Discriminating hepatocellular carcinoma from metastatic carcinoma on fine-needle aspiration biopsy of the liver: The utility of immunocytochemical panel

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.

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.

Authors attain comparable or slightly higher rates of citation publishing in an open access journal (CytoJournal) compared to traditional cytopathology journals - A five year (2007-2011) experience

BACKGROUND

The era of Open Access (OA) publication, a platform which serves to better disseminate scientific knowledge, is upon us, as more OA journals are in existence than ever before. The idea that peer-reviewed OA publication leads to higher rates of citation has been put forth and shown to be true in several publications. This is a significant benefit to authors and is in addition to another relatively less obvious but highly critical component of the OA charter, i.e. retention of the copyright by the authors in the public domain. In this study, we analyzed the citation rates of OA and traditional non-OA publications specifically for authors in the field of cytopathology.

DESIGN

We compared the citation patterns for authors who had published in both OA and traditional non-OA peer-reviewed, scientific, cytopathology journals. Citations in an OA publication (CytoJournal) were analyzed comparatively with traditional non-OA cytopathology journals (Acta Cytologica, Cancer Cytopathology, Cytopathology, and Diagnostic Cytopathology) using the data from web of science citation analysis site (based on which the impact factors (IF) are calculated). After comparing citations per publication, as well as a time adjusted citation quotient (which takes into account the time since publication), we also analyzed the statistics after excluding the data for meeting abstracts.

RESULTS

Total 28 authors published 314 publications as articles and meeting abstracts (25 authors after excluding the abstracts). The rate of citation and time adjusted citation quotient were higher for OA in the group where abstracts were included (P < 0.05 for both). The rates were also slightly higher for OA than non-OA when the meeting abstracts were excluded, but the difference was statistically insignificant (P = 0.57 and P = 0.45).

CONCLUSION

We observed that for the same author, the publications in the OA journal attained a higher rate of citation than the publications in the traditional non-OA journals in the field of cytopathology over a 5 year period (2007-2011). However, this increase was statistically insignificant if the meeting abstracts were excluded from the analysis. Overall, the rates of citation for OA and non-OA were slightly higher to comparable.

Values of circulating GPC-3 mRNA and alpha-fetoprotein in detecting patients with hepatocellular carcinoma

BACKGROUND

The prognosis of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is poor and its early diagnosis is of the utmost importance. This study aimed to investigate the values of glypican-3 (GPC-3) expression in the liver and sera and its gene transcription for diagnosis and monitoring of metastasis of HCC.

METHODS

Liver GPC-3 was analyzed in HCC tissues from 36 patients by immunohistochemistry and Western blotting. GPC-3 mRNA from circulating peripheral blood mononuclear cells from 123 HCC patients or 246 patients with other diseases or 36 HCC tissues was amplified by RT-PCR, quantitative real-time PCR, and confirmed by DNA sequencing. Circulating GPC-3 level was detected by ELISA.

RESULTS

The increasing expression of GPC-3 was observed from non-cancerous to cancerous tissues, with brown granule-like staining localized in tumor parts of atypical hyperplasia and HCC formation. The positive rate of GPC-3 was 80.6% in HCC, 41.7% in their paracancerous tissues, and none in distal cancerous tissues (P<0.001), with no significant difference in differentiation grade and tumor number except for size (Z=2.941, P=0.003). Serum GPC-3 was detected only in HCC (52.8%) and significant difference was found between GPC-3 and tumor size (X2=6.318, P=0.012) or HBV infection (X2=23.362, P<0.001). Circulating GPC-3 mRNA was detected in 70.7% of HCC tissues, with relation to TNM stage, periportal cancerous embolus, and extra-hepatic metastasis (P<0.001). The combination of circulating GPC-3, GPC-3 mRNA and alpha-fetoprotein is of complementary value for HCC diagnosis (94.3%).

CONCLUSION

Both GPC-3 overexpression and GPC-3 mRNA abnormality could be used as markers for the diagnosis of HCC and monitoring its 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.

Therapeutic potential of targeting glypican-3 in hepatocellular carcinoma

Glypican-3 (GPC3) is a developmentally-regulated oncofetal protein that has been established as a clinically-relevant biomarker for early hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). It is one of the first transcripts to appear during malignant hepatocyte transformation, and is expressed at the protein level in approximately half of high-grade dysplastic macronodules in cirrhotic liver. Several studies show it is expressed in most (75 to 100%) of HCCs confirmed by histopathology. The protein is anchored to the hepatocyte membrane by a glycosyl-phosphatidylinositol (GPI) anchor and shows consistent membrane immunostaining pattern, making it a viable target for immunotherapeutic approaches. Targeting GPC3 for therapeutic intervention is a promising approach for the clinical management of HCC and selected other tumors that express the marker.

