Reason for euthanasia in dogs with urothelial carcinoma treated with chemotherapy or radiation therapy or both: A retrospective observational study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Clients want to know the ultimate cause of death in their pet after cancer treatment. The cause of euthanasia and investigation of urinary obstruction in treated dogs with urothelial carcinoma (UC) has not been specifically reported in veterinary literature. HYPOTHESIS/OBJECTIVES: Our hypothesis was that the majority of treated dogs with UC are euthanized secondary to primary tumor factors, such as urinary obstruction. ANIMALS: Fifty-nine client-owned dogs diagnosed with UC. METHODS: Retrospective observational study on clinical signs and disease at euthanasia of dogs with UC treated by radiation therapy or chemotherapy or both. RESULTS: The median overall survival time (OST) of all dogs was 339 days (range, 17-1996; 95% confidence interval [CI], 185-392; interquartile range [IQR], 112-505). Of dogs deemed to have been euthanized because of UC (50/59, 85%), the primary cause was considered to be local progression in 31/50 (62%), most often because of perceived complete or partial urinary obstruction (24/31, 77%). No variables were found to be predictive of urinary obstruction. The overall documented metastatic rate was 56%. In dogs euthanized because of UC, metastasis was deemed to be the cause in 19/50 (38%) dogs. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL IMPORTANCE: Regardless of the type of treatment, UC in dogs has a poor prognosis and there is a continuing need to improve treatments that focus on local control of the primary tumor, given its high contribution to the decision for euthanasia. Proactive management to avoid the high frequency of urinary obstruction may be worthy of future investigation.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".