Retrospective evaluation of clinical outcome after chemotherapy for lymphoma in 15 equids (1991-2017)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Prognosis associated with lymphoma in horses is poorly characterized, and treatment is often palliative. Long-term outcome after chemotherapy for horses with lymphoma is not well documented. OBJECTIVE: To report long-term outcome of horses with lymphoma treated with chemotherapy. ANIMALS: Fifteen equids. METHODS: Retrospective case series. Medical record search and call for cases on the ACVIM listserv for horses treated with chemotherapy for lymphoma. RESULTS: Fifteen cases with adequate data were identified. Complete remission was achieved in 5 horses (33.3%), partial response was achieved in 9 equids (60%), and stable disease was achieved in 1 horse. Overall response rate was 93.3% (14/15). Overall median survival time was 8 months (range, 1-46 months). Nine horses experienced a total of 14 adverse effects attributable to chemotherapy. Adverse effects were graded according to the Veterinary Cooperative Oncology Group common terminology criteria for adverse events grading system (grade 1 alopecia, n = 2; grade 1 neutropenia, n = 2; grade 1 lymphopenia, n = 3; grade 1 lethargy, n = 1; grade 2 neurotoxicity, n = 1; grade 2 colic, n = 1; grade 1 hypersensitivity, n = 1; grade 2 hypersensitivity, n = 2; grade 5 hypersensitivity, n = 1). Higher grade adverse effects most commonly were associated with doxorubicin administration (n = 4), including 1 horse that died 18 hours post-administration. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL IMPORTANCE: Chemotherapy can be used successfully for treatment of horses with lymphoma. Adverse effects, most commonly mild, occurred in approximately two-thirds of treated horses.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".