Treatment of myeloid neoplasia with doxorubicin and cytarabine in 11 dogs
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS) and acute myeloid leukaemia (AML) are primary myeloid neoplasms in dogs generally considered to have a poor outcome. In this study, we assessed toxicity, efficacy and outcome of concurrent administration of doxorubicin and cytarabine in 11 dogs with myeloid neoplasia. Bone marrow specimens were reviewed by three pathologists and classified as either MDS (n = 2), high grade MDS/early AML (MDS/AML; n = 4) or AML (n = 5). The median number of treatment cycles was 5 (range 1-9) and resolution of cytopenia was reported in 7 of 11 dogs including 2 dogs with MDS, 2 dogs with MDS/AML, and 3 dogs with AML. The median duration of remission in the seven responders was 344 days (range 109-1428) and the median overall survival for all dogs was 369 days. Adverse events consisted of predominantly low-grade gastrointestinal illness and myelosuppression. Three dogs developed grade V toxicity manifesting with heart failure (n = 2) at 369 and 1170 days after diagnosis and acute gastrointestinal side effects (n =1). Despite a limited sample size, these results suggest that a doxorubicin and cytarabine protocol may be considered as a therapeutic option in dogs with myeloid neoplasia. Protocol safety, in particular regarding myocardial toxicity, and efficacy should be further investigated.
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) | 0.000 | 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".