Outcomes of eight cats with oral neoplasia treated with radical mandibulectomy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To report outcomes after radical mandibulectomy in cats. STUDY DESIGN: Multi-institutional retrospective study. ANIMALS: Eight cats were included. METHODS: Medical records were searched for cats with confirmed oral neoplasia treated with radical mandibulectomy. Data collected included demographics, surgical procedure, histopathological diagnosis, postoperative management, and outcomes. RESULTS: Ages ranged from 8 to 17 years. All cats had 75% to 90% of the mandible removed and feeding tubes placed. Seven cats had squamous cell carcinoma, and one cat had a giant cell tumor. Six cats ate on their own postoperatively. Three cats had local recurrence and tumor-related died at 136 and 291 days. Six cats had no recurrence, with survival times of 156, 465, 608, and 1023 days, and two cats were still alive at 316 and 461 days after surgery. The three long-term survivors died of causes unrelated to oral neoplasia. One cat died at 156 days due to aspiration of food material. The overall estimated mean survival time was 712 days. CONCLUSION: After radical mandibulectomy, independent food intake was achieved in 6 of eight cats, and four cats lived longer than one year. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: Radical mandibulectomy should be considered for the treatment of extensive oral neoplasia in cats. Successful long-term outcomes are possible with aggressive supportive care perioperatively.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| 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 teacher head, 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".