MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4392488826 · doi:10.3390/ani14050802

Pathological Characterization and Risk Factors of Splenic Nodular Lesions in Dogs (Canis lupus familiaris)

2024· article· en· W4392488826 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Gloria Corvera, Raúl Alegría‐Morán, Federico Cifuentes, Cristian G. Torres

Bibliographic record

VenueAnimals · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicVeterinary Oncology Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePathologyHemangiosarcomaNodule (geology)Odds ratioSpleenHyperplasiaLymphoid hyperplasiaInternal medicineLymphomaBiologyAngiosarcoma

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In dogs, the spleen is a secondary lymphoid organ that can be affected by both neoplastic and non-neoplastic nodules. In general, few studies relate histopathological diagnosis to tumor size and the number of nodules in spleen biopsies. Some of these studies are inconclusive regarding the difference between neoplastic and non-neoplastic lesions and have small sample sizes or do not consider all splenic lesions. This study aimed to characterize splenic masses and determine risk factors for spleen tumors in dogs. A total of 507 histological reports corresponding to the diagnosis of splenic lesions in dogs from a private laboratory of animal pathology in the Metropolitan Region, Chile, were used. Data were analyzed by descriptive statistics and multiple logistic regression. The most frequent neoplastic and non-neoplastic diagnoses were hemangiosarcoma and hyperplasia, respectively. Most of the cases occurred in male (265 cases, 52.3%), senior (421 cases, 83%), and purebred individuals (342 cases, 67.5%). The most affected breeds were the Cocker Spaniel, German Shepherd, and Labrador Retriever. The most frequent lesion was a single nodule. The variables that exhibited a greater risk for the presentation of splenic neoplasia were male sex (odds ratio (OR) = 16.21; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.741–150.879; p = 0.014), the presence of two or more splenic nodules (OR = 3.94; 95% CI 2.168–7.177; p < 0.001), an increase in nodule size greater than 2 cm (OR for quartiles 2, 3 and 4 of 2.2; 95% CI 1.036–4.941; p = 0.041, 2.9; 95% CI 1.331–6.576; p = 0.008, and 3.6; 95% CI 1.562–8.499; p = 0.003, respectively), and increasing age (OR = 1.23; 95% CI 1.048–1.436; p = 0.011). On the other hand, males exhibited a lower risk as age increases (OR = 0.76; 95% CI 0.615–0.928; p = 0.008). In conclusion, this study identified that males, multinodular presentation, nodule size, and age are risk factors for the occurrence of splenic neoplasia in dogs, knowledge that will contribute to the diagnostic management of dogs with spleen lesions.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.052
GPT teacher head0.349
Teacher spread0.297 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations5
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnimalsSame topicVeterinary Oncology ResearchFrench-language works237,207