Title |
Hepatocellular adenoma classification: a comparative evaluation of immunohistochemistry and targeted mutational analysis
|
---|---|
Published in |
Diagnostic Pathology, March 2016
|
DOI | 10.1186/s13000-016-0475-5 |
Pubmed ID | |
Authors |
Elizabeth Margolskee, Fei Bao, Anne Koehne de Gonzalez, Roger K. Moreira, Stephen Lagana, Anthony N. Sireci, Antonia R. Sepulveda, Helen Remotti, Jay H. Lefkowitch, Marcela Salomao |
Abstract |
Four subtypes of hepatocellular adenomas (HCA) are recognized: hepatocyte-nuclear-factor-1α mutated (H-HCA), β-catenin-mutated type with upregulation of glutamine synthetase (b-HCA), inflammatory type (IHCA) with serum-amyloid-A overexpression, and unclassified type. Subtyping may be useful since b-HCA appear to have higher risk of malignant transformation. We sought to apply subtype analysis and assess histological atypia, correlating these with next-generation sequencing analysis. Twenty-six HCA were stained with serum amyloid A (SAA), liver fatty acid-binding protein (LFABP), glutamine synthetase (GS), and β-catenin IHC, followed by analysis with a targeted multiplex sequencing panel. By IHC, 4 HCA (15.4 %) were classified as b-HCA, 11 (42.3 %) as IHCA, 9 (34.6 %) as H-HCA, and two (7.7 %) unclassifiable. Eight HCA (30.8 %) showed atypia (3 b-HCA, 4 IHCA and 1 H-HCA). Targeted sequencing confirmed HNF1A mutations in all H-HCA, confirming reliability of LFABP IHC in identifying these lesions. CTNNB1 mutations were detected in 1 of 4 (25 %) of GS/β-catenin-positive cases, suggesting that positive GS stain does not always correlate with CTNNB1 mutations. Immunohistochemistry does not consistently identify b-HCA. Mutational analysis improves the diagnostic accuracy of β-catenin-mutated HCA and is an important tool to assess risk of malignancy in HCA. |
X Demographics
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Turkey | 1 | 20% |
Brazil | 1 | 20% |
United States | 1 | 20% |
Venezuela, Bolivarian Republic of | 1 | 20% |
Unknown | 1 | 20% |
Demographic breakdown
Type | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Scientists | 2 | 40% |
Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 20% |
Members of the public | 1 | 20% |
Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 20% |
Mendeley readers
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Spain | 1 | 2% |
Unknown | 46 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Other | 11 | 23% |
Student > Ph. D. Student | 4 | 9% |
Researcher | 4 | 9% |
Student > Doctoral Student | 4 | 9% |
Student > Postgraduate | 3 | 6% |
Other | 9 | 19% |
Unknown | 12 | 26% |
Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Medicine and Dentistry | 29 | 62% |
Environmental Science | 1 | 2% |
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 1 | 2% |
Sports and Recreations | 1 | 2% |
Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | 2% |
Other | 2 | 4% |
Unknown | 12 | 26% |