4.5 Article

Osteoclast-type giant cell neoplasm of salivary gland. A microdissection-based comparative genotyping assay and literature review - Extraskeletal giant cell tumor of bone or osteoclast-type giant cell carcinoma?

期刊

AMERICAN JOURNAL OF SURGICAL PATHOLOGY
卷 28, 期 7, 页码 953-961

出版社

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1097/00000478-200407000-00017

关键词

giant cell; osteoclast; salivary gland tumor; giant cell tumor; osteoclastic-type giant cell neoplasm; osteoclastoma; giant cell carcinoma; immunohistochemistry; microsatellite; loss of heterozygosity

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Primary salivary gland tumors resembling giant cell tumor of bone are very rare and have unsettled histogenesis. Both mesenchymal and epithelial origins have been suggested. We review 14 cases in the English-language literature and report another case, the first of which to be studied by microdissection-based microsatellite analysis. One-half of the tumors have been associated with a carcinoma, usually salivary duct carcinoma and carcinoma ex pleomorphic adenoma. Significant differences between this tumor and giant cell tumor of bone were observed. Unlike giant cell tumor of bone, in which the nuclei of the mononuclear and giant cells are similar, those of salivary gland show obvious differences between the nuclei of mononuclear cells and osteoclastic giant cells. In addition and in contrast to giant cell tumor of bone, the mononuclear cells of giant cell tumor of salivary gland express epithelial markers (epithelial membrane antigen, EMA; carcinoembryonic antigen, CEA) and androgen receptor. Genotypically, the microsatellite pattern of the giant cell component is more akin to the carcinomatous component and does not resemble giant cell tumor of bone. Biologically, giant cell tumor of salivary gland tends to be more aggressive than giant cell tumor of bone. We conclude that giant cell tumor of salivary gland is an unusual carcinoma that is not related to giant cell tumor of bone.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据