hepatocyte paraffin-1 (HepPar-1), CD10, and CD34 in differentiating hepatocellular carcinoma from metastatic carcinoma.

Materials and Methods

Ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration was performed on 50 patients with space-occupying lesions of liver suspicious for malignancy on clinical/radiologic findings. The cytological assessment was done on smears stained with May-Grünwald-Giemsa and hematoxylin and eosin. Cell blocks were prepared, and immunostaining for HepPar-1, CD10, and CD34 was done.

Results

In these 50 patients, hepatocellular carcinoma was diagnosed in 7 and metastatic tumors in 43 cases. The sensitivity of smears in diagnosing hepatocellular carcinoma was 100% and the specificity was 95.3%, while the sensitivity and specificity of cell block were 100%. A canalicular pattern of CD10 immunoreactivity had a 100% positive predictive value for diagnosing hepatocellular carcinoma. CD10 had a sensitivity of 57.1% and 41.9% in identification of HCC and metastatic tumors, respectively. For the diagnosis of hepatocellular carcinoma, the sensitivity of CD34 was 85.7% and the specificity of sinusoidal pattern of immunoreactivity was 100%. The sensitivity and specificity of granular cytoplasmic staining pattern of HepPar-1 were 100% in hepatocellular carcinoma.

Conclusions

The staining patterns of HepPar-1, CD10, and CD34 are highly specific in distinguishing hepatocellular carcinoma from metastasis. These three immunomarkers should be included in the immunocytochemical panel for differentiating hepatocellular carcinoma from metastatic carcinoma to the liver.

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.

Immunohistochemical Signature Add Prognostic Value in Patients With Early and Intermediate Hepatocellular Carcinoma Underwent Curative Liver Resection

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is the third most lethal cancer worldwide; however, accurate prognostic tools are still lacking. We aimed to identify immunohistochemistry (IHC)-based signature as a prognostic classifier to predict recurrence and survival in patients with HCC at Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer (BCLC) early- and immediate-stage. In total, 567 patients who underwent curative liver resection at two independent centers were enrolled. The least absolute shrinkage and selection operator regression model was used to identify significant IHC features, and penalized Cox regression was used to further narrow down the features in the training cohort (n = 201). The candidate IHC features were validated in internal (n = 101) and external validation cohorts (n = 265). Three IHC features, hepatocyte paraffin antigen 1, CD34, and Ki-67, were identified as candidate predictors for recurrence-free survival (RFS), and were used to categorize patients into low- and high-risk recurrence groups in the training cohort (P < 0.001). The discriminative performance of the 3-IHC_based classifier was validated using internal and external cohorts (P < 0.001). Furthermore, we developed a 3-IHC_based nomogram integrating the BCLC stage, microvascular invasion, and 3-IHC_based classifier to predict 2- and 5-year RFS in the training cohort; this nomogram exhibited acceptable area under the curve values for the training, internal validation, and external validation cohorts (2-year: 0.817, 0.787, and 0.810; 5-year: 0.726, 0.662, and 0.715; respectively). The newly developed 3-IHC_based classifier can effectively predict recurrence and survival in patients with early- and intermediate-stage HCC after curative liver resection.

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.

Diagnostic value of clusterin immunostaining in hepatocellular carcinoma

Background

Histologic distinction between well differentiated hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) and benign hepatocellular mass lesions is a known challenge. Existing biomarkers are of limited diagnostic value. Our previous studies observed an enhanced canalicular expression pattern of clusterin (CLU) in HCC, which was not observed in benign hepatocellular mass lesions such as hepatocellular adenoma. The aim of this study was to further investigate its diagnostic value for HCC by examining the expression pattern of CLU in a large number of non-hepatocellular tumors, and by comparing it with two other commonly used hepatocellular markers pCEA and CD10 that also show a canalicular staining pattern in HCC.

Methods

Enhanced canalicular staining patterns of CLU, pCEA and CD10 were analyzed on 54 surgically resected well to moderately differentiated HCCs on whole tissue sections, of which 37 had surrounding regenerative nodules while the remaining 17 had a non-cirrhotic background. CLU immunostaining was also performed on tissue microarray sections that contained 74 HCCs (40 of which were also stained for pCEA and CD10), 55 normal liver tissue samples, and 1305 non-hepatocellular tumors from multiple organs.

Results

Enhanced CLU canalicular staining was observed in 70% (89/128) HCCs but not in regenerative nodules, normal liver tissues or any non-hepatocellular tumors. The sensitivity and specificity for enhanced canalicular staining pattern of CLU in HCCs were 0.70 and 1.00. This enhanced canalicular pattern was observed in only 26 and 23% HCCs for CD10 and pCEA, respectively. These results further demonstrate that the distinctive enhanced canalicular pattern of CLU is unique to HCC.

Conclusions

CLU is superior to pCEA and CD10 as a diagnostic immunomarker in that it can help distinguish well to moderately differentiated HCC not only from non-HCC malignancies but also from benign hepatocellular mass lesions.

Study on Diagnostic Values of Astrocyte Elevated Gene 1 (AEG-1) and Glypican 3 (GPC-3) in Hepatocellular Carcinoma

OBJECTIVES

To investigate the diagnostic potential of AEG-1 and GPC-3 in hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC).

METHODS

AEG-1 and GPC-3 immunohistochemistry were performed on HCC, adjacent nontumor tissue (ANT), and dysplastic nodules (DN).

RESULTS

H score of AEG-1 or GPC-3 in HCC was significantly higher than in ANT or DN. In HCC, 92% and 54% showed AEG-1 and GPC-3 positivity, respectively. In ANT, 16.2% were AEG-1 and 7.6% GPC-3 positive. AEG-1 staining was mostly diffuse, whereas GPC-3 frequently showed focal staining. AEG-1 alone showed high sensitivity but low specificity and accuracy. GPC-3, on the other hand, showed high specificity but low sensitivity and accuracy. Combination of both stains boosted the sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy to 94.6%, 89.5%, and 90.5%, respectively, when only diffuse staining was considered as positive.

CONCLUSIONS

AEG-1 or GPC-3 alone seemed not an ideal marker for HCC. The combination of AEG-1 and GPC-3 might improve early diagnosis of HCC.

