ReviewOncology letters2021
Genomics and transcriptomics in veterinary oncology.
Review in Oncology letters, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparative genomic analysis of multiple mammary tumors from a single dog: whole-genome sequencing study.Irish veterinary journal · 2025Article
- Harnessing multi‑omics to revolutionize understanding and management of osteosarcoma: A pathway to precision medicine (Review).International journal of molecular medicine · 2025Review
- Neoplasia in the dromedary camel: a review (Frontiers in veterinary science · 2025Review
- Article
- Animal Wellness: The Power of Multiomics and Integrative Strategies: Multiomics in Improving Animal Health.Veterinary medicine international · 2024Review
- Canine and murine models of osteosarcoma.Veterinary pathology · 2022Review
- A Comparative View on Molecular Alterations and Potential Therapeutic Strategies for Canine Oral Melanoma.Veterinary sciences · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The sequencing of the canine genome, combined with additional genomic technologies, has created opportunities for research linking veterinary genomics with naturally occurring cancer in dogs. Also, as numerous canine cancers have features in common with human cancers, comparative studies can be performed to evaluate the use of cancers in dogs as models for human cancer. There have been several reviews of veterinary genomics but, to the best of our knowledge, there has been no comprehensive review of the literature of canine cancer genomics. PubMed and CAB Abstracts databases were searched to retrieve relevant literature using the search terms 'veterinary', 'cancer' or 'oncology', and 'genomics' or 'transcriptomics'. Results were manually assessed and grouped based on the techniques used, the cancer type investigated and genomic lesions targeted. The search resulted in the retrieval of 44 genomic and transcriptomic studies, with the most common technique employed being comparative genomic hybridization. Across both fields, the most commonly studied cancer type was canine osteosarcoma. Genomic and transcriptomic aberrations in canine cancer often reflected those reported in the corresponding human cancers. Analysis of the literature indicated that employing genomic and transcriptomic technologies has been instrumental in developing the understanding of the origin, development and pathogenesis of several canine cancers. However, their use in canine oncology is at an early phase, and there appears to be comparatively little understanding of certain canine cancer types in contrast to their human forms. Aberrations detected in all tumors were tabulated, and the results for osteosarcoma, lymphoma and leukemia, mast cell tumor, transmissible venereal tumor and urothelial carcinoma discussed in detail.
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.