MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Canine limbal melanoma: 30 cases (1992–2004). Part 1. Signalment, clinical and histological features and pedigree analysis

2006· article· en· W2090654162 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueVeterinary Ophthalmology · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicVeterinary Oncology Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMelanomaMedicineDorsumPedigree chartDermatologyClinical pathologyOcular MelanomaEye colorPathologyNodular melanomaBiologyAnatomy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: (1) To review the signalment, clinical, and histological features of canine limbal melanoma; (2) to perform pedigree analysis on breeds predisposed to limbal melanoma to establish if common ancestry exists; and (3) to investigate if any ancestral relationship exists between canine limbal melanoma and canine anterior uveal melanoma (CAUM). DESIGN: Retrospective study. ANIMALS STUDIED: Thirty dogs with limbal melanoma. METHODS: Medical records of patients were reviewed. Follow-up information was obtained by re-examination of patients or telecommunications with the referring veterinary surgeons or the owners. Pedigrees were analyzed for common ancestry amongst affected dogs. RESULTS The mean age (+/- SD) at diagnosis was 6.2 (+/- 2.75) years with a range from 1 to 11 years. There was a bimodal distribution of ages with a peak at 3-4 years and a peak at 7-10 years. There was no eye predilection or predisposition for sex or coat color. Twenty-five (83%) of the limbal melanomas occurred within a dorsal arc from the dorsomedial to the ventrolateral limbus. Golden retrievers were four times more common in the melanoma group compared to the Animal Health Trust population (P < 0.0001). Labrador retrievers were three times more common in the melanoma group (P=0.01). Pedigree analysis on eight Golden retrievers [limbal melanoma (n=5), CAUM (n=2) and diffuse ocular melanosis (n=1)], revealed a pattern of inter-relatedness consistent with the condition(s) being caused, at least in part, by a genetic mutation(s). A similar level of inter relatedness was evident in six Labrador retrievers (limbal melanoma (n=2) and CAUM (n=4)). In 5/22 cases (23%), histological features suggestive of malignancy were present including intratumor necrosis in 4/22 cases (18%) and cellular atypia in 1/22 cases (5%). CONCLUSIONS: In Golden and Labrador retrievers there is evidence that limbal melanomas, CAUM and ocular melanosis are at least in part heritable and that the same genetic mutation(s) may be causally associated with melanocytic disease at different ocular sites. The same genetic mutation(s) may be present in these two breeds. Histology should be performed on all cases to identify those with greater malignant potential.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.224
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.116
GPT teacher head0.409
Teacher spread0.293 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it