ArticlePloS one2017
Dose escalation study to evaluate safety, tolerability and efficacy of intravenous etoposide phosphate administration in 27 dogs with multicentric lymphoma.
Article in PloS one, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- Cytotoxic and apoptotic effects of etoposide and ellagic acid alone or with possible synergistic/additive combinations on a canine D-17 osteosarcoma cell line.Veterinarni medicina · 2025Article
- Review of Canine Lymphoma Treated with Chemotherapy-Outcomes and Prognostic Factors.Veterinary sciences · 2023Review
- Article
- Evaluation of serum thymidine kinase 1 activity as a biomarker for treatment effectiveness and prediction of relapse in dogs with non-Hodgkin lymphoma.Journal of veterinary internal medicine · 2019Article
- A Comprehensive Preclinical Evaluation of Intravenous Etoposide Lipid Emulsion.Pharmaceutical research · 2019Article
- Radiobiological Characterization of Canine Malignant Melanoma Cell Lines with Different Types of Ionizing Radiation and Efficacy Evaluation with Cytotoxic Agents.International journal of molecular sciences · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Comparative oncology has shown that naturally occurring canine cancers are of valuable and translatable interest for the understanding of human cancer biology and the characterization of new therapies. This work was part of a comparative oncology project assessing a new, clinical-stage topoisomerase II inhibitor and comparing it with etoposide in dogs with spontaneous lymphoma with the objective to translate findings from dogs to humans. Etoposide is a topoisomerase II inhibitor widely used in various humans' solid and hematopoietic cancer, but little data is available concerning its potential antitumor efficacy in dogs. Etoposide phosphate is a water-soluble prodrug of etoposide which is expected to be better tolerated in dogs. The objectives of this study were to assess the safety, the tolerability and the efficacy of intravenous etoposide phosphate in dogs with multicentric lymphoma. Seven dose levels were evaluated in a traditional 3+3 phase I design. Twenty-seven owned-dogs with high-grade multicentric lymphoma were enrolled and treated with three cycles of etoposide phosphate IV injections every 2 weeks. Adverse effects were graded according to the Veterinary Cooperative Oncology Group criteria. A complete end-staging was realized 45 days after inclusion. The maximal tolerated dose was 300 mg/m2. At this dose level, the overall response rate was 83.3% (n = 6, 3 PR and 2 CR). Only a moderate reversible gastrointestinal toxicity, no severe myelotoxicity and no hypersensitivity reaction were reported at this dose level. Beyond the characterization of etoposide clinical efficacy in dogs, this study underlined the clinical and therapeutic homologies between dog and human lymphomas.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.