Rekhtman, Natasha

Ameloblastomas are locally aggressive odontogenic tumors that most commonly arise in the mandible and maxilla and often harbor BRAF V600E mutations. While rare extragnathic ameloblastomas have been reported, primary pulmonary cases have not been documented. We identified 3 pulmonary neoplasms with features of ameloblastoma that were submitted for consultation between 2022 and 2025 at 3 academic institutions and performed detailed clinicopathologic and molecular analysis. The tumors presented as 5.4 to 7.3 cm peribronchial solitary lung masses. All resected tumors exhibited a predominant stellate reticulum-like component composed of loosely arranged p40-reactive bland squamoid-to-spindled cells with long intercellular bridges, and streaming and swirling architecture, surrounded by palisaded columnar cells with focal reverse nuclear polarity at the interface with myxoid stroma. All tumors were immunoreactive for BRAF V600E IHC, and BRAF V600E mutations were confirmed by molecular assays, including broad next-generation sequencing on 2 cases. Florid hyperplasia of entrapped pneumocytes initially suggested a biphasic neoplasm, but the absence of BRAF V600E IHC labeling confirmed pneumocyte entrapment. Occult gnathic primary tumors were excluded by subsequent clinical examination, including negative panoramic dental x-rays. No recurrences or metastases have been observed to date. This first series of primary pulmonary ameloblastomas highlights a distinctive tumor with histologic and molecular features identical to gnathic counterparts. We discuss the potential histogenesis of these unusual tumors.

Adamantinoma-like Ewing sarcoma (ALES) is a rare malignancy currently considered a variant of Ewing sarcoma with most known cases harboring EWSR1 rearrangements. Herein we present a series of 6 cases of EWSR1-negative ALES. The tumors arose in the sinonasal tract (n=3), major salivary glands (submandibular gland=1; parotid=1), and anterior mediastinum (n=1) in patients ranging from 25 to 79 years of age. Most tumors were basaloid in appearance, growing in large nests separated by interlobular fibrosis without overt squamous pearls. However, 1 case closely resembled a well-differentiated neuroendocrine tumor with uniformly round nuclei, eosinophilic cytoplasm, and trabecular architecture. All cases were diffusely positive for pan-cytokeratin, p40 or p63, and CD99. A subset of cases showed diffuse reactivity for synaptophysin, including 1 sinonasal tumor which also demonstrated sustentacular S100 protein expression. Molecular testing showed FUS rearrangements in all cases. Gene partners included known ETS family members FEV (n=2) and FLI1 (n=1). Our results expand the molecular diagnostic considerations for ALES to include FUS rearrangements. We also show that ALES may harbor FUS::FLI1 fusion, which has not been previously reported in the Ewing family of tumors. Furthermore, ALES may show unusual histologic and immunophenotypic features that can overlap with olfactory carcinoma including S100-positive sustentacular cells. ALES should be considered in the diagnostic differential of small round cell tumors and tumors with neuroendocrine differentiation with immunohistochemical workup to include p40 and CD99/NKX2.2.

Abstract Objectives To describe the histologic features that are helpful in the diagnosis of the rare bronchiolar adenomas/ciliated muconodular papillary tumors (BAs/CMPTs) during intraoperative consultation. Methods Multi-institutional retrospective review of frozen sections of 18 BAs/CMPTs. Results In 14 of 18 cases, BA/CMPT was the primary reason for sublobar lung resection, and in 4 cases, BA/CMPT was an incidental finding intraoperatively for resections performed for carcinoma in other lobes. There were 11 proximal-type/classic BAs/CMPTs and 7 distal-type/nonclassic BAs/CMPTs. Only 3 (16.7%) of 18 were correctly diagnosed at the time of frozen section, all of which were proximal type/classic. The remainder were diagnosed as adenocarcinoma (n = 7); invasive mucinous adenocarcinoma (n = 1); non–small cell lung carcinoma (n = 1); cystic mucinous neoplasm, favor adenocarcinoma (either mucinous or colloid type) (n = 1); favor adenocarcinoma, cannot exclude CMPT (n = 1); atypical proliferation (n = 2); mucinous epithelial proliferation (n = 1); and mucous gland adenoma (n = 1). Conclusions BA/CMPT can potentially be misdiagnosed as carcinoma during intraoperative consultation. On retrospective review of the frozen sections, the presence of the following may help to avoid misdiagnosis: a mixture of bland ciliated columnar cells, mucinous cells, and, most important, a basal cell layer, as well as a lack of necrosis, significant atypia, and mitoses.

