Adenoid Ameloblastoma Versus Dentinogenic Ghost Cell Tumor.

BACKGROUND: A recent systematic review published in Head and Neck Pathology found that 3.8% of dentinogenic ghost cell tumors harbor duct-like/ cribriform architecture. Herein we discuss this finding regarding the differential diagnosis of this tumor with adenoid ameloblastoma. METHODS: A critical review of some microscopic findings reported in a recent paper published in the Head and Neck Pathology Journal was done. RESULTS: Although there are overlapping microscopic features with dentinogenic ghost cell tumor, adenoid ameloblastoma is distinguished by the combination of duct-like structures and whorls/morules. In our opinion, at least some cases previously diagnosed as dentinogenic ghost cell tumors may now be more accurately classified as adenoid ameloblastoma. CONCLUSION: We conclude that a reassessment of dentinogenic ghost cell tumor cases using the diagnostic criteria proposed by the new WHO classification of Head and Neck Tumors (2022) is warranted.

Comparative Analysis Between Dentinogenic Ghost Cell Tumor and Ghost Cell Odontogenic Carcinoma: A Systematic Review.

Dentinogenic ghost cell tumor (DGCT) and ghost cell odontogenic carcinoma (GCOC) form a spectrum of rare benign and malignant odontogenic neoplasms, respectively. The aim of this study was to perform a comparative systematic review of the clinicopathological, genetic, therapeutic, and prognostic features of DGCT and GCOC. The electronic search was performed until December 2020 on seven electronic databases. Case reports, series, and research studies with enough histopathological criteria for diagnosis and all genomic studies were included. Both DGCT and GCOC showed a male prevalence (p = 0.043), with mandibular and maxillary predilections, respectively (p = 0.008). Peripheral DGCT (DGCTp) affected most elderly people (p < 0.001), and central DGCT (DGCTc) and GCOC occurred mainly in younger individuals. Unilateral enlargement of maxilla or mandible was the most common clinical sign associated with a radiolucent or mixed image. Ameloblastomatous epithelium was often present in both neoplasms. Basaloid and large cells with vesicular nuclei were also frequently seen in GCOC. ß-catenin expression and mutations (CTNNB1 gene) were found in DGCT and GCOC. Conservative surgery was mostly used for DGCTp, while radical resection was chosen for DGCTc and GCOC. High recurrence rates were found in DGCTc and GCOC. Metastasis occurred in 16.7% of GCOC cases and the 5-year survival rate was 72.6%. DGCT and GCOC share numerous clinicopathological features and demand a careful histopathological evaluation, considering the overlap features with other odontogenic tumors and the possibility of malignant transformation of DGCT. A strict regular post-operative follow-up is mandatory due to high recurrence rates and metastatic capacity in GCOC.

Peripheral dentinogenic ghost cell tumor-report of two cases and review of the literature.

Peripheral dentinogenic ghost cell tumor (DGCT) is a rare and non-aggressive benign odontogenic tumor. They usually affect the elderly and are predominantly located in the anterior region of the jaws. Their differential diagnosis includes reactive/inflammatory gingival lesions. We report here two cases of peripheral DGCT in a 73-year-old female and a 48-year-old male patient and review the cases published in the literature. Both lesions presented as a nodular lesion in the mandible, and panoramic radiography showed no abnormalities. Microscopically, it was observed to be an ameloblastomatous epithelial proliferation associated with clusters of ghost cells and dysplastic dentin. Immunohistochemistry revealed positivity for cytokeratin 19 and a low Ki-67 proliferative index. Based on histopathological features and the absence of radiographic findings, a diagnosis of peripheral DGCT was rendered. The low number of cases published of peripheral DGCT makes case reports important in providing information that helps in their diagnoses and management.

Benign odontogenic ghost cell lesions revisited and new considerations on dysplastic dentin.

OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to revisit benign odontogenic ghost cell lesions (BOGCL) by hematoxylin and eosin staining and immunohistochemistry. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Thirty cases of calcifying odontogenic cyst (COC) and 6 cases of dentinogenic ghost cell tumor (DGCT) were selected for histopathological and immunohistochemical analysis. Sections stained for cytokeratin (K) 14, K-19, amelogenin, collagen type 1 (COL-1), and dentin matrix acidic phosphoprotein 1 (DMP-1) were evaluated using qualitative analysis. Sections stained for Ki-67 and minichromosome maintenance protein-2 (MCM-2) were evaluated using semi-quantitative analysis. RESULTS: A morphologic overlap was noticed in all BOGCL. Moreover, no differences were detected in the expression of K-14 and K-19. The expression of proliferative markers Ki-67 and MCM-2 was similar between cystic and tumor lesions (p > .05). The presence of COL-1 and absence of amelogenin in the so-called dysplastic dentin, associated with its histologic pattern, suggest that this is in fact an enameloid-like tissue. CONCLUSIONS: The dysplastic dentin should be considered an enameloid-like tissue in these lesions. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: The similarity in histology, protein expression, and proliferative marker indices between COC and DGCT suggest that they are a sole entity and likely represent types of the same neoplasia.

Calcifying odontogenic cyst, dentinogenic ghost cell tumor, and ghost cell odontogenic carcinoma: A systematic review.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to integrate the available data published on calcifying odontogenic cyst (COC), dentinogenic ghost cell tumor (DGCT), and ghost cell odontogenic carcinomas (GCOCs) into a comprehensive analysis of their clinicoradiological features, treatment, and recurrence. MATERIALS AND METHODS: An electronic search with no publication date restriction was undertaken in October 2017 in the following databases: PubMed, Medline Ovid, Web of Science, and Scopus. Eligibility criteria included publications containing enough clinical, radiological, and histopathological information to confirm a definite diagnosis of these lesions. Data were evaluated descriptively. RESULTS: The literature review indicated a total of 234 publications reporting 367 COCs, 55 DGCTs and 44 GCOCs. These lesions have a predilection for Asian males. COCs mainly affect the mandible and patients in the second decade of life, DGCTs mostly affect the mandible and patients in the fourth decade of life, and GCOCs mostly affect the maxilla and patients in the fifth decade of life. CONCLUSION: Conservative surgery was the most common therapy for COCs and DGCTs, while radical surgery was most common for GCOCs. This study provides important and interesting data that could help clinicians and surgeons as well as oral and maxillofacial pathologists with the diagnosis and management of these lesions.