Definition and research guide
This page combines a MeSH definition, publication statistics and selected research abstracts. It is a starting point for reading the literature, not a medical textbook or a systematic evidence review.
Content available: 4 complete abstracts (1,024 words), 10 references. Full article text is not stored or reproduced here; follow the PMID, DOI or PMC links to read the original sources and their access terms.
Definition
Tumors of bone tissue or synovial or other soft tissue characterized by the presence of giant cells. The most common are giant cell tumor of tendon sheath and giant cell tumor OF BONE.
Definition: NLM Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) scope note (Public domain (U.S. National Library of Medicine); attribution requested). View the MeSH record.
Also known as: Cell Tumor, Giant; Cell Tumors, Giant; Giant Cell Tumor; Tumor, Giant Cell; Tumors, Giant Cell.
Where it fits in the MeSH classification
- Broader topics
- Neoplasms, Connective Tissue
- Narrower topics
- Giant Cell Tumor of Bone; Giant Cell Tumor of Tendon Sheath
Related concepts
- Giant Cell Tumor
Research landscape
PubMed indexes 7,981 records tagged with the MeSH heading “Giant Cell Tumors” (counts retrieved 2026-10-29). 1,006 of them (12.6%) were published from 2020 onward, and the busiest period so far is through 1999 with 4,084 records.
Reviews account for 871 records (10.9%) and meta-analyses for 28. Randomized controlled trials number 14 (0.2%) as a share of all records on the topic. Randomized trials make up only a small share of this literature, so much of what is known comes from laboratory, observational or descriptive work.
Show the data
| Period | Records |
|---|---|
| through 1999 | 4,084 |
| 2000-2009 | 1,295 |
| 2010-2019 | 1,596 |
| 2020 onward | 1,006 |
Publication-type chart data
| Type | Records | Share |
|---|---|---|
| Reviews | 871 | 10.9% |
| Meta-analyses | 28 | 0.4% |
| Randomized controlled trials | 14 | 0.2% |
Method: PubMed query "Giant Cell Tumors"[MeSH Terms] with publication-type and date filters, retrieved 2026-10-29.
Reading the evidence in cancer and oncology
Cancer research spans very different kinds of evidence. Laboratory studies in cell lines and animal models reveal mechanisms but often do not translate to patients. Early-phase trials mainly test safety and dosing, while phase 3 randomized trials and their meta-analyses are the usual basis for treatment conclusions. Outcomes also differ in meaning: tumour shrinkage, progression-free survival and overall survival are not interchangeable, and screening studies can be distorted by lead-time and overdiagnosis. When reading a result, check the cancer type and stage studied, the comparison treatment, and which outcome was measured.
Evidence from open-access studies
These open-access studies come from PubMed’s best-match results for this heading (papers whose main topic it is), ranked here by citation count, with one recent addition. Each abstract is reproduced in full under its recorded open licence so that you can read the authors’ own words. They illustrate the literature; they are not a systematic summary of it. Citation counts measure attention, not reliability or clinical benefit.
| Study / authors | Year | Source label / design | Europe PMC citations | Licence / source |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| The diffuse-type tenosynovial giant cell tumor (dt-TGCT) patient journey: a prospective multicenter study | 2021 | Research article Design not recorded in structured metadata | 48 | cc by PMID 33926503 · DOI · PMC8086070 |
| Recurrent novel HMGA2-NCOR2 fusions characterize a subset of keratin-positive giant cell-rich soft tissue tumors | 2021 | Research article Design not recorded in structured metadata | 45 | cc by PMID 33742141 · DOI · PMC8295036 |
| Globally altered epigenetic landscape and delayed osteogenic differentiation in H3.3-G34W-mutant giant cell tumor of bone | 2020 | Research article Design not recorded in structured metadata | 44 | cc by PMID 33110075 · DOI · PMC7591516 |
| Giant cell tumor of bone inhibits osteoblastogenesis via WNT5B | 2026 | Research article Design not recorded in structured metadata | 0 | cc by PMID 41872383 · DOI · PMC13469380 |
The diffuse-type tenosynovial giant cell tumor (dt-TGCT) patient journey: a prospective multicenter study [1]
Abstract reading summary — source excerpts
- Opening excerpt
- BackgroundTenosynovial giant cell tumor (TGCT) is a rare, locally aggressive neoplasm arising from the synovium of joints, bursae, and tendon sheaths affecting small and large joints.
- Closing excerpt
- term=NCT02948088&draw=2 .
