Glypican-3 is a heparin sulfate proteoglycan normally expressed in fetal liver and placenta, but not in normal adult liver. Preliminary studies have shown that glypican-3 can be useful for the diagnosis of hepatocellular carcinoma. We performed immunohistochemistry for glypican-3 on 80 resection cases of hepatocellular lesions to examine the utility of glypican-3 immunohistochemistry in hepatocellular carcinoma at two ends of the differentiation spectrum. Staining was compared to Hep Par 1 in poorly differentiated cases. Glypican-3 was expressed in 46 (79%) hepatocellular carcinomas (56, 83 and 89% of well, moderately and poorly differentiated respectively) and seven (64%) fibrolamellar carcinomas. Of the 16 well differentiated cases, 10 closely resembled adenoma and were diagnosed due to focal abnormalities and/or loss of reticulin. Glypican-3 expression was seen in 50% in this group. Hepatocellular carcinomas arising in cirrhotic liver were more likely to be glypican-3 positive (91 vs 57%, P ¼ 0.004). All hepatic adenomas and macroregenerative nodules were negative, and three (43%) high grade dysplastic nodules were positive. Focal staining was seen in regenerative nodules in four (11%) cirrhosis cases. Glypican-3 was significantly more sensitive than Hep Par 1 for diagnosis of poorly differentiated hepatocellular carcinomas (89 vs 63%, P ¼ 0.02). The difference was more significant when only cases with diffuse positive staining were considered (83 vs 21%, Po0.001). In conclusion, glypican-3 has high sensitivity for the diagnosis of hepatocellular carcinoma, but is less sensitive in the extremely well differentiated hepatocellular carcinoma and fibrolamellar variant of hepatocellular carcinoma. Caution should be exercised in using glypican-3 in biopsy specimens as cirrhotic nodules can show strong expression. Glypican-3 can be especially useful in the identification of poorly differentiated hepatocellular carcinoma as it has higher sensitivity compared to Hep Par 1.

Simplified criteria for diagnosis of autoimmune hepatitis are based on autoantibodies, serum immunoglobulin G, histologic features, and negative viral serology. A score of 6 points is necessary for the designation of probable autoimmune hepatitis and 7 points or more for definite autoimmune hepatitis. The presence of three histologic features is required for categorizing a case as typical (2 points): interface hepatitis with portal lymphocytic/ lymphoplasmacytic cells extending into lobule, emperipolesis, and rosettes. In the absence of all three features, a chronic hepatitis picture is considered compatible with autoimmune hepatitis (1 point). This study examines the validity of these histologic features for the diagnosis of autoimmune hepatitis. Clinical data and liver biopsies were reviewed for 88 autoimmune hepatitis, 20 primary biliary cholangitis, and 13 non-autoimmune acute hepatitis cases. Interface/lobular activity, number of plasma cells, copper/CK7 stains, and presence/absence of biliary features were assessed in autoimmune hepatitis and primary biliary cholangitis cases. The simplified criteria score was calculated. Modified histologic criteria were formulated on the basis of interface/lobular activity, number of plasma cells, and presence/absence of biliary features. Using the proposed histologic features, histologic score of 2 increased from 8 to 77%, while total simplified score of 46 increased from 69 to 86%. There was no increase in total simplified score for primary biliary cholangitis or non-autoimmune acute hepatitis. Rosettes and emperipolesis are difficult to interpret, and lack sensitivity and sensitivity for autoimmune hepatitis diagnosis. The current histologic criteria used in the current simplified score lead to underscoring of autoimmune hepatitis cases. The modified histologic criteria based on the inflammatory activity, extent of plasma cells, and results of copper/CK7 staining increased the histologic score in autoimmune hepatitis and led to a probable/definite diagnosis of autoimmune hepatitis in 17% of cases that would have otherwise been classified as non-autoimmune hepatitis by simplified score.

The current clinical practice is based on the assumption of strong correlation between diffuse glutamine synthetase expression and β-catenin activation in hepatocellular adenoma and hepatocellular carcinoma. This high correlation is based on limited data, and may represent an oversimplification as glutamine synthetase staining patterns show wide variability in clinical practice. Standardized criteria for interpreting diverse glutamine synthetase patterns, and the association between each pattern and β-catenin mutations is not clearly established. This study examines the correlation between glutamine synthetase staining patterns and β-catenin mutations in 15 typical hepatocellular adenomas, 5 atypical hepatocellular neoplasms and 60 hepatocellular carcinomas. Glutamine synthetase staining was classified into one of three patterns: (a) diffuse homogeneous: moderate to strong cytoplasmic staining in more than 90% of lesional cells, without a map-like pattern, (b) diffuse heterogeneous: moderate to strong staining in 50–90% of lesional cells, without a map-like pattern, and (c) patchy: moderate to strong staining in <50% of lesional cells (often perivascular), or weak staining irrespective of extent, and all other staining patterns (including negative cases). Sanger sequencing of CTNNB1 exon 3 was performed in all cases. Of hepatocellular tumors with diffuse glutamine synthetase staining (homogeneous or heterogeneous), an exon 3 β-catenin mutation was detected in 33% (2/6) of typical hepatocellular adenoma, 75% (3/4) of atypical hepatocellular neoplasm and 17% (8/47) of hepatocellular carcinomas. An exon 3 mutation was also observed in 15% (2/13) of hepatocellular carcinomas with patchy glutamine synthetase staining. The results show a modest correlation between diffuse glutamine synthetase immunostaining and exon 3 β-catenin mutations in hepatocellular adenoma and hepatocellular carcinoma with discrepancy rates exceeding 50% in both hepatocellular adenoma and hepatocellular carcinoma. The interpretation of β-catenin activation based on glutamine synthetase staining should be done with caution, and the undetermined significance of various glutamine synthetase patterns should be highlighted in pathology reports.

No abstract