Premium
Papillary‐cystic neoplasms of the middle ear are distinct from endolymphatic sac tumours
Author(s) -
Taverna Cecilia,
Pollastri Federica,
Pecci Rudi,
Giani Beatrice,
Fattorini Caterina,
Santucci Marco,
Mueller Sarina K,
Stoehr Robert,
Franchi Alessandro,
Agaimy Abbas
Publication year - 2021
Publication title -
histopathology
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.626
H-Index - 124
eISSN - 1365-2559
pISSN - 0309-0167
DOI - 10.1111/his.14250
Subject(s) - hras , pathology , pax8 , acinic cell carcinoma , kras , cytokeratin , cuboidal cell , papilloma , biology , immunohistochemistry , medicine , carcinoma , cancer , mucoepidermoid carcinoma , gene , biochemistry , colorectal cancer , transcription factor
Aims Papillary neoplasms of the middle and inner ear are rare and poorly characterised. The current World Health Organization classification divides them into two major subtypes: aggressive papillary tumours (APTs) and endolymphatic sac tumours (ELSTs). The aim of this article is to present two papillary neoplasms of the middle ear that do not fit into either the classic APT category or the classic ELST category, and compare them with three ELSTs. Methods and results The patients were a 48‐year‐old female and a 59‐year‐old male without a history of other neoplasms. Histology showed papillary‐cystic growth of predominantly oncocytic (Case 1) or mucinous (Case 2) cells surrounded by a p63‐positive basal layer. The overall histology was reminiscent of oncocytic sinonasal papilloma (Case 1) and pancreatobiliary or salivary intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasms (Case 2). Ovarian‐type stroma, invasion and malignant features were absent. Immunohistochemistry revealed expression of cytokeratin (CK) 7, but not carbonic anhydrase IX (CAIX) or paired box gene 8 (PAX8) (except for very focal PAX8 expression in Case 1). The TST15 gene panel and HRAS sequencing revealed no pathogenic mutations in BRAF , KRAS , EGFR , AKT1 , or HRAS . The TruSight RNA fusion panel revealed an MKRN1 – BRAF fusion in Case 1. No fusion was detected in Case 2. The three ELSTs showed classic features of the entity, expressed CK7, epithelial membrane antigen, PAX8, and CAIX, and lacked a basal cell layer. Conclusion These novel cases suggest that papillary tumours of the ear represent a heterogeneous spectrum of distinct neoplasms unified by a prominent papillary‐cystic pattern rather than a single entity. Future studies should clarify whether the MKRN1 – BRAF fusion is a defining recurrent driver event, especially in those cases reported as sinonasal‐type middle ear papillomas.