We have identified 25 lesions involving alveolar lung parenchyma characterized by nodular proliferation of bland bilayered bronchiolar-type epithelium containing a continuous layer of basal cells. These lesions shared some histologic features with the recently described entity of ciliated muconodular papillary tumor (CMPT); however, the majority did not fit all diagnostic criteria in that they exhibited only focal or absent papillary architecture, and they had variable number of ciliated and mucinous cells, with some lesions entirely lacking 1 or both of these components. The morphologic and immunohistochemical features ranged from those resembling proximal bronchioles (proximal-type: moderate to abundant mucinous and ciliated cells; negative or weak TTF1 in luminal cells; n=8) to those resembling respiratory bronchioles (distal-type: scant or absent mucinous and ciliated cells; positive TTF1 in luminal cells; n=17). The hallmark of all lesions was a continuous layer of basal cells (p40 and CK5/6-positive). We provisionally designated these lesions as bronchiolar adenomas (BAs) and analyzed their clinicopathologic and molecular features. All BAs were discrete, sharply circumscribed lesions with a median size of 0.5 cm (range, 0.2 to 2.0 cm). Most lesions were either entirely flat (n=14) or contained focal papillary architecture (n=7); only 4 lesions, all proximal-type, were predominantly papillary, fitting the classic description of CMPT. Notably, of 9 lesions submitted for frozen section evaluation, 7 were diagnosed as adenocarcinoma. No postsurgical recurrences were observed for any lesions (median follow-up, 11 mo). Twenty-one BAs underwent next-generation sequencing and/or immunohistochemistry for BRAF V600E, revealing mutation profiles similar to those previously described for CMPTs, including BRAF V600E mutations (n=8, 38%), unusual EGFR exon 19 deletions (n=2, 10%), EGFR exon 20 insertions (n=2, 10%), KRAS mutations (n=5, 24%), and HRAS mutations (n=1, 5%). The mutation profiles were similar in proximal-type and distal-type lesions. In conclusion, we describe a family of putatively benign clonal proliferations with a spectrum of morphology recapitulating various levels of the bronchiolar tree, of which only a minor subset fits the classic description of CMPT. Comparable mutation profiles and partially overlapping morphologic features across the spectrum of these lesions support their nosological relationship. We propose designating this entire family of lesions as BAs, and that lesions currently designated CMPTs represent a subgroup of this family.

Context.— The diagnosis and grading of acute cellular and antibody-mediated rejection (AMR) in lung allograft biopsies is important because rejection can lead to acute graft dysfunction and/or failure and may contribute to chronic graft failure. While acute cellular rejection is well defined histologically, no reproducible specific features of AMR are currently identified. Therefore, a combination of clinical features, serology, histopathology, and immunologic findings is suggested for the diagnosis of AMR. Objective.— To describe the perspective of members of the Pulmonary Pathology Society (PPS) on the workup of lung allograft transbronchial biopsy and the diagnosis of acute cellular rejection and AMR in lung transplant. Data Sources.— Reports by the International Society for Heart and Lung Transplantation (ISHLT), experience of members of PPS who routinely review lung allograft biopsies, and search of literature database (PubMed). Conclusions.— Acute cellular rejection should be assessed and graded according to the 2007 working formulation of the ISHLT. As currently no specific features are known for AMR in lung allografts, the triple test (clinical allograft dysfunction, donor-specific antibodies, pathologic findings) should be used for its diagnosis. C4d staining might be performed when morphologic, clinical, and/or serologic features suggestive of AMR are identified.