Prognostic value of blood and lymphatic vessel markers in tongue cancer: A systematic review

Tongue squamous cell carcinoma (TSCC) has a poor prognosis due to its early metastasis through blood and lymphatic vessels. We undertook a systematic review to investigate the prognostic significance of blood microvessel density (MVD) and lymphatic vessel density (LVD) in TSCC patients. We carried out a systematic search in Ovid Medline, Scopus, and Cochrane libraries. All studies that evaluated the prognostic significance of MVD/LVD markers in TSCC were systematically retrieved. Our results showed that MVD/LVD markers, CD31, CD34, CD105, factor VIII, lymphatic vessel endothelial hyaluronan receptor‐1, and D2‐40 were evaluated in TSCC patients until 28 June 2018. Six out of 13 studies reported markers that were associated with poor prognosis in TSCC. Two out of three studies suggested that a high number of D2‐40⁺ vessels predicated low overall survival (OS); the third study reported that the ratio of D2‐40⁺ over factor VIII⁺ vessels is associated with low OS. Most of the other markers had controversial results for prognostication. We found higher expression of MVD/LVD markers were commonly, but not always, associated with shorter survival in TSCC patients. It is therefore not currently possible to recommend implementation of these markers as reliable prognosticators in clinical practice. More studies (especially for D2‐40) with larger patient cohorts are needed.

Diagnostic utility of CD10 immunohistochemical staining on cellblock in differentiating hepatocellular carcinoma from secondary malignancies of liver

Background

Differentiation of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) from metastatic malignancy in liver may be difficult at times on fine-needle aspiration cytology, especially in case of moderate-to-poorly differentiated tumors. The benefit of cell-block technique is the recognition of histologic pattern of diseases along with application of a wide variety of immunohistochemical (IHC) stains to differentiate hepatic malignancies. In this study, CD10 IHC staining was done on cellblocks prepared from aspirates of clinicoradiologically/cytologically suspected malignant liver neoplasms to differentiate HCC from malignancies metastasizing to liver.

Objective

The objective of the study was to assess the diagnostic utility of CD10 IHC stain on cell-block preparation for differentiating primary from Secondary malignancies of liver.

Materials and Methods

Formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded cellblocks of 61 cases (25 cases of HCC and 36 cases of metastatic carcinoma) were prepared from a fine-needle aspirate of the suspected malignant liver neoplasm and immunostained using monoclonal antibody against CD10.

Results

Twenty-two (88%) of 25 cases of HCC were positive for CD10 with a canalicular staining pattern. Two (8%) were positive for CD10 with membranous and one (4%) with cytoplasmic staining pattern.

Conclusion

CD10 immunostaining on cellblock is useful in discriminating HCC and metastatic carcinoma of the liver with a diagnostic accuracy of 88.52%.

Evaluating clinical and prognostic implications of Glypican-3 in hepatocellular carcinoma

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is one of the most deadly cancers worldwide. In patients with HCC, histopathogical differentiation is an important indicator of prognosis; however, because determination of HCC differentiation is difficult, the recently described immunohistochemical (IHC) marker glypican3 (GPC3) might assist in HCC prognostication.The goal of our study was to investigate GPC3's IHC staining pattern and define the relationship between its expression and patients' clinicopathologic features and overall survival. We retrieved clinical parameters from 101 pathologically diagnosed HCC patients' medical records and classified these patients into 4 clinical score categories (0–3) based on increasing GPC3 staining intensity and the percentage of stained tumor cells in their resection and biopsy specimens. Histopathological samples were well, moderately, and poorly differentiated in 33, 22, and 12 patients, respectively, and the GPC3 expression rate was 63%, 86%, and 92%,respectively. The median overall survival was 49.9 months (confidence interval (CI): 35.3–64.6 months) for clinical scores 0–1 and 30.7 months (CI: 19.4–41.9 months) for clinical scores 2–3. This difference was not statistically significant (P = .06) but showed a strong trend. In conclusion, a greater GPC3 expression is associated with a worse HCC prognosis and may be a promising prognostic marker.

Utility of FNAC in Conjunction with Cell Block for Diagnosing Space-Occupying Lesion (SOL) of Liver with Emphasis on Differentiating Hepatocellular Carcinoma from Metastatic SOL: Analysis of 61 Cases

OBJECTIVES

To study the cytological patterns of fine-needle aspiration cytology (FNAC) obtained from space-occupying lesions (SOLs) of the liver with an aim to differentiate primary hepatocellular carcinoma from metastatic deposits and to evaluate the added advantage and efficacy of studying cell blocks in conjunction with smears for enhancing diagnostic accuracy.  .

METHODS

This prospective study took place over two years (September 2007 to 2009) and included 61 patients with cases of liver SOLs that were clinically or radiologically suspicious for malignancy and who were referred for computed tomography or ultrasonography-guided FNAC. Smears were prepared from the aspirated material, and any remainder was used to make the cell block (n = 55). A final diagnosis was made after evaluating the smears and cell block sections.  .

RESULTS

On cytomorphology, a diagnosis of moderately differentiated hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) and metastatic carcinoma was made in 10 (18.2%) and 25 (45.5%) cases, respectively, and were confirmed using cell block sections. In cases where it was difficult to differentiate between well-differentiated HCC and regenerative nodules, and between poorly differentiated HCC and poorly differentiated metastatic carcinoma, a final diagnosis was made with the help of cell blocks sections. Cell blocks assisted in reaching a final diagnosis in 16 (29.1%) cases. Cases that were diagnosed using cytomorphology were confirmed by the cell block method. In these 39 (70.9%) cases we were able to render a diagnosis with much more confidence.  .

CONCLUSION

In our experience, difficulties in diagnosing SOL liver are attributed to differentiation of the tumor. Cell block preparation gives an additional advantage as architectural details can be studied that help to reach an accurate diagnosis in problematic and challenging cases. Thus, we strongly recommend the use of the cell block technique in conjunction with cytosmears for the purpose of diagnosis.

Multidisciplinary perspective of hepatocellular carcinoma: A Pacific Northwest experience

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is the most rapidly increasing type of cancer in the United States. HCC is a highly malignant cancer, accounting for at least 14000 deaths in the United States annually, and it ranks third as a cause of cancer mortality in men. One major difficulty is that most patients with HCC are diagnosed when the disease is already at an advanced stage, and the cancer cannot be surgically removed. Furthermore, because almost all patients have cirrhosis, neither chemotherapy nor major resections are well tolerated. Clearly there is need of a multidisciplinary approach for the management of HCC. For example, there is a need for better understanding of the fundamental etiologic mechanisms that are involved in hepatocarcinogenesis, which could lead to the development of successful preventive and therapeutic modalities. It is also essential to define the cellular and molecular bases for malignant transformation of hepatocytes. Such knowledge would: (1) greatly facilitate the identification of patients at risk; (2) prompt efforts to decrease risk factors; and (3) improve surveillance and early diagnosis through diagnostic imaging modalities. Possible benefits extend also to the clinical management of this disease. Because there are many factors involved in pathogenesis of HCC, this paper reviews a multidisciplinary perspective of recent advances in basic and clinical understanding of HCC that include: molecular hepatocarcinogenesis, non-invasive diagnostics modalities, diagnostic pathology, surgical modality, transplantation, local therapy and oncological/target therapeutics.

