MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4411240148 · doi:10.1038/s41698-025-00988-5

Identification of novel genetic mutations for the treatment prognostication of canine lymphoma

2025· article· en· W4411240148 on OpenAlexaff
Josephine Tsang, Qi Jing Yap, Sheena Kapoor, Jerry Cromarty, Sushmita Sen, Min‐Ji Kim, George Courcoubetis, Deanna Swartzfager, Stanley Park, Ilona N. Holcomb, Jamin Koo

Bibliographic record

Venuenpj Precision Oncology · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicVeterinary Oncology Research
Canadian institutionsImpact
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIdentification (biology)Canine LymphomaLymphomaComputational biologyMedicineBiologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Canine lymphoma, a phenotypically and genetically heterogeneous disease, represents a significant proportion of canine cancers. We present a large-scale study of 238 dogs with lymphoma to better understand the genetic landscape of canine lymphoma, as well as the relationship to clinical outcomes. Using a targeted next-generation sequencing panel comprising 308 genes, we screened somatic and germline mutations in matched tumor and normal samples. Our findings revealed key associations between genetic alterations and lymphoma subtypes, with certain somatic variants linked to significant differences in response to common chemotherapy regimens. Recurrent mutations in genes such as KMT2C, KMT2D, NOTCH2, TRAF3, CCND1, ARID1A, CREBBP, and TP53 were observed, with TRAF3 mutations standing out for their significant association with prolonged progression-free survival and overall survival in B-cell lymphomas. In contrast, mutations in PIK3CD and CREBBP were associated with inferior outcomes in T-cell lymphomas, highlighting the immunophenotype-specific impact of genetic alterations on treatment responses. These findings support the integration of comprehensive genomic profiling in planning treatment strategies and optimizing clinical outcomes in canine lymphomas.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
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 head0.073
GPT teacher head0.444
Teacher spread0.371 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuenpj Precision OncologySame topicVeterinary Oncology ResearchFrench-language works237,207