Linda D. Ferrell

Nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) is characterized by hepatic steatosis in the absence of a history of significant alcohol use or other known liver disease. Nonalcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH) is the progressive form of NAFLD. The Pathology Committee of the NASH Clinical Research Network designed and validated a histological feature scoring system that addresses the full spectrum of lesions of NAFLD and proposed a NAFLD activity score (NAS) for use in clinical trials. The scoring system comprised 14 histological features, 4 of which were evaluated semi-quantitatively: steatosis (0-3), lobular inflammation (0-2), hepatocellular ballooning (0-2), and fibrosis (0-4). Another nine features were recorded as present or absent. An anonymized study set of 50 cases (32 from adult hepatology services, 18 from pediatric hepatology services) was assembled, coded, and circulated. For the validation study, agreement on scoring and a diagnostic categorization ("NASH," "borderline," or "not NASH") were evaluated by using weighted kappa statistics. Inter-rater agreement on adult cases was: 0.84 for fibrosis, 0.79 for steatosis, 0.56 for injury, and 0.45 for lobular inflammation. Agreement on diagnostic category was 0.61. Using multiple logistic regression, five features were independently associated with the diagnosis of NASH in adult biopsies: steatosis (P = .009), hepatocellular ballooning (P = .0001), lobular inflammation (P = .0001), fibrosis (P = .0001), and the absence of lipogranulomas (P = .001). The proposed NAS is the unweighted sum of steatosis, lobular inflammation, and hepatocellular ballooning scores. In conclusion, we present a strong scoring system and NAS for NAFLD and NASH with reasonable inter-rater reproducibility that should be useful for studies of both adults and children with any degree of NAFLD. NAS of > or =5 correlated with a diagnosis of NASH, and biopsies with scores of less than 3 were diagnosed as "not NASH."

The precise staging of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) based on the size and number of lesions that predict recurrence after orthotopic liver transplantation (OLT) has not been clearly established. We therefore analyzed the outcome of 70 consecutive patients with cirrhosis and HCC who underwent OLT over a 12-year period at our institution. Pathologic tumor staging of the explanted liver was based on the American Tumor Study Group modified Tumor-Node-Metastases (TNM) Staging Classification. Tumor recurrence occurred in 11.4% of patients after OLT. The Kaplan-Meier survival rates at 1 and 5 years were 91.3% and 72.4%, respectively, for patients with pT1 or pT2 HCC; and 82.4% and 74.1%, respectively, for pT3 tumors (P =.87). Patients with pT4 tumors, however, had a significantly worse 1-year survival of 33.3% (P =.0001). An alpha-fetoprotein (AFP) level > 1,000 ng/mL, total tumor diameter > 8 cm, age > or = 55 years and poorly differentiated histologic grade were also significant predictors for reduced survival in univariate analysis. Only pT4 stage and total tumor diameter remained statistically significant in multivariate analysis. Patients with HCC meeting the following criteria: solitary tumor < or = 6.5 cm, or < or = 3 nodules with the largest lesion < or = 4.5 cm and total tumor diameter < or = 8 cm, had survival rates of 90% and 75.2%, at 1 and 5 years, respectively, after OLT versus a 50% 1-year survival for patients with tumors exceeding these limits (P =.0005). We conclude that the current criteria for OLT based on tumor size may be modestly expanded while still preserving excellent survival after OLT.

A panel of recognized experts in liver transplantation pathology, hepatology, and surgery was convened for the purpose of developing a consensus document for the grading of acute liver allograft rejection that is scientifically correct, simple, and reproducible and clinically useful. Over a period of 6 months pertinent issues were discussed via electronic communication media and a consensus conference was held in Banff, Canada in the summer of 1995. Based on previously published data and the combined experience of the group, the panel agreed on a common nomenclature and a set of histopathological criteria for the grading of acute liver allograft rejection, and a preferred method of reporting. Adoption of this internationally accepted, common grading system by scientific journals will minimize the problems associated with the use of multiple different local systems. Modifications of this working document to incorporate chronic rejection are expected in the future.

We previously proposed modified staging criteria for predicting acceptable outcome after orthotopic liver transplantation (OLT) for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). These were solitary tumor < or = 6.5 cm, or three or fewer nodules with the largest lesion < or = 4.5 cm and total tumor diameter < or = 8 cm, without gross vascular invasion (University of California, San Francisco [UCSF] criteria). In this study, we further evaluated the performance of the Milan criteria (solitary tumor < or = 5 cm, or three or fewer lesions none > 3 cm), the UCSF criteria, and the Pittsburgh modified tumor-node-metastasis (TNM) criteria. Pathologic HCC staging according to each set of criteria was performed in 70 patients. The difference in survival when comparing 24 patients with HCC exceeding Milan criteria versus 46 patients meeting Milan criteria did not reach statistical significance (HR, 2.0; P = .12). Using our definition for acceptable 2-year survival to be > or = 70%, the 14 patients (20%) meeting UCSF criteria but exceeding Milan criteria had a 2-year survival of 86% (95% CI, 54% to 96%). Survival for Pittsburgh stage I, II, and IIIA patients as a group was significantly better than for stages IIIB and IVA patients combined (HR, 4.2; P = .007), and similar to survival for patients meeting UCSF criteria. Advanced tumor exceeding UCSF criteria served reasonably well as a surrogate marker for poorly differentiated grade and microvascular invasion. In conclusion, our analyses suggest that UCSF criteria better predict acceptable posttransplant outcome than Milan criteria. UCSF criteria confer a different advantage over Pittsburgh criteria, which require information on microvascular invasion that is difficult to ascertain preoperatively without the attendant risk of biopsy.