Telecytological diagnosis of space-occupying lesions of the liver

OBJECTIVE

In this study, the efficiency of telemedical consulting with regard to fine needle aspirates from space-occupying lesions (SOLs) of the liver is investigated for the first time.

STUDY DESIGN

The study includes fine needle aspirations from 62 patients, 33 with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) and 29 with non-hepatic tumors. Using the Internet-based iPath system, the initial pathologist submitted 1-8 images from smears and cell block sections. One consultant assessed the cytological and another one the histological images. Both made their diagnoses independent of each other. A final diagnosis was made by immunochemistry of cell block sections. The cytological images were analyzed retrospectively for the occurrence of the most typical HCC indicators. The number of these indicators was related to the initial diagnoses of the three pathologists, and possible reasons for diagnostic errors were analyzed based on this analysis.

RESULTS

The accuracy of the preliminary telemedical diagnoses regarding HCC was 82.0% for the cytological images and 87.7% for the histological images. Most of the false diagnoses occurred in tumors with unusual cytological and histological patterns.

CONCLUSIONS

Telemedical consulting is a valuable tool to obtain a second opinion. However, for improvement of the diagnosis of HCC, supplementary immunochemical tests are necessary.

Diagnostic role of glypican 3 and CD34 for differentiating hepatocellular carcinoma from nonmalignant hepatocellular lesions

Well-differentiated hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) may be difficult to distinguish from a benign lesion. Glypican 3 (GPC-3) is an oncofetal protein, which has been demonstrated to be up-regulated in HCC. The aim of this study is to evaluate the diagnostic role of combined GPC-3 and CD34 immunoassaying in the distinction between HCC and benign hepatic mimickers. This study was performed on 100 cases of formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded cases of hepatic focal lesions obtained from the files of pathology laboratory of our university from 2009 to 2012. The following groups were studied: group A (n = 60) (hepatocellular malignant lesions) and group B (n = 40) (Hepatocellular nonmalignant lesions). All cases were stained with GPC-3 and CD34. Sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values were calculated for both antibodies. Glypican 3 and complete CD34 staining pattern expression in group A was significantly higher than in group B. The results of costaining showed that, in HCCs, almost all the GPC-3-positive cases had a complete CD34 staining pattern, whereas in the 40 hepatocellular nonmalignant lesions, none stained up with the 2 markers. Therefore, although the sensitivity declined (82%), the specificity and positive predictive value (PPV) of costaining reached 100% and were greater than that observed for single staining with GPC-3 (specificity, 92.5%; PPV, 94.3%) or CD34 (specificity, 97.5%; PPV, 98.3%). Our data demonstrate that GPC-3 and CD34 costaining has better diagnostic value for differentiating HCC from nonmalignant hepatocellular lesions than does single staining.

Diagnostic value of glypican-3 in alpha fetoprotein negative hepatocellular carcinoma patients

BACKGROUND

The prognosis of patients with hepatocellular carcinoma(HCC) is generally very poor with a 5-year survival rate of less than 15% since most of them are diagnosed clinically at their late stage. However, the differential diagnosis between alpha fetoprotein(AFP) negative HCC and cirrhotic nodules is still difficult.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the diagnostic value of glypican-3(GPC3) in patients with AFP negative hepatitis B related HCC.

METHODS

The liver tissue GPC3 (GPC3L) expression was tested from 426 for surgery and 179 of needle biopsies of hepatitis B related HCC patients using immunohistochemistry staining. Serum GPC3 (GPC3S) and AFP were also measured.

RESULTS

Among surgical HCC samples, 80.0% of GPC3L expression was positive, however, in paracarcinomatous and cirrhotic nodules were negative. In needle biopsy tissues, GPC3L positively expression was in 74.9%. The sensitivity of AFP>400 µg/L was 25.4%. The GPC3S >3.5 µg/L was determined as a positive. The area of ROC curve of GPC3S was 0.68(95% CI 0.56-0.79,P<0.05) in all HCC patients,0.81 (95% CI 0.62 -0. 98, P<0.05) in AFP greater or equal to 400 µg/L and 0.64 (95% CI 0.51-0.77, P=0.051) in AFP negative patients. The GPC3S was positive in 48.8% of patients with AFP negative. No difference was observed between GPC3L/GPC3S and serum AFP.

CONCLUSIONS

GPC3 may be helpful in improving diagnosis of HCC and in differentiating diagnosis between AFP negative HCC and cirrhotic nodules.

Serological diagnosis of liver metastasis in patients with breast cancer

Objective

To diagnose and explore the serological diagnostic factors for liver metastasis in patients with breast cancer before symptoms occur.

Methods

A total of 430 female in-patients with breast cancer of stages 0 to IIIC who came to Tianjin Medical University Cancer Institute and Hospital from January 2003 to January 2004 were studied and followed up until May 2011. Serum levels of biochemical markers for tumor and liver were measured at the time of diagnosis.

Results

Liver metastasis was more likely to occur in patients with stage III cancer or c-erbB-2-positive expression. Alanine aminotransferase, aspartate aminotransferase, γ-glutamyltransferase (GGT), alkaline phosphatase, lactate dehydrogenase (LDH), and carbohydrate antigen 153 (CA153) levels were significantly higher in patients with liver metastasis than those without liver metastasis. Diagnostic indices of LDH, GGT, and CA153 were 174 U/L, 32 U/L, and 26.48 µg/L, respectively. The areas under the curves of LDH, GGT, and CEA were 0.795, 0.784, and 0.661, respectively, and sensitivities of parallel tests for LDH and CA153 and for GGT and CA153 were 88.6% and 85.7%, respectively. The specificity of serial tests for both pairs of enzymes was 97.7%.

Conclusions

The sensitivity and specificity of combined tumor and biochemical markers could be used as indicators during screening for breast-liver metastasis.

Cytopathologic diagnosis of liver mass lesions

The liver is a common site for metastatic malignancies, particularly from the gastrointestinal tract. It also may be involved by primary neoplasms, both benign and malignant. Cytopathologic examination of mass lesions of the liver with pertinent use of ancillary studies is a useful method of establishing a correct diagnosis for patient management. The authors reviewed the literature for articles pertaining to cytologic characteristics of specific tumor types, utility of immunohistochemical markers and pertinent molecular studies, differential diagnoses and pitfalls.

