Polypoid non-neural granular cell tumor of the oral cavity: case report and literature review

To report a case of non-neural granular cell tumor (NN-GCT), an uncommon neoplasm, with only six studies worldwide describing cases involving the oral cavity. Methods: A 26-year-old male patient with an erythematous, firm, polypoid nodule in the floor of the mouth that exhibited areas of ulceration and mild bleeding to the touch. A biopsy was performed to aid in the diagnosis. Results: Based on the histopathological and immunohistochemical results (vimentin +, CD68 +, S100 -), the diagnosis was compatible with S100-negative (primitive polypoid non-neural) granular cell tumor. No recurrence was observed over two years of follow-up. Conclusion: The diagnosis of NN-GCT is extremely challenging because this tumor shares histological and immunophenotypic features with many benign and malignant tumors. Although oral NN-GCT may exhibit unusual and atypical histological features, it has an indolent behavior. Thus, until more cases of oral involvement are reported, complete resection and close follow-up are recommended

Central giant cell granuloma: A clinicopathological and immunohistochemical study of macrophages, blood vessels, lymphatic vessels and regulatory proteins.

OBJECTIVE: This study seeks to investigate immunohistochemical parameters that could distinguish non-aggressive Central giant cell granuloma (CGCG) from aggressive CGCG, two groups of lesions which differ in their clinical and radiographic features and prognosis. MATERIAL AND METHODS: 12 cases of non-aggressive CGCG and 11 cases of aggressive CGCG were investigated and associated the immunohistochemical expression of macrophages (CD68 and CD163), blood vessels (CD34 and CD105), lymphatic vessels (D2-40) and regulator proteins (p63 and Ki-67). Clinical and radiographic features were also studied. RESULTS: Associations between all proteins in non-aggressive and aggressive CGCG were not significant (p > 0.05). With respect to non-aggressive CGCG, there were no significant correlations, while in aggressive CGCG there was a significant positive correlation between CD68 and CD163 (p = 0.031), between CD34 and D2-40 proteins (p = 0.04), whereas a significant negative correlation was observed between CD105 and CD68 (p = 0.040). However, regardless of aggressiveness of CGCG, there was a significant positive correlation between CD68 and CD163 (p = 0,04). Among the clinical and immunohistochemical aspects, only the symptomatology was a significant risk factor for the occurrence of aggressive CGCG (OR = 12.00/p = 0.016). CONCLUSION: Macrophages and angiogenesis contribute to their maintenance and development of CGCG. In addition, immunohistochemistry used here was not able to differentiate their aggressiveness. However, symptomatology was proved to be a risk factor for the occurrence of aggressive CGCG. It is possible that clinical features, particularly symptomatology, represent the most appropriate parameter to attempt to distinguish GCCG.