The Journal of Contemporary Dental Practice

Register      Login

SEARCH WITHIN CONTENT

FIND ARTICLE

Volume / Issue

Online First

Archive
Related articles

VOLUME 16 , ISSUE 1 ( January, 2015 ) > List of Articles

RESEARCH ARTICLE

Immunohistochemical Comparison of p53, Ki-67, CD68, Vimentin, α-smooth Muscle Actin and Alpha-1-Antichymotrypsin in Oral Peripheral and Central Giant Cell Granuloma

Omar Kujan, Ahmad Zahi Al-Shawaf, Saleh Azzeghaiby, Ahmad AlManadille, Kusay Aziz, Syed Ahmed Raheel

Citation Information : Kujan O, Al-Shawaf AZ, Azzeghaiby S, AlManadille A, Aziz K, Raheel SA. Immunohistochemical Comparison of p53, Ki-67, CD68, Vimentin, α-smooth Muscle Actin and Alpha-1-Antichymotrypsin in Oral Peripheral and Central Giant Cell Granuloma. J Contemp Dent Pract 2015; 16 (1):20-24.

DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10024-1629

Published Online: 01-01-2015

Copyright Statement:  Copyright © 2015; Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) Ltd.


Abstract

Introduction

Giant cell lesions are characterised histologically by multinucleated giant cells in a background of ovoid to spindleshaped mesenchymal cells. There is a major debate whether these lesions are separate entities or variants of the same disease. Our aim was to study the nature of multinucleated and mononuclear cells from peripheral giant cell granuloma (PGCG), and central giant cell granuloma (CGCG) and giant cell tumor (GCT) of long bones using immunohistochemistry evaluation and to determine whether there is a correlation between recurrence and the markers used.

Materials and methods

Ki-67, p53, Vimentin, smooth muscle specific actin, CD68 and alpha-1-antichymotrypsin were used to study 60 giant cell lesions. These included 26 CGCG, 28 PGCG, and 6 GCT cases using an avidin-biotin-complex immunohistochemistry standard method.

Results

All studied cases showed the same results except the percentage of Ki-67 positive mononuclear cells in PGCG was significantly higher than that of both CGCG and GCT (p < 0.05). Interestingly, no statistical correlation between recurrence and the markers used was found.

Conclusion

Our results may suggest that these lesions have the same histogenesis. The mononuclear stromal cells, both histiocytic and myofibroblastic, are thought to be responsible for the behavior of these lesions whereas the multinucleated cells are considered as reactive. This might support the argument that PGCG, CGCG and GCT are different variants for the same disease. Further studies using molecular techniques are required to elucidate why some of these lesions behave aggressively than others.

How to cite this article

Kujan O, Al-Shawaf AZ, Azzeghaiby S, AlManadille A, Aziz K, Raheel SA. Immunohistochemical Comparison of p53, Ki-67, CD68, Vimentin, α-smooth Muscle Actin and Alpha-1-Antichymotrypsin in Oral Peripheral and Central Giant Cell Granuloma. J Contemp Dent Pract 2015;16(1):20-24.


PDF Share
  1. Giant cell reparative granuloma, traumatic bone cyst, and fibrous dysplasia of the long bones. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol 1953;6:159-175.
  2. Central giant cell lesions of the jaws. A clinical, radiologic, and histopathologic study. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol 1993;75:199-208.
  3. A histological comparison of the giant cells in the central giant cell granuloma of the jaws and the giant cell tumor of long bone. J Oral Pathol 1974;3:217-223.
  4. A clinical and histomorphologic comparison of the central giant cell granuloma and the giant cell tumor. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol 1988;66:197-208.
  5. Central giant cell lesions of the jaws: A clinicopathologic study. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 1986;44:708-713.
  6. Giant cell tumor of bone and giant cellcontaining lesions of bone. In: Pathology of Bone and Joint Neoplasms. Philadelphia: W.B. Saunders; 1999. p. 304-329.
  7. Cellular cannibalism in central and peripheral giant cell granuloma of the oral cavity can predict biological behavior of the lesion. J Oral Pathol Med. 2014;43(6):459-463.
  8. Evaluation of p53, PCNA, Ki-67, MDM2 and AgNOR in oral peripheral and central giant cell lesions. Oral Dis 2000;6:35-39.
  9. Peripheral giant cell granuloma. Clinicopathologic study of 224 new cases and review of 956 reported cases. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg 1988;17:94-99.
  10. Central giant cell granulomas of the jaws. Nuclear DNA analysis using image cytometry. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg 1989;18:3-6.
  11. Muramidase, á-1 antitrypsin, á-1 antichymotrypsin, and S-100 protein immunoreactivity in giant cell lesions. Cancer 1987;59:64-68.
  12. Immunohistochemical and ultrastructural evidence of a modified microvasculature in the giant cell granuloma of the jaws. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 1995;79:190-198.
  13. Central giant cell granulomas of the jaws: phenotype and proliferationassociated markers. J Oral Pathol Med 1997;26:159-163.
  14. Immunohistochemical expression of p53, MDM2, Ki-67 and PCNA in central giant cell granuloma and giant cell tumor. J Oral Pathol Med 1999;28:54-58.
  15. Giant cell lesions of the jaws: Does the level of vascularity and angiogenesis correlate with behavior? J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2012;70:1860-1866.
  16. Cytochemical and ultrastructural changes in the osteoclastlike giant cells of giant cell tumor of bone following bisphosphonate administration. Ultrastruct Pathol 2003;27:385-391.
  17. The nature of giant cell tumor of bone. J Cancer Res Clin Oncol 2001;127:467-474.
  18. Immunohistochemical expression of Src protein in peripheral and central giant cell granulomas of the jaws. J Oral Maxillofac Pathol. 2013;17:358-362
  19. Comparative immunohistochemical investigation of markers for malignant histiocytes. Hum Pathol 1985;16:763-771.
  20. Cellular mechanisms of osteoclast formation and lacunar resorption in giant cell granuloma of the jaw. J Oral Pathol Med. 2003;32:224-231.
  21. Peripheral and central giant cell lesions: Etiology, origin of giant cells, diagnosis and treatment. J Bras Patol Med Lab 2013;49:446-452.
PDF Share

© Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) LTD.