Arginase-1, HepPar-1, and Glypican-3 are the most effective panel of markers in distinguishing hepatocellular carcinoma from metastatic tumor on fine-needle aspiration specimens

Distinction of liver metastases from hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) may present a diagnostic challenge. Arginase-1 (Arg-1) is a marker for HCC recently described in some literature. Immunohistochemical evaluation of Arg-1, hepatocyte paraffin-1 (HepPar-1), and glypican-3 expression was performed on 1,240 surgical specimens and 62 liver fine-needle aspiration specimens (29 HCCs, 28 metastatic tumors, and 5 benign liver cases). The staining results on tissue microarray sections showed that 2.7% and 3.1% of nonhepatic tumor cases were positive for HepPar-1 and glypican-3, respectively; none was positive for Arg-1. For fine-needle aspiration specimens, 19 HCCs were positive for all 3 markers; 9 were positive for 1 or 2 markers; and only 1 case was negative for all 3 markers. These data demonstrate that Arg-1 is the most specific marker in differentiating a non-HCC from HCC. It is recommended to use 3 markers as a panel in distinguishing HCC from metastatic carcinoma.

Fine needle aspiration biopsy of hepatocellular carcinoma and hepatocellular nodular lesions: role, controversies and approach to diagnosis

The role of fine needle aspiration (FNA) biopsy of the liver has evolved. Advances in imaging modalities have obviated the need for tissue confirmation in clinically classic hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). The risks of needle tract seeding and haematogenous dissemination have been actively debated. Nowadays, cytopathologists are confronted by smaller and smaller nodules, detected due to increased surveillance of high-risk cirrhotic patients. Tissue characterization of small well-differentiated hepatocellular nodular lesions (size less than and equal to 2 cm) is extremely challenging and has therapeutic implications. Major issues in the cytodiagnosis of HCC include: (i) distinguishing benign hepatocellular nodular lesions, namely, large regenerative nodules, dysplastic nodules, focal nodular hyperplasia and hepatocellular adenoma from reactive hepatocytes; (ii) distinguishing well-differentiated HCC from benign hepatocellular nodular lesions; (iii) distinguishing poorly differentiated HCC from intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma and metastatic carcinomas; (iv) determining the histogenesis of a malignant tumour; and (v) determining the site of origin of a malignant tumour. An overview of the biological evolution and histopathological aspects of dysplastic nodules, small HCCs and 'nodule-in-nodule' lesions is presented in tandem with clinically relevant nomenclature. An algorithmic approach to FNA diagnosis of HCC and hepatocellular nodular lesions is outlined. Optimal results depend on (i) a dedicated radiologist-cytopathologist team; (ii) an on-site cytology service, (iii) a combined cytohistological approach, (iv) immunohistochemistry, and (v) clinicopathological correlation. As we move towards personalized medicine, it is envisaged that hepatic FNA is likely to become a point of care in the management protocol as it takes on the additional role of procurement of tumour and peritumoural tissues for genomic and proteomic profiling to enable targeted molecular therapy.

Fine-needle aspiration biopsy of hepatocellular carcinoma and related hepatocellular nodular lesions in cirrhosis: controversies, challenges, and expectations

The role of hepatic fine-needle aspiration (FNA) biopsy has evolved. Advances in imaging modalities have obviated the need for tissue confirmation in most hepatocellular carcinomas (HCCs). There is risk of needle-tract seeding. Increasingly, small nodules are being detected on ultrasound surveillance of high-risk patients. Diagnostic challenges associated with cirrhosis include distinction of benign hepatocellular nodules, namely, large regenerative nodules and dysplastic nodules, from reactive hepatocytes; and distinction of well-differentiated HCCs from benign hepatocellular nodules. This paper will discuss (i) controversies regarding preoperative/pretransplantation FNA diagnosis of HCC, (ii) update of biological evolution, nomenclature, and histopathologic criteria for diagnosis of precancerous nodules and small HCCs, and (iii) algorithmic approach to FNA diagnosis of hepatocellular nodules. Optimal results depend on dedicated radiologist-cytopathologist team, on-site cytology service; combined cytohistologic approach, immunohistochemistry, and clinicopathologic correlation. Hepatic FNA is likely to be incorporated as a point of care as we move towards personalized medicine.

iTRAQ-2DLC-ESI-MS/MS based identification of a new set of immunohistochemical biomarkers for classification of dysplastic nodules and small hepatocellular carcinoma

The study aims to develop novel clinical immunohistochemical biomarkers for distinguishing small hepatocellular carcinoma (sHCC) from dysplastic nodules (DN). iTRAQ-2DLC-ESI-MS/MS technique was used to screen immunohistochemical biomarkers between precancerous lesions (liver cirrhosis and DN) and sHCC. A total of 1951 proteins were quantified, including 52 proteins upregulated in sHCC and 95 proteins downregulated in sHCC by at least 1.25- or 0.8-fold at p < 0.05. The selected biomarker candidates were further verified using Western blotting and immunohistochemistry. Furthermore, receiver operation characteristics (ROC) curves and logistic regression model were carried out to evaluate the diagnostic values of the biomarkers. Finally, aminoacylase-1 (ACY1) and sequestosome-1 (SQSTM1) were chosen as novel candidate biomarkers for distinction of sHCC from DN. A constructed logistic regression model included ACY1, SQSTM1, and CD34. The sensitivity and specificity of this model for distinguishing sHCC from DN was 96.1% and 96.7%. In conclusion, ACY1 and SQSTM1 were identified as novel immunohistochemical biomarkers distinguishing sHCC from DN. In conclusion, expression levels of CD34, ACY1, and SQSTM1 can be used to establish an accurate diagnostic model for distinction of sHCC from DN.

Cutaneous metastasis of hepatocellular carcinoma diagnosed by fine needle aspiration cytology and Hep Par 1 immunopositivity

Cutaneous metastasis of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is very rare, accounting for less than 0.8% of all known cutaneous metastases and occurring in 2.7-3.4% of HCCs. With less than 50 such cases reported worldwide, most of which were diagnosed histologically on excised lesions, it can only be expected that diagnosis made on cytological features alone would be challenging. We report a case of cutaneous metastasis of HCC diagnosed based on cytological features and confirmed by Hep Par 1 immunopositivity of the cell block material. An 81-year-old man, who was known to have unresectable HCC, presented with a 1-month history of painless, left nasal alae mass. The mass measured 1.5 cm in diameter, and was multilobulated with a central necrosis. Fine needle aspiration of the mass was done. Smears were cellular, comprising of malignant cells in loose clusters and aggregates as well as singly dispersed. The malignant cells displayed moderate nuclear pleomorphism, occasional prominent nucleoli, and intranuclear pseudoinclusion. Cell block material demonstrated the trabeculae pattern of the malignant cells and Hep Par 1 immunopositivity. The final diagnosis of a metastatic cutaneous HCC was made. In conclusion, cutaneous HCC metastasis is rare and should be considered in the differential diagnosis in patients with a history of HCC presenting with suspicious skin lesion. In the right clinical setting, a confident diagnosis can be made in such cases by using the fine needle aspiration technique aided with immunopositivity for Hep Par 1 antibody of the aspirated material.

