ReviewHead and neck pathology2025
Calcifying Epithelial Odontogenic Tumour (Pindborg Tumour): A Report of 20 Cases and Review of the Literature.
Review in Head and neck pathology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Calcifying Epithelial Odontogenic Tumor: A Report of a Rare Case With Clinical and Radiographic Findings.Cureus · 2026Article
- Revision of an Early History of Calcifying Epithelial Odontogenic Tumor: Herkert's Original Description (1914).Head and neck pathology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
aimThe aim of the present work was to analyze 20 cases of calcifying epithelial odontogenic tumour (CEOT), also known as "Pindborg tumour", and contrast the data with findings reported in the literature. MATERIALS AND
methodsTwenty cases of CEOT filed in the archives of the Surgical Pathology Laboratory of the Oral Pathology Department, School of Dentistry, University of Buenos Aires, over a period of 63 years (1960-2023) were retrieved. Their histopathological, histochemical-immunohistochemical, and clinical-radiographic features were evaluated, and the obtained data were compared with those reported in the literature.
resultsCEOT accounted for 1% of odontogenic tumours and 0.02% of oral pathologies filed over the study period. Seventeen cases (85%) were intraosseous lesions (solid: 14 cases; cystic: three cases). Three cases (15%) were extraosseous (solid: two cases; cystic: one case). One case, an intraosseous tumour, was malignant. Three cases (15%) showed clear cells (intraosseous location: two cases; extraosseous location: one case), and two cases (10%) (intraosseous) had fusiform cells. All cases showed amyloid deposits and calcifications. Mean age was 36 years (10-71 years). A female predominance was observed (12 cases, 60%), and the prevalent location was the mandible (14 cases, 70%).
conclusionsCEOT is infrequent and presents a wide range of morphological features, making diagnosis challenging. Two cases in our series, intraosseous tumours, showed spindle cell epithelial proliferation, and one extraosseous case was cystic. To our knowledge, this is the first study to report these findings.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.