HepPar1, MOC-31, pCEA, mCEA and CD10 for Distinguishing Hepatocellular Carcinoma vs. Metastatic Adenocarcinoma in Liver Fine Needle Aspirates

2006 ◽  
Vol 50 (3) ◽  
pp. 257-262 ◽  
Author(s):  
Luoquan Wang ◽  
Magalis Vuolo ◽  
Mark J. Suhrland ◽  
Kathie Schlesinger
Keyword(s):  
Hepatocellular Carcinoma ◽  
Metastatic Adenocarcinoma ◽  
Fine Needle ◽  
Fine Needle Aspirates

Use of CD34 and Factor VIII To Diagnose Hepatocellular Carcinoma on Fine Needle Aspirates

1998 ◽  
Vol 42 (3) ◽  
pp. 691-696 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shoshana Gottschalk-Sabag ◽  
Noemi Ron ◽  
Tzipporah Glick
Keyword(s):  
Hepatocellular Carcinoma ◽  
Factor Viii ◽  
Fine Needle ◽  
Fine Needle Aspirates

FLOW CYTOMETRIC DNA CONTENT IN FINE NEEDLE ASPIRATES OF HEPATOCELLULAR CARCINOMA TO ASSESS PROGNOSIS

1991 ◽  
Vol 73 (2-3) ◽  
pp. 42a-42a
Author(s):  
Michèle Perrin-Cottier ◽  
Claude Jouffre ◽  
Odile Sabido ◽  
Ivan Maubon ◽  
Olivier Dumas ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Hepatocellular Carcinoma ◽  
Dna Content ◽  
Fine Needle ◽  
Fine Needle Aspirates ◽  
Flow Cytometric

Fine-Needle Aspirates of Adenocarcinoma/Metastatic Carcinoma That Resemble Hepatocellular Carcinoma: Correlating Cytologic Features and Performance in the College of American Pathologists Nongynecologic Cytology Program

2005 ◽  
Vol 129 (10) ◽  
pp. 1217-1221
Author(s):  
Andrew A. Renshaw ◽  
Jennifer Haja ◽  
David C. Wilbur ◽  
Theodore R. Miller
Keyword(s):  
Hepatocellular Carcinoma ◽  
Fine Needle Aspiration ◽  
Needle Aspiration ◽  
Metastatic Carcinoma ◽  
Time Range ◽  
Fine Needle ◽  
Fine Needle Aspirates ◽  
Granular Cytoplasm ◽  
The Difference ◽  
And Performance

Abstract Context.—The cytologic features of adenocarcinoma/ metastatic carcinoma in liver fine-needle aspirates are well described. We review the cytologic findings from 16 aspirates of adenocarcinoma/metastatic carcinoma that were frequently misclassified as hepatocellular carcinomas and compare them with 17 cases that were rarely misclassified. Objective.—To compare the cytologic features of adenocarcinoma/metastatic carcinoma in fine-needle aspiration specimens of the liver that were frequently misclassified as hepatocellular carcinoma with those of aspirates that were rarely misclassified. Design.—We reviewed a total of 1712 interpretations from 33 different cases of adenocarcinoma/metastatic carcinoma tumor in liver fine-needle aspiration specimens in the College of American Pathologists Nongynecologic Cytology Program and correlated the cytologic features with performance in the program. Results.—Overall, cases that were frequently misclassified as hepatocellular carcinoma were misclassified on average 26% of the time (range, 13%–54%), while infrequently misclassified cases were interpreted as hepatocellular carcinoma on average 0.7% of the time (range, 0%– 3%). The difference was statistically significant (P < .001). On review, cases that were frequently misclassified most often had moderate amounts of granular cytoplasm (16/16 cases) and round nuclei with even chromatin (13/16 cases). Trabeculae (3/16 cases), bare nuclei (2/16 cases), and endothelial wrapping (1/16 cases) were also occasionally present. In contrast, cases that were rarely misclassified were more likely to have areas with cells showing scant cytoplasm that were crowded and overlapped or molded (13/17 cases) and contained dark hyperchromatic chromatin (13/17 cases) compared to cases that were frequently misclassified (P < .001 and P = .002, respectively). Trabeculae (2/17) and bare nuclei (2/17 cases) were also rarely present. Conclusion.—Cases of adenocarcinoma/metastatic carcinoma with moderate amounts of granular cytoplasm and round nuclei with even chromatin are frequently misclassified as hepatocellular carcinoma. Recognition of this problem, attention to cytologic criteria, and frequent use of immunohistochemical studies and core biopsy may help avoid this pitfall.