Immunohistology--past, present, and future

The rapid development of immunohistochemistry, a morphology-based technique, has come about through refinements in detection systems and an increasing range of sensitive and specific antibodies that have allowed application of the technique to formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded tissues. The introduction of heat-induced antigen retrieval has been a significant milestone to compliment these developments so that the immunohistochemistry is firmly entrenched as an indispensable adjunct to morphologic diagnosis. Although this ancillary stain was initially used in a qualitative manner, problems surrounding the many variables that influence antigen preservation in formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded tissues were not a major issue and laboratories strived to optimize their staining protocols to the material they accessioned and processed. The advent of personalized medicine and targeted cancer treatment has imposed the need to quantitate the stain reaction product and has resulted in calls to standardize the process of immunostaining. A closer examination of the variables that influence the ability to show antigens in formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded tissues revealed many important variables, particularly in the preanalytical phase of the assay, that are beyond the control of the accessioning laboratory. Although analytical factors have the potential to be standardized, the actions of many pivotal procedures including fixation and antigen retrieval are not completely understood. Postanalytical processes including threshold and cut-off values require consensus and standardization and it is clear that some of these goals can be achieved through the direction of national and international organizations associated with cancer diagnosis and treatment. With the ability to serve as a surrogate marker of many genetic abnormalities, immunohistochemistry enters a new era and the need to better understand some of the mechanisms fundamental to the technique become more pressing and the development of true quantitative assays is imperative. There is also an increasing appreciation that the technique highlights patterns of staining that reflect exquisite localization to organelles and tissue structures that are not appreciable in routine stains, adding a further dimension to morphologic diagnosis.

The best immunohistochemical panel for differentiating hepatocellular carcinoma from metastatic adenocarcinoma

It can be difficult to differentiate hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) from metastatic adenocarcinoma (MA). An appropriate immunohistochemical panel is required for the differential diagnosis. This study aimed at finding the best panel, including hepatocyte-specific antigen (Hepatocyte), pCEA, CD10, Villin, CD34, TTF-1, MOC-31, CK7, and CK20 antibodies. Sixty-eight cases of HCC and 107 cases of MA were investigated. Hepatocyte positivity was seen in 95.6% of HCCs and in 1.9% of MAs. pCEA was expressed in 47.8% of HCCs and in 86.8% of MAs. CD10 stained 73.13% of HCCs and 36.9% of MAs. Villin was positive in 23.5% of HCCs and in 81.0% of MAs. Canalicular staining with pCEA, CD10, and Villin was seen only in HCCs. Sinusoidal CD34 staining was seen only in 42.6% of HCCs. A small subset of HCCs demonstrated cytoplasmic TTF-1 and MOC-31. CK7 was expressed in 29.4% of HCCs and in 29.9% of MAs, whereas CK20 stained 14.7% of HCCs and 62.6% of MAs. In conclusion, Hepatocyte should be combined with pCEA, MOC-31, CD10, and CD34. Canalicular staining with pCEA, CD10, and Villin is specific for HCC. CK7 and CK20 expression may be seen in some HCCs. We suggest that the best panel for discriminating HCC from MA should contain Hepatocyte, MOC-31, pCEA, CD10, and CD34.

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.

Metastatic hepatocellular carcinoma presenting as a pancreatic mass by computed tomography scan and mimicking a primary neuroendocrine tumor: a potential pitfall in aspiration cytology

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is a highly malignant neoplasm, often presenting at late stage and portending a poor prognosis for the patient. The peripancreatic fat is a rare site of extrahepatic metastasis, and metastatic HCC can mimic primary pancreatic neoplasms, even in this location. It is crucial to be aware of this pitfall in the evaluation of aspiration cytology of pancreatic neoplasms and to develop a strategy to reach the correct diagnosis. We present an endoscopic ultrasound fine-needle aspiration diagnosis of metastatic HCC presenting as a pancreatic mass radiologically that had neuroendocrine features on various cytological and histological preparations. The metastatic lesions were located surgically in the peripancreatic adipose tissue with involvement of one peripancreatic lymph node. This case illustrates the utility of FNA for diagnosing uncommon presentations of HCC and the importance of clinical history, cell block, and an immunocytochemical panel in determining the origin of the tumor.

Metastatic hepatocellular carcinoma with CD138 positivity: an unusual mimic of multiple myeloma?

CD138 is a monoclonal anti-syndecan-1 antibody that is often used to identify plasma cells in the bone marrow of patients with multiple myeloma (MM). Several carcinomas may also express CD138 including prostate, colon, renal cell, and hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). We report a case of metastatic HCC that presented as a soft tissue mass on the back of a 67-year-old male. Based on the clinical and radiologic findings, MM was strongly suspected. In addition, fine-needle aspiration biopsy (FNAB) of the mass revealed neoplastic cells that were positive for CD138, both by immunohistochemistry (IHC) and flow cytometry. The cytomorphologic features however did not support a diagnosis of MM, but were consistent with metastatic HCC. Our case highlights the potential problems that may arise by over-reliance on IHC and flow cytometry. Careful morphologic assessment as well as clinical and radiologic correlation are very important when evaluating any CD138-positive neoplasm. This approach should improve diagnostic accuracy and reduce the risk of erroneous interpretation of aberrant IHC results. In addition, we examined the expression of CD138 in known cases of HCC.

Can E-cadherin and CD34 be used as indicators of prognosis for hepatocellular carcinoma patients?

BACKGROUND

The high postoperative recurrence of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is a problem that would benefit from the identification of indicators of recurrence and prognosis. In the past few years, research has shown that E-cadherin and CD34 can be used as indicators of the invasion of malignant tumors. In the present study, we investigated the expression of E-cadherin and CD34 in HCC patients.

METHODS

Expression levels of E-cadherin and CD34 in 41 HCC samples were detected using two-step immunohistochemical methods and compared with clinical pathological parameters and survival rate.

RESULTS

The positive rates of E-cadherin and CD34 expression in 41 HCC cases were 48.78% and 100%, respectively. Expression of E-cadherin was significantly lower in patients with larger tumors, a high risk invasion and Edmondson classification III or IV (p<0.05). There was a significant relationship between CD34 expression and age and tumor invasiveness (p<0.05). There was no significant relationship between expression of CD34 and E-cadherin by Spearman statistical analysis (p>0.05). The survival rate in patients with negative expression of E-cadherin was significantly lower.

