Should the solid variant of odontogenic keratocyst and keratoameloblastoma be classified as the same entity? A clinicopathological analysis of nine cases and a review of the literature.

Ran Zhang,Jie Yang,Jianyun Zhang,Yingying Hong,Xiaoyan Xie,Tiejun Li

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pathol.2020.09.028

IF: 5.335

2021-01-01

Pathology

Abstract:The solid variant of odontogenic keratocyst (SOKC) is an extremely rare odontogenic lesion, which remains poorly defined even in the 2017 World Health Organization odontogenic tumour classification. It is difficult to distinguish between SOKC and so called keratoameloblastoma (KAB), both rare lesions that have similarities in clinical, histological and biological characteristics. Here, we report clinicopathological data and results of molecular analysis of nine cases with a literature review. First, they were compared to previously reported cases of SOKC and/or KAB, and many overlaps were found in clinical and pathological characteristics. Second, we performed PCR analysis for BRAF V600E mutation. Although ameloblastoma-like epithelia were often encountered, none exhibited BRAF V600E mutation, which has been reported to occur frequently in ameloblastomas but not in odontogenic keratocysts (OKCs). One of two cases of SOKC in the present series from which fresh frozen tissue specimens were available was found to harbour PTCH1 mutations, indicating that these were more likely to be a subtype of OKC. Moreover, we also examined the differences between SOKC and primary intraosseous carcinoma (PIOC) with regard to the expression of cytokeratins (pan-CK, CK5/6, CK7, CK8/18, CK10, CK14 and CK19), p53 and Ki-67. The proportions of p53-and Ki-67-positive cells were significantly higher in PIOC than in SOKC. These findings suggest that immunostaining for p53 and Ki-67 would be useful to differentiate between SOKC and PIOC. We also conducted a review of SOKC and KAB cases reported in the English language literature.