Clinical presentation, treatment and outcome in 31 dogs with presumed primary colorectal lymphoma (2001–2013)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The objective of this multicentre retrospective study was to describe clinical presentation, treatment and outcome and to determine prognostic factors for dogs with presumed primary colorectal lymphoma (PCRL). A total of 31 dogs were included. The predominant features of PCRL were high grade (n = 18) and immunophenotype B (n = 24). Most dogs were substage b (n = 25) with higher prevalence of haematochezia (n = 20). One dog had surgery only. Thirty dogs received chemotherapy; amongst them 13 had surgery or radiotherapy. Progression free survival (PFS) was 1318 days and disease-related median survival time (MST) was 1845 days. Fourteen dogs were alive at the end of the study with a median follow-up time of 684 days (3-4678 days). Younger dogs had longer PFS (P = 0.031) and disease-related MST (P = 0.01). Presence of haematochezia corresponded with longer PFS (P = 0.02). Addition of local treatment to chemotherapy did not significantly improve the outcome (P = 0.584). Canine PCRL has considerably longer PFS and MST than other forms of non-Hodgkin's 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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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".