CONCLUSIONS

The expression of CD34 cannot be used singly as a prognostic indicator for HCC patients. The co-expression of E-cadherin and CD34 cannot be used as a prognostic indicator for HCC patients. Clin Chem Lab Med 2008;46:1122-6.

Distinction of hepatocellular carcinoma from benign hepatic mimickers using Glypican-3 and CD34 immunohistochemistry

Distinguishing a well-differentiated hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) from normal and cirrhotic liver tissue or benign liver nodules, such as hepatic adenoma (HA) and focal nodular hyperplasia (FNH), may be very difficult in some cases, particularly in small needle core biopsies. We studied the expression of Glypican-3 (GPC3) and CD34 in 107 cases of HCC, 19 cases of HA, and 16 cases of focal nodular hyperplasia (FNH). In addition, we studied GPC3 expression in 225 cases of nonhepatic human tumors with epithelial differentiation. Ninety-four of 107 cases (88%) of HCC showed focal or diffuse cytoplasmic GPC3 staining, whereas all HA and FNH cases were GPC3-negative, and only 7 of 225 cases (3%) of nonhepatic tumors with epithelial differentiation expressed GPC3. The sensitivity and specificity of GPC3 for HCC was 88% and 97%, respectively. There were three CD34 staining patterns observed in hepatic tissue: negative, incomplete positive, and complete positive. In negative staining pattern, only blood vessels in portal triads or rare sinusoidal spaces immediately adjacent to portal tracts were positive. The negative staining pattern was seen in normal or cirrhotic liver tissue only. The complete CD34 staining pattern showed virtually all sinusoidal spaces with CD34-positive staining throughout the lesion. The complete CD34 staining pattern was seen in virtually all cases of HCC and in only some cases of HA and FNH. The incomplete CD34 staining pattern was characterized by either CD34 positivity in virtually all sinusoidal spaces in some but not all nodules or CD34 positivity in the peripheral sinusoidal spaces adjacent to portal triads. The incomplete CD34 staining pattern was seen in rare cases of HCC and in most cases of HA and FNH. We conclude that GPC3 is a very specific marker not only for differentiating HCC from nonhepatic tumors with epithelial differentiation, but also for differentiating HCC from HA and FNH. GPC3 immunoreactivity, in combination with a complete CD34 immunostaining pattern, greatly facilitates the accuracy of distinguishing between malignant hepatic lesions and benign mimickers.

Role of CD10 immunochemistry in differentiating hepatocellular carcinoma from metastatic carcinoma of the liver

BACKGROUND

Differentiation of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) from metastatic carcinoma in liver may be difficult on fine needle aspiration cytology (FNAC), especially when both appear as moderate to poorly differentiated tumours. A panel of immunocytochemical stains is frequently used in case of diagnostic difficulty. Recently, CD10 immunostain with a canalicular staining pattern has been shown to be a specific marker for hepatocytic differentiation.

OBJECTIVE

The present study was designed to assess the value of CD10 immunostain in distinguishing HCC from metastatic carcinoma in material obtained by FNAC of liver masses.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded cell blocks of 22 cases (7 cases of HCC and 15 cases of metastatic carcinoma), direct acetone-fixed smears and destained smears of 28 cases (18 cases of HCC and 10 cases of metastatic carcinoma) prepared from FNAC of the liver were immunostained using monoclonal antibody against CD10.

RESULTS

Seventeen (68%) of twenty-five cases of HCC were positive for CD10 with a canalicular staining pattern. Among them 7 (70%) of 10 cases were well-differentiated HCC and 10 (66%) of 15 cases were moderate to poorly differentiated HCC. Of 25 cases of metastatic carcinoma, four (16%) were positive for CD10 with a cytoplasmic (three cases) and membranous staining (one case) pattern.

CONCLUSION

CD10 immunostaining is useful in discriminating HCC and metastatic carcinoma of the liver and is easily applied on cell blocks as well as FNAC smears.

Cytomorphology of a solitary left chest wall mass: an unusual presentation from unknown primary hepatocellular carcinoma

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) may present in various ways, but only very rarely with symptoms of distant metastases or evolve from ectopic liver tissue. This report describes a case of a 62-year-old white man who was admitted for hemoptysis and a large left chest wall mass that was growing for about a year. The patient underwent Fine-needle aspiration (FNA) of the mass that revealed poorly differentiated large-cell carcinoma. A lung primary was suspected initially; however, further workup of this patient showed an elevated serum alpha-fetoprotein (AFP) level of 16,425 ng/ml. A computerized tomography (CT) scan of the abdomen showed cirrhotic liver, evidence of esophageal varices, but no evidence of a liver mass. The FNA findings were reviewed and ancillary studies were performed, including pan cytokeratin (AE1/3), Hepatocyte Paraffin 1 (HepPar-1), AFP, CD10, CD34, and polyclonal CEA. The results confirmed the diagnoses of HCC probably from occult primary or from ectopic liver tissue. The former was suggested, since serum AFP was dropped to 6,640 ng/ml following resection of the tumor. We concluded that HCC should be considered in the list of differential diagnosis of chest wall mass. HCC may present as metastatic disease from a clinically and radiologically unrecognized liver mass. FNA, coupled with ancillary studies, provides a rapid and accurate diagnostic tool in challenging cases.

Glypican-3 immunocytochemistry in liver fine-needle aspirates : a novel stain to assist in the differentiation of benign and malignant liver lesions

BACKGROUND

Glypican-3 (GPC3) is a heparan sulfate proteoglycan which is elevated in the serum of patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), but not in healthy blood donors, or patients with benign liver disease. GPC3 immunohistochemistry (IHC) is a promising marker of HCC in surgical pathology. This study explores the value of GPC3 expression in liver fine-needle aspirates (FNAs) by immunocytochemistry (ICC), and compares its sensitivity and staining intensity with that of IHC.

METHODS

Archival cytologic material in hepatic FNAs from 20 patients with HCC, 20 patients with metastatic tumors, and 20 patients with benign lesions, were studied. Correlating surgical specimens and/or cell blocks were available for GPC-3 IHC in 16 patients with HCC. All slides were stained with GPC3-1G12 antibody with appropriate positive and negative controls. Staining intensity was graded as 0, no staining; 1, weak cytoplasmic staining; 2, moderate cytoplasmic staining; 3, strong cytoplasmic staining with membranous accentuation. Grades 0 and 1 were regarded as negative; grades 2 and 3 were considered positive for GPC3.

RESULTS

In the HCC group, positive staining was found in 18/20 (90%) samples. In contrast, GPC3 ICC of 20/20 (100%) metastatic tumors and 20/20 (100%) benign cases displayed negative staining, no cases showing moderate or strong expression. The sensitivity and specificity of GPC3 in HCC ICC were 90% and 100% respectively. The surgical sections and cell blocks of HCC demonstrated positive staining less frequently, in 11/16 (68.8%) cases, with 12/16 (75%) correlation with ICC.

