Loading...
Publication
Tissue eosinophilia in oral intraepithelial neoplasia as a probable indicator of invasion
| Name: | Description: | Size: | Format: | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 471.91 KB | Adobe PDF |
Advisor(s)
Abstract(s)
Objective: to investigate the presence of eosinophils in oral intraepithelial neoplasia (OIN) and oral squamous cell carcinoma (OSCC) lesions and its relation to invasion.
Subjects and methods: ninety‐nine oral biopsies were selected and subdivided into the following: OIN‐1(16 cases), OIN‐2 (18 cases), OIN‐3 (17 cases), microinvasive OSCC (10 cases), non‐metastatic OSCC (22 cases) and metastatic OSCC (16 cases). The tissue eosinophilia was evaluated histologically in slices stained with haematoxylin and eosin.
Results: Eosinophil distribution was associated with diagnosis severity (p < .01). A significant difference was found between OIN‐3 or microinvasive OSCC and non‐metastatic or metastatic OSCC. Stromal invasion threshold was 7 eos/10 high power field (hpf) (96.1% specificity and 62.5% sensitivity). Eosinophils were absent in OIN‐1; in OIN‐2, two cases were positive. In OIN‐3, five cases showed tissue eosinophilia, four of which had ≥3 eos/hpf or ≥7 eos/10 hpf. Three cases were suspected of invasion; two had a previous history of OSCC with elevated eosinophil infiltrate. In microinvasive OSCC, the four positive cases presented ≥3 eos/hpf and ≥7 eos/10 hpf. Although not significantly different, non‐metastatic invasive OSCC had a higher number of cases (68.2%) with ≥22 eos/10 hpf contrasting with 50% in metastatic OSCC.
Conclusion: our results suggest that eosinophils can be considered an indicator of invasion in OIN, helping in cases of difficult diagnosis.
Subjects and methods: ninety‐nine oral biopsies were selected and subdivided into the following: OIN‐1(16 cases), OIN‐2 (18 cases), OIN‐3 (17 cases), microinvasive OSCC (10 cases), non‐metastatic OSCC (22 cases) and metastatic OSCC (16 cases). The tissue eosinophilia was evaluated histologically in slices stained with haematoxylin and eosin.
Results: Eosinophil distribution was associated with diagnosis severity (p < .01). A significant difference was found between OIN‐3 or microinvasive OSCC and non‐metastatic or metastatic OSCC. Stromal invasion threshold was 7 eos/10 high power field (hpf) (96.1% specificity and 62.5% sensitivity). Eosinophils were absent in OIN‐1; in OIN‐2, two cases were positive. In OIN‐3, five cases showed tissue eosinophilia, four of which had ≥3 eos/hpf or ≥7 eos/10 hpf. Three cases were suspected of invasion; two had a previous history of OSCC with elevated eosinophil infiltrate. In microinvasive OSCC, the four positive cases presented ≥3 eos/hpf and ≥7 eos/10 hpf. Although not significantly different, non‐metastatic invasive OSCC had a higher number of cases (68.2%) with ≥22 eos/10 hpf contrasting with 50% in metastatic OSCC.
Conclusion: our results suggest that eosinophils can be considered an indicator of invasion in OIN, helping in cases of difficult diagnosis.
Description
Keywords
Oral epithelial dysplasia Oral intraepithelial neoplasia Oral squamous cell carcinoma Tissue eosinophilia
Citation
Martinelli‐Kläy, CP, Lombardi, T, Mendis, BRRN, et al. Tissue eosinophilia in oral intraepithelial neoplasia as a probable indicator of invasion. Oral Dis. 2018; 24: 103– 108. https://doi.org/10.1111/odi.12789
Publisher
John Wiley and Sons