-
Head and Neck Pathology Mar 2021This article reviews odontogenic and developmental oral lesions encountered in the gnathic region of pediatric patients. The process of odontogenesis is discussed as it... (Review)
Review
This article reviews odontogenic and developmental oral lesions encountered in the gnathic region of pediatric patients. The process of odontogenesis is discussed as it is essential to understanding the pathogenesis of odontogenic tumors. The clinical presentation, microscopic features, and prognosis are addressed for odontogenic lesions in the neonate (dental lamina cysts/gingival cysts of the newborn, congenital (granular cell) epulis of the newborn, melanotic neuroectodermal tumor, choristoma/heterotopia, cysts of foregut origin), lesions associated with unerupted/erupting teeth (hyperplastic dental follicle, eruption cyst, dentigerous cyst, odontogenic keratocyst/keratocystic odonogenic tumor, buccal bifurcation cyst/inflammatory collateral cyst) and pediatric odontogenic hamartomas and tumors (odontoma, ameloblastic fibroma, ameloblastoma, adenomatoid odontogenic tumor, primordial odontogenic tumor). Pediatric odontogenic and developmental oral lesions range from common to rare, but familiarity with these entities is essential due to the varying management implications of these diagnoses.
Topics: Child; Child, Preschool; Female; Humans; Infant; Infant, Newborn; Jaw Diseases; Male; Odontogenesis; Tooth Abnormalities
PubMed: 33723756
DOI: 10.1007/s12105-020-01284-3 -
Modern Pathology : An Official Journal... Jan 2022Mesothelial tumors are classified into benign or preinvasive tumors, and mesotheliomas. The benign or preinvasive group includes adenomatoid tumors, well-differentiated... (Review)
Review
Mesothelial tumors are classified into benign or preinvasive tumors, and mesotheliomas. The benign or preinvasive group includes adenomatoid tumors, well-differentiated papillary mesothelial tumors, and mesothelioma in situ. Malignant tumors are mesotheliomas and can be localized or diffuse. Histological classification of invasive mesotheliomas into three major subtypes-epithelioid, sarcomatoid, and biphasic is prognostically important. It also plays a significant role in the treatment decisions of patients diagnosed with this deadly disease. Grading and subtyping of epithelioid mesotheliomas have been one of the major changes in the recent WHO classification of pleural tumors. Mesothelioma in situ has emerged as a precisely defined clinico-pathologic entity that for diagnosis requires demonstration of loss of BAP1 or MTAP by immunohistochemistry, or CDKN2A homozygous deletion by FISH. The use of these two biomarkers improves the diagnostic sensitivity of effusion specimens and limited tissue samples and is valuable in establishing the diagnosis of epithelioid mesothelioma. In this review, recent changes in the histologic classification of pleural mesothelioma, importance of ancillary diagnostic studies, and molecular characteristics of mesotheliomas are discussed.
Topics: Biomarkers, Tumor; Diagnosis, Differential; Genes, p16; Humans; Mesothelioma, Malignant; Pleura; Pleural Neoplasms; Prognosis; Tumor Suppressor Proteins; Ubiquitin Thiolesterase
PubMed: 34465883
DOI: 10.1038/s41379-021-00895-7 -
Respiratory Medicine Aug 2015Malignant pleural effusion is a frequent situation in pulmonary medicine. However, it is sometimes difficult to recognize the underlying etiology. The aim of this review... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND/PURPOSE
Malignant pleural effusion is a frequent situation in pulmonary medicine. However, it is sometimes difficult to recognize the underlying etiology. The aim of this review is to provide the key characteristics of primary and metastatic pleural neoplasms.
METHODS
A review of the recent literature regarding pleural neoplasia is provided.
RESULTS
Malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) is the commonest primary pleural epithelial tumor showing remarkable histological heterogeneity often with prognostic significance. Various genetic alterations like changes in INK4 locus, NF2, BAP1 but also epigenetic changes are present in MPM. It should be distinguished from atypical mesothelial hyperplasia, mainly through morphological and clinical criteria, and from other rare primary and metastatic tumors, for which immunohistochemistry is rather important. Solitary fibrous tumor, the commonest primary pleural mesenchymal tumor is characterized by STAT6 overexpression. Other primary tumors, like adenomatoid tumor, well-differentiated papillary mesothelioma, synovial sarcoma, vascular tumors, various other sarcomas, thymic tumors and tumors of uncertain histogenesis are rarely encountered in the pleura. In contrast, metastatic disease is the commonest neoplasia of the pleura, and especially lung, breast and lymphoid malignancies.
CONCLUSION
The basic pathological, immunohistochemical and molecular characteristics of these entities are provided in the current review, along with their differential diagnosis.