- Interpretation limits
- Verbatim excerpts from the authors’ abstract; the closing excerpt may describe a finding, limitation or recommendation. Design, population, effect size and uncertainty have not been independently extracted or appraised. Read the complete abstract and linked paper before interpreting the findings.
Read complete abstract (367 words)
BackgroundTenosynovial giant cell tumor (TGCT) is a rare, locally aggressive neoplasm arising from the synovium of joints, bursae, and tendon sheaths affecting small and large joints. It represents a wide spectrum ranging from minimally symptomatic to massively debilitating. Most findings to date are mainly from small, retrospective case series, and thus the morbidity and actual impact of this rare disease remain to be elucidated. This study prospectively explores the management of TGCT in tertiary sarcoma centers.MethodsThe TGCT Observational Platform Project registry was a multinational, multicenter, prospective observational study involving 12 tertiary sarcoma centers in 7 European countries, and 2 US sites. This study enrolled for 2 years all consecutive ≥ 18 years old patients, with histologically diagnosed primary or recurrent cases of diffuse-type TGCT. Patient demographic and clinical characteristics were collected at baseline and every 6 months for 24 months. Quality of life questionnaires (PROMIS-PF and EQ-5D) were also administered at the same time-points. Here we report baseline patient characteristics.Results166 patients were enrolled between November 2016 and March 2019. Baseline characteristics were: mean age 44 years (mean age at disease onset: 39 years), 139/166 (83.7%) had prior treatment, 71/166 patients (42.8%) had ≥ 1 recurrence after treatment of their primary tumor, 76/136 (55.9%) visited a medical specialist ≥ 5 times, 66/116 (56.9%) missed work in the 24 months prior to baseline, and 17/166 (11.6%) changed employment status or retired prematurely due to disease burden. Prior treatment consisted of surgery (i.e., arthroscopic, open synovectomy) (128/166; 77.1%) and systemic treatments (52/166; 31.3%) with imatinib (19/52; 36.5%) or pexidartinib (27/52; 51.9%). Treatment strategies at baseline visits consisted mainly of watchful waiting (81/166; 48.8%), surgery (41/166; 24.7%), or targeted systemic therapy (37/166; 22.3%). Patients indicated for treatment reported more impairment compared to patients indicated for watchful waiting: worst stiffness NRS 5.16/3.44, worst pain NRS 6.13/5.03, PROMIS-PF 39.48/43.85, and EQ-5D VAS 66.54/71.85.ConclusionThis study confirms that diffuse-type TGCT can highly impact quality of life. A prospective observational registry in rare disease is feasible and can be a tool to collect curated-population reflective data in orphan diseases. Name of registry: Tenosynovial Giant Cell Tumors (TGCT) Observational Platform Project (TOPP).Trial registration numberNCT02948088. Date of registration: 10 October 2016. URL of Trial registry record: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02948088?term=NCT02948088&draw=2 .
Abstract reproduced from the open-access article under the recorded cc by licence; © the authors. PMID 33926503 · DOI · PMC8086070
Recurrent novel HMGA2-NCOR2 fusions characterize a subset of keratin-positive giant cell-rich soft tissue tumors [2]
Abstract reading summary — source excerpts
- Opening excerpt
- Giant cell tumors of soft tissue (GCT-ST) are rare low-grade neoplasms that were at one time thought to represent the soft tissue counterparts of GCT of bone (GCT-B) but are now known to lack the H3F3 mutations characteristic of osseous GCT.
- Closing excerpt
- Their natural history appears favorable, although a study of additional cases and longer follow-up are warranted.
- Interpretation limits
- Verbatim excerpts from the authors’ abstract; the closing excerpt may describe a finding, limitation or recommendation. Design, population, effect size and uncertainty have not been independently extracted or appraised. Read the complete abstract and linked paper before interpreting the findings.
