ArticleDiagnostic pathology2012
The diagnostic value of arginase-1 immunostaining in differentiating hepatocellular carcinoma from metastatic carcinoma and cholangiocarcinoma as compared to HepPar-1.
Article in Diagnostic pathology, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 40 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
40 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 117 citations in OpenAlex.
- Criteria for preclinical models of cholangiocarcinoma: scientific and medical relevance.Nature reviews. Gastroenterology & hepatology · 2023Guideline
- Meta-analysis of gene expression profiles identifies differential biomarkers for hepatocellular carcinoma and cholangiocarcinoma.Tumour biology : the journal of the International Society for Oncodevelopmental Biology and Medicine · 2016Pooled it
- Emerging role of proteomics in advancing diagnosis, prognosis, and treatment of liver cancer.Liver research (Beijing, China) · 2026Review
- Ectopic hepatocellular carcinoma metastasizing to the brain with initial presentation as tumor stroke syndrome: a case report.BJR case reports · 2026Article
- Multimodal biomarkers for early detection and immunotherapy assessment in hepatocellular carcinoma: integrating liquid biopsy, AI-based imaging and tumor immune profiling.Frontiers in genetics · 2026Review
- Prediction of Tumor Progression After Microwave Ablation of Hepatocellular Carcinoma by Contrast-Enhanced Ultrasound Combined with Immunohistochemical Markers.Journal of hepatocellular carcinoma · 2026Article
- [N-cadherin as a novel diagnostic marker : Differentiation of primary liver tumours from metastases of an extrahepatic primary tumour].Pathologie (Heidelberg, Germany) · 2025Article
- An Update of Immunohistochemistry in Hepatocellular Carcinoma.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Distinct chromosome abnormality patterns for differential diagnosis of hepatocellular carcinoma and cholangiocarcinoma.PloS one · 2025Article
- Combined Salivary Proteome Profiling and Machine Learning Analysis Provides Insight into Molecular Signature for Autoimmune Liver Diseases Classification.International journal of molecular sciences · 2023Article
- Review
- Decreased ARG1 expression as an adverse prognostic phenotype in non-alcoholic non-virus-related hepatocellular carcinoma.Virchows Archiv : an international journal of pathology · 2022Article
- Large-Scale Tissue Microarray Evaluation Corroborates High Specificity of High-Level Arginase-1 Immunostaining for Hepatocellular Carcinoma.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Article
- The prognostic value of arginase-1 and glypican-3 expression levels in patients after surgical intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma resection.World journal of surgical oncology · 2021Article
- Arginase-1 and P-glycoprotein are downregulated in canine hepatocellular carcinoma.Journal of veterinary science · 2021Article
- Scirrhous Hepatocellular Carcinoma: Systematic Review and Pooled Data Analysis of Clinical, Radiological, and Histopathological Features.Journal of hepatocellular carcinoma · 2021Article
- The Diagnostic Value of Arginase-1, FTCD, and MOC-31 Expression in Early Detection of Hepatocellular Carcinoma (HCC) and in Differentiation Between HCC and Metastatic Adenocarcinoma to the Liver.Journal of gastrointestinal cancer · 2020Article
- The significance of arginase-1 expression in the diagnosis of liver cancer: A protocol for a systematic review.Medicine · 2020Article
- Elevated levels of circulating ITIH4 are associated with hepatocellular carcinoma with nonalcoholic fatty liver disease: from pig model to human study.BMC cancer · 2019Article
- Histopathological characteristics of needle core biopsy and surgical specimens from patients with solitary hepatocellular carcinoma or intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma.World journal of gastrointestinal oncology · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe ability to distinguish hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) from metastatic carcinoma (MC) involving the liver and cholangiocarcinoma (CC) by immunohistochemistry has been limited by the lack of a reliable positive marker for hepatocellular differentiation. Arginase-1 is a marker for HCC recently described in some literature.
aimTo examine the immunohistochemical staining of arginase-1 in cases of HCC, MC involving the liver and CC as compared to hepatocyte paraffin antigen -1 (HepPar-1) in an attempt to further define the diagnostic utility of arginase-1 in differentiating these tumors. MATERIALS AND
methodsA comparative immunohistochemical study of arginase-1 and HepPar-1expression was performed in 50 HCC cases, 38 cases of MC to the liver from varying sites, 12 cases of CC and 10 specimens of normal liver tissues. The predictive capacity of arginase-1 and HepPar-1 staining was determined using sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value calculations.
resultsAll normal liver tissues (no=10), non- neoplastic cirrhotic liver tissues adjacent to HCC (no=42) as well as those adjacent to MC (no= 9) showed diffuse and strong immunostaining for both arginase-1 and HepPar-1. Arginase-1 demonstrated positive immunoreactivity in 42 of 50 (84%) cases of HCC compared with 35 of 50 (70%) for HepPar-1. Only one of 38 (2.6%) cases of MC and one of 12 (8.3%) cases of CC showed positive immunoreactivity for arginase-1. In contrast, HepPar-1 immunoreactivity was detected in 6 of 38 (15.8%) cases of MC and in 2 of 12 (16.7%) cases of CC. Arginase -1 showed a significantly higher sensitivity for HCC diagnosis (84%) compared to HepPar -1(70%) (p=0.016). The specificity of arginase-1 for HCC diagnosis was higher (96%) than that of HepPar -1 (84%); nevertheless, this was not statistically significant (p=0.109). Howerver, the combination of both immunomarkers for the diagnosis of HCC, raised the specificity to 100%.
conclusionArginase-1 immunostaining has a higher sensitivity and specificity than HepPar-1 for HCC diagnosis. Furthermore, the combined use of arginase-1 and HepPar-1 can provide a potentially promising tool to improve the accuracy in distinguishing HCC from metastatic carcinoma and cholangiocarcinoma. VIRTUAL SLIDES: The virtual slide(s) for this article can be found here: http://www.diagnosticpathology.diagnomx.eu/vs/9991436558072434.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.