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.

Points of therapeutic intervention along the Wnt signaling pathway in hepatocellular carcinoma

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is the third leading cause of cancer mortality worldwide. However, there is little known about targeted therapeutics for the treatment of this devastating tumor. Among the growth factor signaling cascades deregulated in HCC, evidences suggest that the WNT/Frizzled-mediated signaling pathway plays a key role in the hepatic carcinogenesis. Aberrant activation of the signaling in HCC is mostly due to deregulated expression of the Wnt/β-catenin signaling components. This leads to the activation of the β-catenin/TCF dependent target genes, which controls cell proliferation, cell cycle, apoptosis or motility. It has been shown that disruption of the Wnt/β-catenin signaling cascade displayed anti-cancer properties in HCC. Currently, no therapeutic molecules targeting the WNT pathway are available or under clinical evaluation for the treatment of HCC. This review will discuss the identified potential molecular targets related to the canonical WNT signaling pathway and their potential therapeutic usefulness.

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.

Fibrolamellar carcinoma of the liver exhibits immunohistochemical evidence of both hepatocyte and bile duct differentiation

Fibrolamellar carcinoma is a rare malignant primary liver neoplasm with characteristic histological features that typically arises in young patients without viral hepatitis or cirrhosis. Previous studies on this entity have been limited by small numbers of patients. In contrast to classical hepatocellular carcinoma, individual cases of fibrolamellar carcinoma have been reported to express cytokeratin 7. In addition, ultrastructural and serological studies have suggested that fibrolamellar carcinoma may show neuroendocrine differentiation. The cellular differentiation of fibrolamellar carcinoma has not been studied and little is reported about its immunohistochemical profile. We studied 26 cases of fibrolamellar carcinoma and 62 cases of classical hepatocellular carcinoma by immunohistochemistry for HepPar1, glypican-3, pCEA, CD10, alpha-fetoprotein, cytokeratin 20, neuroendocrine markers, and surrogate markers for biliary differentiation (cytokeratin 7, cytokeratin 19, epithelial membrane antigen, EpCAM, mCEA, B72.3, and CA19.9). In situ hybridization for albumin mRNA was also performed. Tumor cells of fibrolamellar carcinoma and hepatocellular carcinoma showed positive signals for albumin mRNA by in situ hybridization in all cases. Both tumor types stained uniformly positively with HepPar1 and most showed a canalicular staining pattern for pCEA, confirming their hepatocellular differentiation. In addition, 39% of hepatocellular carcinoma cases and 59% of fibrolamellar carcinoma cases were positive for glypican-3. All 22 fibrolamellar carcinoma cases tested showed positive staining for cytokeratin 7 and epithelial membrane antigen, whereas less than one-third of hepatocellular carcinoma cases were positive for these markers (P<0.0001). Further, 36% of fibrolamellar carcinoma cases showed staining for B72.3, cytokeratin 19, EpCAM, or mCEA. Minimal evidence of neuroendocrine differentiation in either tumor was found with any of the usual immunohistochemical markers used for this purpose. Therefore, cytokeratin 7 and epithelial membrane antigen may be useful to differentiate between fibrolamellar carcinoma and hepatocellular carcinoma. On the basis of immunohistochemistry, fibrolamellar carcinoma seems to show both hepatocellular and bile duct differentiation.

Oral metastatic hepatocellular carcinoma: a changing demographic in Europe and North America. Immunohistochemical advances in the microscopic diagnosis

The incidence of hepatocellular carcinoma has shown an alarming increase in North America and Europe since 1980, as has the incidence of reported metastases to the oral region. Consequently, it is important that head and neck health care specialists be familiar with recent epidemiological trends and the histologic and recent immunohistochemical advances in the diagnosis of this deadly malignancy. Histologic features are reviewed, and recent advances in the immunohistochemical differential diagnosis are detailed and illustrated in two cases. A panel of immunohistochemical stains is recommended, some or all of which may be useful to differentiate poorly differentiated or pseudoglandular hepatocellular carcinoma from other metastatic adenocarcinomas to the oral and maxillofacial region.