MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409119705 · doi:10.1111/evj.14502

Intratumoural tigilanol tiglate in the multicentre treatment of equine sarcoids and cutaneous melanomas

2025· article· en· W4409119705 on OpenAlexaff
Raphael Labens, Corey Saba, Jarred Williams, A. R. Hollis, J. M. Ensink, Eduard Jose‐Cunilleras, Mireia Jordana‐Garcia, Kerstin Bergvall, Mick Ruppin, Frank Condon, Chiara Spelta, Y Elce, Thomas De Ridder, John M. Morton, Cassandra McGee, Paul Reddell

Bibliographic record

VenueEquine Veterinary Journal · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicVeterinary Oncology Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Prince Edward Island
FundersQbioticsUniversitat Autònoma de BarcelonaSveriges LantbruksuniversitetUniversiteit UtrechtCharles Sturt University
KeywordsMedicineLogistic regressionClinical trialDermatologyComplete responseInternal medicineChemotherapy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

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 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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.036

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.045
GPT teacher head0.377
Teacher spread0.331 · 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

Citations3
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEquine Veterinary JournalSame topicVeterinary Oncology ResearchFrench-language works237,207