4.5 Article

Papillary glioneuronal tumor

Journal

PATHOLOGY RESEARCH AND PRACTICE
Volume 202, Issue 2, Pages 107-112

Publisher

ELSEVIER GMBH, URBAN & FISCHER VERLAG
DOI: 10.1016/j.prp.2005.11.008

Keywords

papillary glioneuronal tumor; extraventricular neurocytoma; oligodendroglioma mimic; synaptophysin; GFAP

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The descriptive term papillary glioneuronal tumor (PGNT) has been repeatedly applied to a morphologic subset of low-grade mixed glial-neuronal neoplasia of juvenile and young adult patients. We report on a 13-year-old boy with PGNT of the left temporal lobe, who presented with headaches and a single generalized seizure. On magnetic resonance imaging, tumor was seen as a large, moderately enhancing paraventricular mass with cyst-mural nodule configuration and slight midline shift. Perifocal edema was virtually absent. Gross total resection could be performed, followed by an uneventful recovery. Histologically, the tumor exhibited similar, if not identical, features as reported previously. These comprised a patterned biphasic mixture of sheets of synaptophysin-expressing small round cells and pseudorosettes of GFAP-positive rudimentary astrocytes along vascular cores. Focally, the latter imprinted a pseudopapillary aspect on this otherwise solid lesion. Both cellular components expressed non-polysialylated neural cell adhesion molecule (NCAM)-L species, and several overlapping areas of synaptophysin and GFAP immunoreactivity were present. The mean MIB-1 labeling index remained below 1%. Signs of anaplasia, in particular mitotic figures, endothelial proliferation, or necrosis were consistently lacking. We perceive PGNT as a clinically and morphologically well-delineated subgroup of extraventricular neurocytic neoplasia, whose paradigmatic presentation may allow for consideration as an entity. (c) 2005 Elsevier GmbH. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available