Skip to main content
. 2015 Apr 1;90(3):701–715. doi: 10.1007/s00204-015-1488-7

Table 2.

Histopathology grades of liver

Eosinophilic alterationa Nuclear dysmorphologyb Fatty change
Grade 0 Grades 1, 2 Grade 0 Grades 1, 2 Grade 0 Grades 1, 2, 3, 4
Males
 Control 10 0 10 0 10 0
 PFOA 14 6 13 7 16 4
Eosinophilic alteration Nuclear dysmorphologyb Fatty change
Grades 0, 1 Grades 2, 3 Grade 0 Grades 1, 2 Grade 0 Grades 1, 2, 3
Females
 Control 7 3 9 0 10 0
 PFOA 11 8 12 7 17 2

Grades were defined through a first blinded screening of sections and represent a range for focus of eosinophilic alteration (left) from no (grade 0), moderate (grade 1), to strong (grade 3); a range of nuclear dysmorphology, e.g., anisokaryosis/karyomegaly (middle) from no (grade 0), moderate (grade 1), to strong (grade 2) and a range of fatty change (right) from no (grade 0), moderate (grade 2), to strong (grade 4). In this distribution table, numbers are counts of perinatally control and PFOA-exposed (300 and 3000 µg PFOA/kg body weight/day) individual males (upper) and females (bottom) with a given grade. Results for both PFOA dose groups were similar, and data have been combined for statistical power

aThe distribution in the PFOA-exposed males versus control males is nearly statistically significant (p = 0.07) in a two-tailed Fisher’s exact test

bThe distribution in the PFOA-exposed animals versus control animals in both males and females is nearly statistically significant (for both p = 0.06) in a two-tailed Fisher’s exact test