Topics: Biomarkers, Tumor; Diagnosis, Differential; Humans; Immunohistochemistry; Lung Neoplasms; Mesothelioma; Mesothelioma, Malignant; Pleura; Pleural Neoplasms; Prognosis
PubMed: 26048082
DOI: 10.1016/j.rmed.2015.05.014 -
Modern Pathology : An Official Journal... Jan 2022We report nine examples of a previously undescribed type of peritoneal circumscribed nodular mesothelial tumor characterized by nests or sheets of mesothelial cells with...
We report nine examples of a previously undescribed type of peritoneal circumscribed nodular mesothelial tumor characterized by nests or sheets of mesothelial cells with sharp cell borders and extremely bland, sometimes grooved, nuclei. In some cases, nests were separated by fibrous bands. All patients were women, age range 30-72 years (median 52 years). All tumors were incidental findings during surgery and grossly were either solitary nodules or a few small nodules on the peritoneal surface. Referring pathologic diagnoses included diffuse malignant mesothelioma, localized malignant mesothelioma, well-differentiated papillary mesothelioma, and adenomatoid tumor. No tumor showed BAP1 loss by immunohistochemistry nor deletion of CDKN2A by FISH. RNA-seq revealed that these tumors clustered together and were distinct from peritoneal diffuse malignant mesotheliomas. Very few mutations or translocations were found, none of them recurrent from tumor to tumor, and no tumor showed an abnormality in any of the genes typically mutated/deleted in diffuse malignant mesothelioma. Array CGH on three cases revealed two with a completely flat profile and one with a small deletion at 3q26-3q28. On follow-up (range 5-60, median 34 months), there were no deaths, no recurrences, and no evidence of metastatic disease nor local spread; one case that initially had scattered nodules on the pelvic peritoneum had the same pattern of nodules at a second look operation 2 years later. We propose the name solid papillary mesothelial tumor for these lesions. These appear to be either benign or very low-grade tumors that need to be separated from malignant mesotheliomas.
Topics: Adult; Aged; Carcinoma, Papillary; Chi-Square Distribution; Cluster Analysis; Cohort Studies; Female; Follow-Up Studies; Gene Expression Regulation, Neoplastic; Humans; In Situ Hybridization, Fluorescence; Incidental Findings; Middle Aged; Mutation; Neoplasms, Mesothelial; Peritoneal Neoplasms; Prognosis; Sequence Analysis, RNA; Signal Transduction; Time Factors; Translocation, Genetic
PubMed: 34480081
DOI: 10.1038/s41379-021-00899-3 -
Oral Surgery, Oral Medicine, Oral... Jun 2022Adenomatoid odontogenic tumor (AOT) was classified by the World Health Organization as a mixed odontogenic tumor in 1992 and reclassified without a clear rationale as an...
OBJECTIVE
Adenomatoid odontogenic tumor (AOT) was classified by the World Health Organization as a mixed odontogenic tumor in 1992 and reclassified without a clear rationale as an epithelium-only tumor in 2005. The purpose of this study was to investigate if there was any evidence to suggest AOT might be a mixed odontogenic tumor.
STUDY DESIGN
Immunohistochemical studies with nestin, dentin sialophosphoprotein (DSPP), cytokeratin, and vimentin were performed using 21 cases of AOT, and the staining results were analyzed according to the various morphologic patterns seen in AOT. Sirius red stain was used to detect the presence of collagen types I and III in AOT products.
RESULTS
Our results showed that 20 of 21 (95.23%), 0 of 21 (0%), 21 of 21 (100%), and 20 of 21 (95.23%) cases expressed nestin, DSPP, cytokeratin, and vimentin, respectively. Some cells in rosette/duct-like structures (RDSs) expressed nestin, vimentin, or both, without cytokeratin. Coexpression of vimentin and cytokeratin or of nestin, cytokeratin, and vimentin was noted in some cells. Sirius red staining was positive in eosinophilic products in RDSs, double-layered spheres, and dentinoids.
CONCLUSION
Although most AOT cells appear epithelial, there is a small population of cells expressing mesenchymal proteins and secreting collagen types I and III. This evidence suggests that AOT is a mixed odontogenic tumor.
