Chemokines represent a major mediator of innate immunity and play a key role in the selective recruitment of cells during localized inflammatory responses. Beyond critical extracellular mediators of leukocyte trafficking, chemokines and their cognate receptors are expressed by a variety of resident and infiltrating cells (monocytes, lymphocytes, NK cells, mast cells, and NKT cells). Chemokines represent ideal candidates for mechanistic studies (particularly in murine models) to better understand the pathogenesis of chronic inflammation and possibly become biomarkers of disease. Nonetheless, therapeutic approaches targeting chemokines have led to unsatisfactory results in rheumatoid arthritis, while biologics against pro-inflammatory cytokines are being used worldwide with success. In this comprehensive review we will discuss the evidence supporting the involvement of chemokines and their specific receptors in mediating the effector cell response, utilizing the autoimmune/primary biliary cholangitis setting as a paradigm.

Primary liver carcinomas with both hepatocytic and cholangiocytic differentiation have been referred to as "combined (or mixed) hepatocellular-cholangiocarcinoma." These tumors, although described over 100 years ago, have attracted greater attention recently because of interest in possible stem cell origin and perhaps because of greater frequency and clinical recognition. Currently, because of a lack of common terminology in the literature, effective treatment and predictable outcome data have been challenging to accrue. This article represents a consensus document from an international community of pathologists, radiologists, and clinicians who have studied and reported on these tumors and recommends a working terminology for diagnostic and research approaches for further study and evaluation.

Conclusion

It is recommended that diagnosis is based on routine histopathology with hematoxylin and eosin (H&E); immunostains are supportive, but not essential for diagnosis. (Hepatology 2018;68:113-126).

Background and aim

A recently carried out randomized controlled trial showed the benefit of a novel 20-G fine-needle biopsy (FNB) over a 25-G fine-needle aspiration (FNA) needle. The current study evaluated the reproducibility of these findings among expert academic and non-academic pathologists.

Methods

This study was a side-study of the ASPRO (ASpiration versus PROcore) study. Five centers retrieved 74 (59%) consecutive FNB and 51 (41%) FNA samples from the ASPRO study according to randomization; 64 (51%) pancreatic and 61 (49%) lymph node specimens. Samples were re-reviewed by five expert academic and five non-academic pathologists and rated in terms of sample quality and diagnosis. Ratings were compared between needles, expert academic and non-academic pathologists, target lesions, and cytology versus histological specimens.

Results

Besides a higher diagnostic accuracy, FNB also provided for a better agreement on diagnosing malignancy (ĸ = 0.59 vs ĸ = 0.76, P < 0.001) and classification according to Bethesda (ĸ = 0.45 vs ĸ = 0.61, P < 0.001). This equally applied for expert academic and non-academic pathologists and for pancreatic and lymph node specimens. Sample quality was also rated higher for FNB, but agreement ranged from poor (ĸ = 0.04) to fair (ĸ = 0.55). Histology provided better agreement than cytology, but only when a core specimen was obtained with FNB (P = 0.004 vs P = 0.432).

Conclusion

This study shows that the 20-G FNB outperforms the 25-G FNA needle in terms of diagnostic agreement, independent of the background and experience of the pathologist. This endorses use of the 20-G FNB needle in both expert and lower volume EUS centers.