Read complete abstract (294 words)
Giant cell tumors of soft tissue (GCT-ST) are rare low-grade neoplasms that were at one time thought to represent the soft tissue counterparts of GCT of bone (GCT-B) but are now known to lack the H3F3 mutations characteristic of osseous GCT. We present six distinctive giant cell-rich soft tissue neoplasms that expressed keratins and carried a recurrent HMGA2-NCOR2 gene fusion. Patients were five females and one male aged 14-60 years (median, 29). All presented with superficial (subcutaneous) masses that were removed by conservative marginal (3) or wide (2) local excision. The tumors originated in the upper extremity (2), lower extremity (2), head/neck (1), and trunk (1). Five patients with follow-up (median, 21 months; range, 14-168) remained disease-free. Grossly, all tumors were well-demarcated but not encapsulated with variable lobulation. Histologically, they were composed of bland plump epithelioid or ovoid to spindled mononuclear cells admixed with evenly distributed multinucleated osteoclast-type giant cells. Foci of stromal hemorrhage and hemosiderin were seen in all cases. The mitotic activity ranged from 2 to 14/10 high power fields (median: 10). Foci of necrosis and vascular invasion were seen in one case each. The mononuclear cells were immunoreactive with the AE1/AE3 keratin cocktail and less frequently/less diffusely for K7 and K19 but lacked expression of other lineage-associated markers. RNA-based next-generation sequencing revealed an HMGA2-NCOR2 fusion in all tumors. None of the keratin-negative conventional GCT-ST showed the HMGA2-NCOR2 fusion (0/7). Metaplastic bone (4/9) and SATB2 expression (3/4) were frequent in keratin-negative conventional GCT-ST but were lacking in keratin-positive HMGA2-NCOR2 fusion-positive tumors. The distinctive immunophenotype and genotype of these tumors strongly suggest that they represent a discrete entity, differing from conventional GCT-ST and other osteoclast-rich morphologic mimics. Their natural history appears favorable, although a study of additional cases and longer follow-up are warranted.
Abstract reproduced from the open-access article under the recorded cc by licence; © the authors. PMID 33742141 · DOI · PMC8295036
Globally altered epigenetic landscape and delayed osteogenic differentiation in H3.3-G34W-mutant giant cell tumor of bone [3]
Abstract reading summary — source excerpts
- Opening excerpt
- The neoplastic stromal cells of giant cell tumor of bone (GCTB) carry a mutation in H3F3A, leading to a mutant histone variant, H3.
- Closing excerpt
- 3-G34W-associated changes.
- Interpretation limits
- Verbatim excerpts from the authors’ abstract; the closing excerpt may describe a finding, limitation or recommendation. Design, population, effect size and uncertainty have not been independently extracted or appraised. Read the complete abstract and linked paper before interpreting the findings.
Read complete abstract (138 words)
The neoplastic stromal cells of giant cell tumor of bone (GCTB) carry a mutation in H3F3A, leading to a mutant histone variant, H3.3-G34W, as a sole recurrent genetic alteration. We show that in patient-derived stromal cells H3.3-G34W is incorporated into the chromatin and associates with massive epigenetic alterations on the DNA methylation, chromatin accessibility and histone modification level, that can be partially recapitulated in an orthogonal cell line system by the introduction of H3.3-G34W. These epigenetic alterations affect mainly heterochromatic and bivalent regions and provide possible explanations for the genomic instability, as well as the osteolytic phenotype of GCTB. The mutation occurs in differentiating mesenchymal stem cells and associates with an impaired osteogenic differentiation. We propose that the observed epigenetic alterations reflect distinct differentiation stages of H3.3 WT and H3.3 MUT stromal cells and add to H3.3-G34W-associated changes.
Abstract reproduced from the open-access article under the recorded cc by licence; © the authors. PMID 33110075 · DOI · PMC7591516
Giant cell tumor of bone inhibits osteoblastogenesis via WNT5B [4]
Abstract reading summary — source excerpts
- Opening excerpt
- IntroductionGiant cell tumor of bone (GCTB) induces overproduction of bone-resorbing osteoclasts through receptor activator of nuclear factor kappa B ligand (RANKL), leading to bone resorption and destruction.
- Closing excerpt
- ConclusionThese studies indicate that GCTB not only induces osteoclasts, but also possesses activity that inhibits bone formation.
- Interpretation limits
- Verbatim excerpts from the authors’ abstract; the closing excerpt may describe a finding, limitation or recommendation. Design, population, effect size and uncertainty have not been independently extracted or appraised. Read the complete abstract and linked paper before interpreting the findings.
Read complete abstract (225 words)
IntroductionGiant cell tumor of bone (GCTB) induces overproduction of bone-resorbing osteoclasts through receptor activator of nuclear factor kappa B ligand (RANKL), leading to bone resorption and destruction. Consequently, denosumab, a neutralizing antibody against RANKL (a cytokine essential for osteoclast induction), is used to treat patients with GCTB. However, the activity of bone formation in GCTB remains poorly understood. Here, we show that GCTB antagonizes bone formation by expressing WNT5B, which inhibits bone formation.Materials and methodsCo-culture of NCC-GCTB1-C1 (GCTB1s), a human GCTB cell line, with human adipose-derived stem cells (ADSCs) was performed with osteoblast induction medium. To identify the inhibitors of osteoblast differentiation, we reanalyzed the single-cell RNA sequencing data that was previously published. In addition, we performed spatial transcriptome analysis (Visium) against the section of paraffin block of GCTB. The targeted protein was knocked out using CRISPR/Cas9 and co-culture was performed.ResultsCo-culture of GCTB1s with ADSCs significantly inhibited mineralization of ADSCs. Reanalysis of single-cell RNA sequencing data indicated that GCTB tumors express WNT5B, and we observed that GCTB1s express WNT5B. We then knocked out WNT5B in GCTB1s using CRISPR/Cas9 and co-cultured them with ADSCs and observed significant rescue of mineralization in ADSCs relative to ADSCs cultured with GCTB1s expressing WNT5B. We also show that ADSC supernatants induce mineralization of GCTB1s.ConclusionThese studies indicate that GCTB not only induces osteoclasts, but also possesses activity that inhibits bone formation.