Topics: Ameloblastoma; Collagen; Humans; Keratins; Nestin; Odontogenic Tumors; Vimentin
PubMed: 35165067
DOI: 10.1016/j.oooo.2021.11.005 -
Sultan Qaboos University Medical Journal Aug 2022This article aimed to collectively present the demographic, clinical, radiographic and histopathological features as well as the treatment performed along with its... (Review)
Review
This article aimed to collectively present the demographic, clinical, radiographic and histopathological features as well as the treatment performed along with its outcome for all the cases of adenoid ameloblastoma with dentinoid (AAD) reported in scientific literature till date. Ameloblastoma and adenomatoid odontogenic tumours are the most common odontogenic neoplasms. However, AAD, a hybrid variant of the two lesions, is found to be extremely rare. The lesion comprises of characteristic histopathological features of ameloblastoma and adenomatoid odontogenic tumour and shares certain clinical characteristics with either of the entities. AAD may be considered to be present at the more aggressive end of spectrum of benign odontogenic neoplasms. Owing to the frequent tendency of the lesions to be underdiagnosed, careful histopathological screening of submitted biopsies is warranted. With the increase in number of reported cases in the recent years, it is likely to be included as a separate entity in the upcoming World Health Organization classification.
Topics: Adenoids; Ameloblastoma; Biopsy; Humans; Odontogenic Tumors
PubMed: 36072074
DOI: 10.18295/squmj.9.2021.127 -
Asian Journal of Surgery Feb 2022
Topics: Adenomatoid Tumor; Fallopian Tube Neoplasms; Fallopian Tubes; Female; Humans
PubMed: 34955345
DOI: 10.1016/j.asjsur.2021.11.045 -
International Journal of Surgery Case... Jul 2022An adenomatoid odontogenic tumor is a rare medical condition. Large tumor (or several) often appears in the maxillae. In a minority of cases, the tumor(s) appear in the...
INTRODUCTION AND IMPORTANCE
An adenomatoid odontogenic tumor is a rare medical condition. Large tumor (or several) often appears in the maxillae. In a minority of cases, the tumor(s) appear in the mandible.
CASE PRESENTATION
We report on a case of a 24-year-old female diagnosed with a mandibular adenomatoid odontogenic tumor, a giant tumor measuring approximately 22 × 25 × 17 cm. The tumor was located on the side of the mandible, causing facial deformity, malnutrition, and hemorrhaging. We assessed the patient's overall condition, carried out a resection of the tumor and mandible from the right condyle to the left mandibular angle, and reconstructed the mandibular defect with a fibula free flap. After the treatment, the patient was followed up for 1 year, with no recurrence detected over this period.
CLINICAL DISCUSSION
Because adenomatoid odontogenic tumors are benign odontogenic lesions, which are painless and slow-growing, most are surgically removed or treated conservatively. However, the above treatment measures cannot be applied in the case of a giant tumor that causes facial deformity, destroys the entire jawbone, and has complications such as hemorrhaging and malnutrition. After the tumor resection, the defect is still significant. Accordingly, reconstruction using a microsurgical bone flap is an effective method instead.
CONCLUSION
Large adenomatoid odontogenic tumors in the mandible are rare, and treatment cannot follow conventional methods. Accordingly, defect reconstruction after tumor resection is essential.
PubMed: 35714392
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijscr.2022.107295 -
Frontiers in Oral Health 2021To perform a comprehensive and systematic critical appraisal of the genetic alterations reported to be present in adenomatoid odontogenic tumor (AOT) compared to...
To perform a comprehensive and systematic critical appraisal of the genetic alterations reported to be present in adenomatoid odontogenic tumor (AOT) compared to ameloblastoma (AM), to aid in the understanding in their development and different behavior. An electronic search was conducted in PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science during March 2021. Eligibility criteria included publications on humans which included genetic analysis of AOT or AM. A total of 43 articles reporting 59 AOTs and 680 AMs were included. Different genomic techniques were used, including whole-exome sequencing, direct sequencing, targeted next-generation sequencing panels and TaqMan allele-specific qPCR. Somatic mutations affecting were identified in 75.9% of all AOTs, mainly G12V; whereas a 71% of the AMs harbored mutations, mainly V600E. The available genetic data reports that AOTs and AM harbor somatic mutations in well-known oncogenes, being KRAS G12V/R and BRAFV600E mutations the most common, respectively. The relatively high frequency of ameloblastoma compared to other odontogenic tumors, such as AOT, has facilitated the performance of different sequencing techniques, allowing the discovery of different mutational signatures. On the contrary, the low frequency of AOTs is an important limitation for this. The number of studies that have a assessed the genetic landscape of AOT is still very limited, not providing enough evidence to draw a conclusion regarding the relationship between the genomic alterations and its clinical behavior. Thus, the presence of other mutational signatures with clinical impact, co-occurring with background mutations or in wild-type cases, cannot be ruled out. Since BRAF and RAS are in the same MAPK pathway, it is interesting that ameloblastomas, frequently associated with BRAFV600E mutation have aggressive clinical behavior, but in contrast, AOTs, frequently associated with RAS mutations have indolent behavior. Functional studies might be required to solve this question.
PubMed: 35048068
DOI: 10.3389/froh.2021.767474