Evaluation of a multidrug chemotherapy protocol with mitoxantrone based maintenance (CHOP-MA) for the treatment of canine lymphoma
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of adding mitoxantrone to a cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, L-asparaginase and prednisone containing protocol. Sixty-five dogs with multicentric lymphoma were evaluated for overall remission and survival times. Remission and survival time versus stage, substage, pretreatment hypercalcaemia and pretreatment steroid administration were also evaluated. Overall median remission for dogs with multicentric lymphoma was 302 days and overall median survival was 622 days. Of the dogs with multicentric lymphoma, 23 (35%) received all scheduled mitoxantrone doses. Only median survival versus substage was found to be significant (substage a median survival was 679 days and substage b median survival was 302 days, P = 0.025). Increasing the total combined dose of doxorubicin and mitoxantrone may improve remission times when compared with historical controls, and further studies are needed to determine how best to utilize mitoxantrone in multidrug chemotherapy protocols for canine multicentric lymphoma.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".