Abstract reproduced from the open-access article under the recorded cc by licence; © the authors. PMID 41872383 · DOI · PMC13469380
Key reviews and meta-analyses
The most cited review-type papers among PubMed’s best-match results for this heading, listed with bibliographic details only. Follow the links for the full text and access terms.
- Research article Giant cell tumor of bone [5]
- Research article Giant cell tumor of the extremity: A review of 349 cases from a single institution [6]
- Research article Giant cell tumor of bone: review, mimics, and new developments in treatment [7]
- Research article Pexidartinib: First Approval [8]
- Research article The clinical approach toward giant cell tumor of bone [9]
- Research article Giant cell tumour of bone: morphological, biological and histogenetical aspects [10]
References
- Bernthal NM, Spierenburg G, Healey JH, Palmerini E, Bauer S, TOPP Study Group, et al.. The diffuse-type tenosynovial giant cell tumor (dt-TGCT) patient journey: a prospective multicenter study. . 2021. PMID 33926503 · DOI · PMC8086070
- Agaimy A, Michal M, Stoehr R, Ferrazzi F, Fabian P, Michal M, et al.. Recurrent novel HMGA2-NCOR2 fusions characterize a subset of keratin-positive giant cell-rich soft tissue tumors. . 2021. PMID 33742141 · DOI · PMC8295036
- Lutsik P, Baude A, Mancarella D, Öz S, Kühn A, Toth R, et al.. Globally altered epigenetic landscape and delayed osteogenic differentiation in H3.3-G34W-mutant giant cell tumor of bone. . 2020. PMID 33110075 · DOI · PMC7591516
- Shimada M, Tsuyama T, Yoshimura N, Tateyama M, Matsunaga H, Homma F, et al.. Giant cell tumor of bone inhibits osteoblastogenesis via WNT5B. . 2026. PMID 41872383 · DOI · PMC13469380
- Turcotte RE. Giant cell tumor of bone. Orthop Clin North Am. 2006. PMID 16311110 · DOI
- Errani C, Ruggieri P, Asenzio MA, Toscano A, Colangeli S, Rimondi E, et al.. Giant cell tumor of the extremity: A review of 349 cases from a single institution. Cancer Treat Rev. 2010. PMID 19879054 · DOI
- Chakarun CJ, Forrester DM, Gottsegen CJ, Patel DB, White EA, Matcuk GR. Giant cell tumor of bone: review, mimics, and new developments in treatment. Radiographics. 2013. PMID 23322837 · DOI
- Lamb YN. Pexidartinib: First Approval. Drugs. 2019. PMID 31602563 · DOI · PMC7044138
- van der Heijden L, Dijkstra PD, van de Sande MA, Kroep JR, Nout RA, van Rijswijk CS, et al.. The clinical approach toward giant cell tumor of bone. Oncologist. 2014. PMID 24718514 · DOI · PMC4012970
- Werner M. Giant cell tumour of bone: morphological, biological and histogenetical aspects. Int Orthop. 2006. PMID 17013643 · DOI · PMC3172738
About this article
- Sources
- NLM Medical Subject Headings (definition, synonyms); NCBI PubMed (counts, identifiers); Europe PMC (open-access abstracts and citation counts).
- Verification
- Every reference was resolved against PubMed on 2026-10-31; title, year and DOI matched.
- Review state
- automated source verified; no human expert review has been recorded yet.
- Version
- 1, last updated 2026-10-29.
See how EvidenceLib is built. Spotted an error? Email support@evidencehelix.com.
Evidence strength
EvidenceHelix's computed view of the study designs behind this topic: how common meta-analyses, randomized trials and reviews are, how recent the literature is, and a plain-language reading. It describes the design mix of the literature. It is not a quality appraisal of any study, and it is not medical advice.