In retrospect, all groups were compared with the results of histological markers (staging and grading) and the immunohistochemical markers K7, glypican-3, and HepPar-1. Table 1 Overview of the canine histological classification. Groups K19 expression Grading 0 to 3 Staging 0 to 2 K7 expression Glypican-3 expression HepPar-1 expression Normal liver

(n = 5) 0% 0 0 0% 0% 100% Nodular hyperplasia (n = 4) 0% 0 0 0% 0% 100% Hepatocellular tumour K19 negative (n = 30) 0-5% 1 (n = 24) 2 (n = 6) 0 0% (n = 29) 5% (n = 1) 0% 50-75% (n = 2) 90-100% (n = 28) Hepatocellular tumour K19 positive (n = 4) 10-90% 3 1 – 2 0% (n = 2) 5% (n = 2) 30-100% 0% Grouping based on histology and K19 expression in https://www.selleckchem.com/products/cx-4945-silmitasertib.html hepatocytes compared with the results of the grading, staging, and clinicopathological markers Nodular hyperplasia (n = 4) No K19 expression was observed MM-102 mouse in the nodular hyperplasia group (Figure 1A). Histologically, lesions consisted of double-layered cords of well-differentiated hepatocytes and slight compression

of the surrounding parenchyma. Cells had a similar shape and size, indicating a good uniformity with no cell pleomorphism. No multinucleated hepatocytes were present. There was no mitotic activity and portal areas were present (Figure 1B). All nodular hyperplasias were negative for Glypican-3 (Figure 1C) and strongly positive for HepPar-1 (Figure 1D). Figure 1 Examples of ARS-1620 order canine nodular hyperplasia. Immunohistochemical staining of K19 negative cells is shown in (A). HE staining,

double layered cords of well differentiated hepatocytes are shown in (B). Absence of immunohistochemical staining for glypican-3 is shown in (C). Positive immunohistochemical staining for HepPar-1 is shown in (D). Hepatocellular tumour K19 negative (n = 30) K19 expression in none or less than five percent of the tumour cells was observed ALOX15 in 30 of the 34 hepatocellular tumours (88%) (Figure 2A). Histologically, these tumours formed trabeculae of well differentiated hepatocytes. Cells were uniform in shape and size and with none to little pleomorphism. The nuclei were round and regular with minimal nuclear irregularity; the nucleoli were uniform and sometimes prominent. There were no multinucleated cells and mitotic figures were absent or very rare (Figure 2B). In two cases the tumour cells were not of the same size and were therefore classified as stage two. However the majority of cells were well differentiated and occasionally multinucleated cells could be seen. All tumours were negative for glypican-3 (Figure 2C) and strongly positive for HepPar-1 (Figure 2D). Figure 2 Examples of canine K19 negative hepatocellular tumours. Immunohistochemical staining of K19 with a negative tumour field (left) and positive reactive ductular proliferation at the periphery of the tumour (arrow) is shown in (A). HE staining, trabeculae of well-differentiated hepatocytes with a uniform appearance are shown in (B).