Intratumoural tigilanol tiglate in the multicentre treatment of equine sarcoids and cutaneous melanomas
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background Intralesional chemotherapeutic administration represents an important treatment option for equine cutaneous neoplasia. Tigilanol‐tiglate (TT), a novel molecule extracted from Fontainea picrosperma , an Australian rainforest plant, is registered for intratumoural treatment of canine MCT, leading to rapid oncosis and tumour slough. Evidence from horses is limited but suggests that efficacy may be similar. Objectives To evaluate the response to intratumoural TT treatment in horses with sarcoids (fibroblastic/nodular) and cutaneous melanomas. Study Design Two noncontrolled prospective multicentre clinical trials, one for each of sarcoids and melanomas. Methods Cases were enrolled across multiple sites and treated by the same site‐specific clinician with intralesional TT (sarcoids: 0.35 mg/cm 3 ; melanomas: 0.2 mg/cm 3 of tumour volume − T vol ; max dose 2 mg). Quantitative ( T vol regression) and qualitative outcomes (likely tumour free (LTF) per expert opinion) were recorded, and potential determinants of efficacy were assessed using random effects logistic models. A full clinical response was complete T vol regression and a LTF treatment site. Results Forty‐one sarcoids and 97 melanomas were enrolled and treated. 73/74% of treated sarcoids/melanomas showed complete T vol regression. 64/61% (sarcoids/melanomas) showed a full clinical response at medians of 546/247 days post final treatment. For both tumour types, this response was dependent on initial tumour volume ( P sarcoids = 0.006; P melanomas <0.001). The predicted probability of a full clinical response was 6 times greater for initially small sarcoids ( T vol = 1 cm 3 ) than for the maximum study volume ( T vol = 6 cm 3 ). For melanomas in the perineal region, this was 11 times greater for T vol ≤0.3 cm 3 than for tumours ≥2.0 cm 3 . For melanomas, tumour location further affected treatment efficacy = 0.005). In total, 5 adverse events were reported. Main Limitations Lack of treatment control and histologic/biomolecular follow‐up data. Conclusions The observed therapeutic efficacy of TT supports clinical use as well as early interventions in horses. Successful use necessitates knowledge of the drug's mode of action and management of associated local site responses.
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".