Hyperactive gp130/STAT3-driven gastric tumourigenesis promotes submucosal tertiary lymphoid structure development

Tertiary lymphoid structures (TLSs) display phenotypic and functional characteristics of secondary lymphoid organs, and often develop in tissues affected by chronic inflammation, as well as in certain inflammation-associated cancers where they are prognostic of improved patient survival. However, the mechanisms that govern the development of tumour-associated TLSs remain ill-defined. Here, we observed tumour-associated TLSs in a preclinical mouse model (gp130F/F) of gastric cancer, where tumourigenesis is dependent on hyperactive STAT3 signalling through the common IL-6 family signalling receptor, gp130. Gastric tumourigenesis was associated with the development of B and T cell-rich submucosal lymphoid aggregates, containing CD21+ cellular networks and high endothelial venules. Temporally, TLS formation coincided with the development of gastric adenomas and induction of homeostatic chemokines including Cxcl13, Ccl19 and Ccl21. Reflecting the requirement of gp130-driven STAT3 signalling for gastric tumourigenesis, submucosal TLS development was also STAT3-dependent, but independent of the cytokine IL-17 which has been linked with lymphoid neogenesis in chronic inflammation and autoimmunity. Interestingly, upregulated lymphoid chemokine expression and TLS formation were also observed in a chronic gastritis model induced by Helicobacter felis infection. Tumour-associated TLSs were also observed in patients with intestinal-type gastric cancer, and a gene signature linked with TLS development in gp130F/F mice was associated with advanced clinical disease, but was not prognostic of patient survival. Collectively, our in vivo data reveal that hyperactive gp130-STAT3 signalling closely links gastric tumourigenesis with lymphoid neogenesis, and while a TLS gene signature was associated with advanced gastric cancer in patients, it did not indicate a favourable prognosis

Role of aetiology in the progression, regression, and parenchymal remodelling of liver disease: implications for liver biopsy interpretation

Clinicopathological concepts on acute and chronic liver disease have evolved rapidly during the last few years, with advances in general and specific treatment options and improved patient outcomes. The old paradigm of ‘irreversibility’ of cirrhosis had been challenged in major ways, and the validity of the usage of the term ‘cirrhosis’ has come into question. This paper addresses aetiology-based clinicopathological concepts and features that may deserve attention because they may determine disease outcome and, specifically, patterns of regression and remodelling. A variety of therapeutic interventions may influence remaining disease features after elimination of damaging agents (virus, alcohol, etc.), and determine the final clinical outcome including the risk of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). New concepts create new responsibilities and opportunities for the pathologist to contribute to the understanding of liver pathology and communicate this with clinical colleagues and researchers

Beyond "Cirrhosis" A Proposal From the International Liver Pathology Study Group

Cirrhosis is a moiphologic term that has been used for almost 200 years to denote the end stage of a variety of chronic liver diseases. The term implies a condition with adverse prognosis due to the well-known complications of portal hypertension, hepatocellular carcinoma, and liver failure. However, recent advances in the diagnosis and treatment of chronic liver diseases have changed the natural history of cirrhosis significantly. This consensus document by the International Liver Pathology Study Group challenges the usefulness of the word cirrhosis in modern medicine and suggests that this is an appropriate time to consider discontinuing the use of this term. The role of pathologists should evolve to the diagnosis of advanced stage of chronic liver disease, with emphasis on etiology, grade of activity, features suggestive of progression or regression, presence of other diseases, and risk factors for malignancy, within the perspective of an integrated clinicopathologic assessment

Consensus Recommendations for Histological Criteria of Autoimmune Hepatitis from the International AIH Pathology Group

Background & Aims Diagnostic histological criteria for autoimmune hepatitis (AIH) have not been clearly established. Previously published criteria focused mainly on chronic AIH, in which inflammatory changes mainly occur in portal/periportal regions and may not be applicable to acute presentation of AIH, in which inflammatory changes are typically predominantly lobular in location. International consensus criteria for the diagnosis and assessment of disease severity in both acute and chronic AIH are thus urgently needed. Methods Seventeen expert liver pathologists convened at an international workshop and subsequently used a modified Delphi panel approach to establish consensus criteria for the histopathological diagnosis of AIH. Results The consensus view is that liver biopsy should remain standard for diagnosing AIH. AIH is considered likely, if there is a predominantly portal lymphoplasmacytic hepatitis with more than mild interface activity and/or more than mild lobular hepatitis in the absence of histological features suggestive of another liver disease. AIH is also considered likely if there is predominantly lobular hepatitis with or without centrilobular necroinflammation and at least one of the following features: portal lymphoplasmacytic hepatitis, interface hepatitis or portal-based fibrosis, in the absence of histological features suggestive of another liver disease. Emperipolesis and hepatocellular rosettes are not regarded as being specific for AIH. Conclusions The criteria proposed in this consensus statement provide a uniform approach to the histological diagnosis of AIH, which is relevant for patients with an acute as well as a chronic presentation and to more accurately reflect the current understanding of liver pathology in AIH

Stereological analysis of liver biopsy histology sections as a reference standard for validating non-invasive liver fat fraction measurements by MRI

© 2016 St. Pierre et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.Background and Aims: Validation of non-invasive methods of liver fat quantification requires a reference standard. However, using standard histopathology assessment of liver biopsies is problematical because of poor repeatability. We aimed to assess a stereological method of measuring volumetric liver fat fraction (VLFF) in liver biopsies and to use the method to validate a magnetic resonance imaging method for measurement of VLFF. Methods: VLFFs were measured in 59 subjects (1) by three independent analysts using a stereological point counting technique combined with the Delesse principle on liver biopsy histological sections and (2) by three independent analysts using the HepaFat-Scan® technique on magnetic resonance images of the liver. Bland Altman statistics and intraclass correlation (IC) were used to assess the repeatability of each method and the bias between the methods of liver fat fraction measurement. Results: Inter-analyst repeatability coefficients for the stereology and HepaFat-Scan® methods were 8.2 (95% CI 7.7-8.8)% and 2.4 (95% CI 2.2-2.5)% VLFF respectively. IC coefficients were 0.86 (95% CI 0.69-0.93) and 0.990 (95% CI 0.985-0.994) respectively. Small biases (=3.4%) were observable between two pairs of analysts using stereology while no significant biases were observable between any of the three pairs of analysts using Hepa-Fat-Scan®. A bias of 1.4±0.5% VLFF was observed between the HepaFat-Scan® method and the stereological method. Conclusions: Repeatability of the stereological method is superior to the previously reported performance of assessment of hepatic steatosis by histopathologists and is a suitable reference standard for validating non-invasive methods of measurement of VLFF

Limits of agreement between liver fat fraction measurements.

<p>A) MRI HIST-MORPH fat fraction plotted against HIST-MORPH fat fraction for the 59 subjects. The solid line is the line of equivalence. B) The difference between the natural logarithm of HIST-MORPH and the natural logarithm of MRI HIST-MORPH plotted against the mean of the two logarithms for the 59 subjects. The solid lines indicate the 95% limits of agreement and the dashed line is the mean difference between the logarithms of the two methods.</p