Effect of cyclooxygenase inhibitors in a xenograft model of canine mammary tumours
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Inhibition of cyclooxygenase-2 (COX-2) represents a possible avenue for the prevention and/or treatment of some cancers. Our goal was to compare the effect of a selective inhibitor of COX-2, deracoxib, and a COX-1 and -2 inhibitor, piroxicam, on the growth of canine mammary tumours in a murine model. CMT-9 was used to induce xenografts in nude mice. Mice were treated with piroxicam (0.6 mg kg(-1)), deracoxib (6 mg kg(-1)) or a control solution. Tumour volumes between 0 and 24 days post-treatment showed no significant difference between all groups. A second series of experiments was performed with a higher dose of piroxicam (0.9 mg kg(-1)). Tumour volumes between 14 and 21 days post-treatment were significantly smaller in piroxicam-treated mice compared with controls. These results demonstrate that COX inhibition reduced the growth of canine mammary cancer xenografts in mice, suggesting that COX inhibitors could have a positive effect in dogs.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".