Osteosarcoma following tibial plateau leveling osteotomy in dogs: 29 cases (1997–2011)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To determine the signalment, tibial plateau leveling osteotomy (TPLO) plate type, clinical staging information, treatment, and oncological outcome in dogs that developed osteosarcoma at the proximal aspect of the tibia following TPLO and to calculate the interval between TPLO and osteosarcoma diagnosis. DESIGN: Multi-institutional retrospective case series. ANIMALS: 29 dogs. PROCEDURES: Medical records from 8 participating institutions were searched for dogs that developed osteosarcoma (confirmed through cytologic or histologic evaluation) at previous TPLO sites. Signalment, TPLO details, staging tests, treatment data, and outcome information were recorded. Descriptive statistics were calculated, and disease-free intervals and survival times were evaluated by means of Kaplan-Meier analysis. RESULTS: 29 dogs met the inclusion criteria. The mean age was 9.2 years and mean weight was 45.1 kg (99.2 lb) at the time of osteosarcoma diagnosis. Most dogs had swelling over the proximal aspect of the tibia (17/21) and lameness of the affected limb (28/29). The mean interval between TPLO and osteosarcoma diagnosis was 5.3 years. One type of cast stainless steel TPLO plate was used in most (18) dogs; the remaining dogs had received plates of wrought stainless steel (n = 4) or unrecorded type (7). Twenty-three of 29 dogs underwent treatment for osteosarcoma. Median survival time for 10 dogs that underwent amputation of the affected limb and received ≥ 1 chemotherapeutic treatment was 313 days. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Results supported that osteosarcoma should be a differential diagnosis for dogs with a history of TPLO that later develop lameness and swelling at the previous surgical site. Oncological outcome following amputation and chemotherapy appeared to be similar to outcomes previously reported for dogs with appendicular osteosarcoma.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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".