{"title":"Pitfalls in Diagnosis of Myoepithelial Carcinoma of Salivary Glands: A Study of 3 Cases with Cytologic-histologic Correlation and Molecular Analysis.","authors":"Shweta Agarwal","doi":"10.1007/s12105-024-01698-3","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Context: </strong>Myoepithelial carcinoma (MECA) represents < 1% percent of salivary gland (SG) tumors with a mean age of 55 years. These tumors can arise de novo or in association with pre-existing pleomorphic Adenoma (PA). The cytologic features of MECA overlap with other SG neoplasms including the more common benign entities like PA and myoepithelioma and can pose a diagnostic challenge.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>A database search for MECA was performed spanning 10 years. 3 cases qualified with available cyto-histologic correlation. All were morphologically MECA with one case diagnosed as MECA ex-PA. The cases were subjected to a comprehensive immunohistochemical and molecular evaluation (Case#1 has been previously reported and published in head and neck pathology in 2021).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A comparative analysis of these cases is presented in Table 1. All three cases were initially diagnosed as PA on cytology. On review of cytology slides, presence of metachromatic stromal fragments and bland myoepithelial cells was found to be the most common diagnostic pitfall. S100 was positive in all cases while myosin, p63, and GFAP were variably positive. Molecular analysis revealed novel, previously undescribed mutations in the three cases. Additionally, two of three cases expressed PD-L1, suggesting a role for immunotherapy in treatment.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Cytomorphology of MECA is poorly described in literature and can pose a diagnostic challenge due to overlapping features with salivary gland benign neoplasms. A conclusive diagnosis on cytology is often not possible. However, a high cellularity, predominant oncocytoid/ myoepithelial cell population on smears and cell block, along with a strong clinical and radiologic suspicion for malignant salivary gland tumor, should alert the cytopathologist and help avoid an erroneous benign diagnosis on cytology.</p>","PeriodicalId":47972,"journal":{"name":"Head & Neck Pathology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11473744/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Head & Neck Pathology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s12105-024-01698-3","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PATHOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Context: Myoepithelial carcinoma (MECA) represents < 1% percent of salivary gland (SG) tumors with a mean age of 55 years. These tumors can arise de novo or in association with pre-existing pleomorphic Adenoma (PA). The cytologic features of MECA overlap with other SG neoplasms including the more common benign entities like PA and myoepithelioma and can pose a diagnostic challenge.
Design: A database search for MECA was performed spanning 10 years. 3 cases qualified with available cyto-histologic correlation. All were morphologically MECA with one case diagnosed as MECA ex-PA. The cases were subjected to a comprehensive immunohistochemical and molecular evaluation (Case#1 has been previously reported and published in head and neck pathology in 2021).
Results: A comparative analysis of these cases is presented in Table 1. All three cases were initially diagnosed as PA on cytology. On review of cytology slides, presence of metachromatic stromal fragments and bland myoepithelial cells was found to be the most common diagnostic pitfall. S100 was positive in all cases while myosin, p63, and GFAP were variably positive. Molecular analysis revealed novel, previously undescribed mutations in the three cases. Additionally, two of three cases expressed PD-L1, suggesting a role for immunotherapy in treatment.
Conclusions: Cytomorphology of MECA is poorly described in literature and can pose a diagnostic challenge due to overlapping features with salivary gland benign neoplasms. A conclusive diagnosis on cytology is often not possible. However, a high cellularity, predominant oncocytoid/ myoepithelial cell population on smears and cell block, along with a strong clinical and radiologic suspicion for malignant salivary gland tumor, should alert the cytopathologist and help avoid an erroneous benign diagnosis on cytology.
期刊介绍:
Head & Neck Pathology presents scholarly papers, reviews and symposia that cover the spectrum of human surgical pathology within the anatomic zones of the oral cavity, sinonasal tract, larynx, hypopharynx, salivary gland, ear and temporal bone, and neck.
The journal publishes rapid developments in new diagnostic criteria, intraoperative consultation, immunohistochemical studies, molecular techniques, genetic analyses, diagnostic aids, experimental pathology, cytology, radiographic imaging, and application of uniform terminology to allow practitioners to continue to maintain and expand their knowledge in the subspecialty of head and neck pathology. Coverage of practical application to daily clinical practice is supported with proceedings and symposia from international societies and academies devoted to this field.
Single-blind peer review
The journal follows a single-blind review procedure, where the reviewers are aware of the names and affiliations of the authors, but the reviewer reports provided to authors are anonymous. Single-blind peer review is the traditional model of peer review that many reviewers are comfortable with, and it facilitates a dispassionate critique of a manuscript.