Abstract
Giant cell tumor of bone (GCTB) accounts for 5% of primary skeletal tumors. Although it is considered to be a benign lesion, there are still incidences of pulmonary metastasis. Pulmonary metastasis of GCTB may be affected by tumor grading and localization as well as the age, gender and overall health status of the patient. Patients with local recurrence are more likely to develop pulmonary metastasis of GCTB. High expression of some genes, cytokines and chemokines may also be closely related to the metastatic potential and prognosis of GCTB. The treatment of the primary GCTB is key to the final outcome of the disease, as intralesional curettage has a significantly higher local recurrence and pulmonary metastasis rate than wide resection. However, even patients with pulmonary metastasis seem to have a good prognosis after timely and appropriate surgical resection. It is hoped that with the development of novel surgical methods and drugs, pulmonary metastasis of GCTB can be prevented and treated more effectively.
Highlights
Giant cell tumor of bone (GCTB) accounts for 5% of primary skeletal tumors
Its name originated from the giant cells found within the tumor. Those giant cells share specific markers with osteoclasts such as tartrate-resistant acid phosphatase [4], cathepsin K [5], carbonic anhydrase II [6], calcitonin receptor [7] and receptor activator of nuclear factor-κB (RANK) [8]. They both have bone resorption capabilities, but giant cells are significantly larger than the osteoclasts and have hundreds of nuclei [9]
GCTB account for 5% of primary skeletal tumors and 21% of all benign bone tumors [10,11]
Summary
GCTB is normally considered a benign bone tumor. It may occasionally metastasize to vital organs such as the lung. The prognosis can be successful with timely and appropriate surgical treatment and chemotherapy. With the development of novel surgical methods and application of new drugs, most patients with GCTB can still achieve successful treatment results. Competing interests The authors declare that they have no competing interests. Authors’ contributions Dr A.M searched for the papers, extracted the research data from those papers and drafted the manuscript. Dr X.N checked the structure of the manuscript, provided the patient file and figures of the patients he has treated. Both authors read and approved the final manuscript
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