CONCLUSIONS

Results indicated positive staining for GPC3 as defined in 90% of liver FNAs from HCC patients. All metastatic tumors and benign aspirates studied were negative for GPC3. ICC was superior to IHC in 25% of cases. This pilot study supports the diagnostic utility of GPC3 in hepatic FNAs to aid in distinction of HCC from metastatic tumors and benign liver lesions.

Intratumoral sampling variability in hepatocellular carcinoma: A case report

The differential diagnosis between hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) and regenerative liver nodules and other primary liver tumors may be very difficult, particularly when performed on liver biopsies. Difficulties in histological typing may be often minimized by immunohistochemistry. Among the numerous markers proposed, CK18, Hep Par1 and glypican 3 (GPC3) are considered the most useful in HCC diagnosis. Here we report a case of HCC in a 72-year-old male with HBV-related chronic liver disease, characterized by a marked morphological and immunohistochemical intratumoral variability. In this case, tumor grading ranged from areas extremely well differentiated, similar to regenerative nodule, to undifferentiated regions, with large atypical multinucleated cells. While almost all sub nodules were immunostained by Hep Par 1, immunoreactivity for glypican 3 and for Ck18 was patchy, with negative tumor region adjacent to the highly immunoreactive areas. Our case stresses the relevance of sampling variability in the diagnosis of HCC, and indicates that caution should be taken in grading an HCC and in the interpretation of immunohistochemical stains when only small core biopsies from liver nodules are available.

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

BACKGROUND

Difficulties with cytologic diagnoses on fine-needle aspiration cytology (FNAC) of the liver can be overcome by the application of immunocytochemical panels applied on smears. The aim of the current study was to analyze the performance of a panel of monoclonal antibodies to differentiate hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) from metastatic carcinoma (MC) or regenerative nodules, and to identify the to date unknown primary sites of carcinomas that had metastasized to the liver.

METHODS

In a validating cohort study, 108 FNACs coin lesions in the liver were routinely evaluated applying immunocytochemistry as an ancillary method. All patients had confirmatory histologic and/or clinical follow-up. A total of 23 HCCs were analyzed for the distinction from MC or regenerative nodules applying a panel of HepPar1, alpha-fetoprotein, BerEP4, CD31, CD68, and Ki-67. A total of 85 cases of unknown primary tumor metastatic to the liver were used to identify the tumor sites applying a panel of CK5/6, CK7, CK20, CA 125, thyroid transcription factor-1 (TTF-1), and Cdx2.

RESULTS

Typing accuracy to differentiate HCC from MC or regenerative nodules was 100% and 90.3%, respectively, to identify the primary tumor site of MC. In 23 cases, the site of the primary tumor remained clinically unknown.

CONCLUSIONS

The application of immunocytochemical panels on the same slide used for microscopic diagnosis is a useful tool in the routine assessment of FNACs of the liver to discriminate HCCs from MC or regenerative nodules and for the identification of primary sites of MC. Their performance should be confirmed in a larger series of cases.

Diagnostic utility of immunohistochemistry in hepatocellular carcinoma, its variants and their mimics

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is known for its histomorphologic heterogeneity. Immunohistochemistry (IHC) can help in the comparative morphologic evaluation of HCC, its variants and their mimics. Some of these diagnostic challenges can be attributed to (i) the variety of neoplasms that can arise from the hepatic stem cell lineage; (ii) the spectrum of well-differentiated hepatocellular nodular lesions; (iii) the liver being a target for metastases with some of these histologic entities mimicking variants of HCC or actually arising in the liver; and (iv) the limitations of serum alpha-fetoprotein (AFP). The role of IHC is in the distinction of benign hepatocellular nodules from reactive hepatocytes; WD-HCC from benign hepatocellular nodules; poorly differentiated HCC from cholangiocarcinoma and metastases; and determination of histogenesis of malignant tumor; and of primary site of origin of malignant tumor. A panel of antibodies has more discriminant value. AFP expression usually indicates malignancy in a hepatocellular nodule and hepatocytic histogenesis of a malignancy. Polyclonal carcinoembryonic antigen (pCEA) and CD10 stain bile canaliculi in better-differentiated HCC. HepPar1 is generally accepted as a hepatocytic marker. However, not all HCC stain uniformly and not all HepPar1-positive tumors are of hepatocytic origin or arise in the liver. Mature hepatocytes and hepatocellular nodules stain with CAM 5.2, CK 8, and 18 but not with CK 7, 19, 20, or AE1/AE3. Biliary epithelium expresses CK 7 and 19. CD 34 highlights sinusoidal capillarization. AFP, pCEA/CD10, and CD34 are useful for ascertainment of malignancy in hepatocellular nodules; HepPar1 and cytokeratins to be included if histogenesis is the issue. IHC results should be interpreted in the larger context of the case.

Subcutaneous and intrahepatic growth of human hepatoblastoma in immunodeficient mice

BACKGROUND/AIMS

Hepatoblastoma is the most frequent malignant pediatric liver tumor. Approximately 25% of hepatoblastoma patients cannot be cured with current treatment protocols. Additional treatment options must, therefore, be developed. Subcutaneous animal models for hepatoblastoma exist, but a more physiologic intrahepatic model is lacking.

METHODS

The alpha-fetoprotein-expressing hepatoblastoma-cell lines HepT1, HuH6 and the childhood hepatocellular carcinoma-cell line HepG2 were injected subcutaneously and intrasplenically into NMRI nu/nu mice. Tumor growth was monitored by measuring tumor size for subcutaneous and serum human alpha-fetoprotein levels for intra-abdominal tumors. Tumors were characterized microscopically.

RESULTS

Subcutaneous tumor growth occurred in 70% (7/10) of mice injected with HuH6 and 50% (5/10) of mice injected with HepG2. HepT1 did not form tumors. Accumulation of serum alpha-fetoprotein reflected tumor growth. Intrasplenic growth was seen in 50% (14/27, HuH6) and 10% (3/10, HepG2) of the mice, with only HuH6 forming intrahepatic tumors in 25% (7/27) of the mice. Growth pattern and alpha-fetoprotein production were similar at the subcutaneous and intra-abdominal location. Intrahepatic grafting occurred by metastatic spread from the spleen, produced well-defined nodules, and was accompanied by a weakened expression of the hepatocyte marker carbamoylphosphate synthetase, and the canalicular markers CD10 and cytokeratin7. The expression of cytokeratin18 and -19, active caspase3, and beta-catenin was increased. There were no lung metastases.