Cytomorphologic and DNA Cytometric Features of Hepatocellular Carcinoma in Fine Needle Aspirates

1997 ◽  
Vol 41 (2) ◽  
pp. 435-442 ◽  
Author(s):  
Pichet Sampatanukul ◽  
Gregor Mikuz ◽  
Sachapan Israsena ◽  
Kaesorn Vajarapongse ◽  
Hans Feichtinger
Keyword(s):  
Hepatocellular Carcinoma ◽  
Fine Needle ◽  
Fine Needle Aspirates

scholarly journals Cell features and patterns in fine-needle aspirates of hepatocellular carcinoma

Cancer ◽  
1986 ◽  
Vol 58 (2) ◽  
pp. 321-328 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sanai Noguchi ◽  
Reiko Yamamoto ◽  
Masaharu Tatsuta ◽  
Hiroshi Kasugai ◽  
Shigeru Okuda ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Hepatocellular Carcinoma ◽  
Fine Needle ◽  
Fine Needle Aspirates

Cytologic aspect of fibrolamellar hepatocellular carcinoma in fine-needle aspirates

1999 ◽  
Vol 21 (3) ◽  
pp. 180-187 ◽  
Author(s):  
Miguel P�rez-Guillermo ◽  
Nuria Alberti Masgrau ◽  
Jos� Garc�a-Solano ◽  
Joaqu�n Sola-P�rez ◽  
Pedro de Agust�n y de Agust�n
Keyword(s):  
Hepatocellular Carcinoma ◽  
Fibrolamellar Hepatocellular Carcinoma ◽  
Fine Needle ◽  
Fine Needle Aspirates

Fine-Needle Aspirates of Hepatocellular Carcinoma That Are Misclassified as Adenocarcinoma: Correlating Cytologic Features and Performance in the College of American Pathologists Nongynecologic Cytology Program

2006 ◽  
Vol 130 (1) ◽  
pp. 19-22
Author(s):  
Andrew A. Renshaw ◽  
Jennifer Haja ◽  
David C. Wilbur ◽  
Theodore R. Miller
Keyword(s):  
Hepatocellular Carcinoma ◽  
Needle Aspiration ◽  
Time Range ◽  
Common Pattern ◽  
Fine Needle ◽  
Fine Needle Aspirates ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Granular Cytoplasm ◽  
The Difference ◽  
And Performance

Abstract Context.—The cytologic features of hepatocellular carcinoma in fine-needle aspirates are well described. While some cases are easily distinguished from adenocarcinoma, poorly differentiated tumors can be difficult to differentiate. We reviewed the cytologic findings for 9 aspirates from cases of hepatocellular carcinoma that were frequently misclassified as adenocarcinoma and compared them with another 10 cases of hepatocellular carcinoma that were rarely misclassified. Objective.—To compare the cytologic features of cases of hepatocellular carcinoma in fine-needle aspirates that were both rarely and frequently misclassified as adenocarcinoma. Design.—We reviewed a total of 762 interpretations from 19 different cases of hepatocellular carcinoma in liver fine-needle aspiration specimens in the College of American Pathologists Nongynecologic Cytology Program and correlated the cytologic features with performance in the program. Results.—Overall, cases that were frequently misclassified as adenocarcinoma were misclassified 39% of the time (range, 18%–70%), while cases that were rarely misclassified were classified as adenocarcinoma 2% of the time (range, 0%–8%). The difference was statistically significant (P < .001). On review, 4 cytologic patterns were found. The most common pattern for cases that were rarely misclassified was prominent trabeculae of cells and endothelial cells wrapping the trabeculae (6/10 cases vs 2/9 cases that were frequently misclassified). The most common pattern among cases that were frequently misclassified was clusters of cells with granular cytoplasm and associated stripped nuclei (5/9 cases vs 2/10 cases that were rarely misclassified). However, the distribution of neither pattern was significantly different (P = .16 for both). One case with large atypical granular cells, as seen in the fibrolamellar variant, was rarely misclassified. The remaining 3 cases (2 frequently misclassified, 1 rarely misclassified) had a nonspecific a pattern of cells with granular cytoplasm without obvious trabeculae or stripped nuclei. Conclusion.—Correctly classifying hepatocellular carcinoma by cytology alone remains a significant challenge. While some patterns are more common in cases that performed well and other patterns are more common in cases that performed poorly, there was no significant difference in the distribution of these patterns. These results suggest that people should support their interpretations of aspirations with either immunologic evidence, biopsy evidence, or review by an experienced cytopathologist. Continued educational efforts in this area may be of value.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document