CONCLUSIONS

We established an intrahepatic mouse model for human hepatoblastoma, in which tumor growth could be monitored by serum alpha-fetoprotein levels. Engrafting in the liver occurred by metastatic spread from the spleen and was accompanied by some loss of differentiation features.

The diagnosis of malignancy in effusion cytology: a pattern recognition approach

This review presents a pattern recognition approach for the diagnosis of malignant effusions. The cytomorphologic features of reactive mesothelial proliferation, mesothelioma and metastatic carcinoma are presented. In addition, the role of ancillary studies in challenging cases and the importance of integrating clinical findings are stressed. An algorithmic approach to the workup of serous effusions as well as pitfalls for false-positive diagnosis are discussed.

Cytologic diagnosis of brain metastasis from hepatocellular carcinoma by squash preparation

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) metastasizes to the brain is rare instances. In published series and case reports of metastatic HCC, diagnosis of central nervous system metastases has been determined by histologic methods. We present a case of metastatic HCC of brain diagnosed by squash cytologic preparation. A 69-year-old male, HCV positive, suffering from post-hepatitic cirrhosis, initially diagnosed at age 68 with HCC presented with headaches of increasing frequency and severity. A computed tomography scan confirmed a 3-cm nodule in the right parietal lobe of the brain. Squash cytology was performed intraoperatively and preparations of a small tissue fragment resected from the mass showed medium-to-large-sized, well-cohesive clusters or sheets of uniform tumor cells. The tumor cells are highly cellular and contain solitary tumor cells in loose groupings as well as many fragments. They also appear somewhat bizarre and contain large, round, or ovoid nuclei with prominent nucleoli. Cytologic diagnosis of metastatic HCC was rendered reported and confirmed by a subsequent frozen section examination. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first reported case in which HCC was reported as brain metastasis, by using squash cytology. We suggest that intraoperative squash cytologic examination be viewed as a useful initial approach in the diagnosis of metastatic brain tumor.

Canalicular immunostaining of aminopeptidase N (CD13) as a diagnostic marker for hepatocellular carcinoma

BACKGROUND

Aminopeptidase N (CD13) is expressed in normal and neoplastic liver tissue, where it exhibits a characteristic canalicular pattern (CD13(can)), similar to that seen for CD10 and when antibodies crossreact with biliary glycoprotein I (p-CEA).

AIM

To compare the putative diagnostic use of CD13(can) in differentiating between hepatocellular (HCC) and non-hepatocellular carcinomas metastatic to the liver (non-HCC).

METHODS

A retrospective study comparing 53 HCC specimens with 32 non-HCC specimens. Immunostaining was performed with HepPar1 and antibodies directed against CD10, CD13, p-CEA, and alpha fetoprotein (AFP).

RESULTS

In the HCC group, a canalicular staining pattern was found for CD13, p-CEA, and CD10 in 51, 43, and 33 specimens, respectively. HepPar1 was positive in 29 and AFP in 17 HCC specimens. In the non-HCC group, canalicular immunostaining for CD10 and p-CEA was confined to non-neoplastic liver tissue. One poorly differentiated cholangiocarcinoma showed apical expression of CD13, resembling to some extent CD13(can). Sensitivity and specificity were 96.2% and 97.0%, respectively, for CD13(can), 81.1% and 100% for p-CEA(can), 62.3% and 100%, for CD10(can), 54.7% and 99.9% for HepPar1, and 32.1% and 100% for AFP.

CONCLUSIONS

These results show that CD13(can) is more sensitive in differentiating between HCC and non-HCC than CD10(can), p-CEA(can), HepPar1, and AFP.

Fine needle aspiration biopsy of the liver: Algorithmic approach and current issues in the diagnosis of hepatocellular carcinoma

The role of fine needle aspiration biopsy (FNAB) in the evaluation of focal liver lesions has evolved. Guided FNAB is still useful to procure a tissue diagnosis if clinical, biochemical and radiologic findings are inconclusive. Major diagnostic issues include: (i) Distinction of benign hepatocellular nodular lesions from reactive hepatocytes, (ii) Distinction of well-differentiated hepatocellular carcinoma (WD-HCC) from benign hepatocellular nodular lesions, (iii) Distinction of poorly differentiated HCC from cholangiocarcinoma and metastatic carcinomas, (iv) Determination of histogenesis of malignant tumor, and (v) Determination of primary site of origin of malignant tumor. This review gives a general overview of hepatic FNAB; outlines an algorithmic approach to cytodiagnosis with emphasis on HCC, its variants and their mimics; and addresses current diagnostic issues. Close radiologic surveillance of high-risk cirrhotic patients has resulted in the increasing detection of smaller lesions with many subjected to biopsy for tissue characterization. The need for tissue confirmation in clinically obvious HCC is questioned due to risk of malignant seeding. When a biopsy is indicated, core needle biopsy is favored over FNAB. The inherent difficulty of distinguishing small/early HCC from benign hepatocellular nodular lesions has resulted in indeterminate reports. Changing concepts in the understanding of the biological behavior and morphologic evolution of HCC and its precursors; and the current lack of agreement on the morphologic criteria for distinguishing high-grade dysplastic lesions (with small cell change) from WD-HCC, have profound impact on nomenclature, cytohistologic interpretation and management. Optimization of hepatic FNAB to enhance the yield and accuracy of diagnoses requires close clinicopathologic correlation; combined cytohistologic approach; judicious use of ancillary tests; and skilled healthcare teams.

Utility of CD10 and RCCma in the diagnosis of metastatic conventional renal-cell adenocarcinoma by fine-needle aspiration biopsy

The cytologic diagnosis of primary conventional renal-cell adenocarcinoma (cRCC) is usually straightforward; however, metastatic cRCC must be distinguished from a variety of neoplasms with clear-cell features. CD10, a cell membrane-associated neutral endopeptidase, and renal-cell carcinoma marker (RCCma), an antibody against human proximal tubular brush border antigen, have recently been shown to be useful in the diagnosis of cRCC. We compared CD10 and RCCma in cell block material from fine-needle aspiration biopsies (FNABs) to assess their utility in the diagnosis of metastatic cRCC, in cytologic specimens. Seven primary and sixteen metastatic cRCCs were immunostained with CD10 and RCCma. The immunoreactivity results were compared with those of a variety of neoplasms originating from other sites such as the liver, lungs, breast, and the gastrointestinal tract. The sensitivity and specificity of CD10 for cRCC were 100% and 59%, respectively. The sensitivity and specificity of RCCma for cRCC were 35% and 100%, respectively. We conclude that CD10 has limited value in confirming the diagnosis of cRCC because of its low specificity. RCCma, when positive, is highly specific for cRCC, but its low sensitivity hinders its diagnostic usefulness.