ArticleOpen veterinary journal2024
Clinical differentiation of cutaneous and subcutaneous mast cell tumors in dogs: A pilot study.
Article in Open veterinary journal, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Canine mast cell tumors (MCT) in the skin are classified into cutaneous MCT (cMCT) and subcutaneous MCT (scMCT) types, which exhibit different clinical behaviors. Although these types have been classified only by histology, preoperative differentiation is important for proper surgical planning. Aim: To examine the accuracy of differentiating these types based on the gross features before surgery. Methods: Gross photographic and histologic features of 52 MCTs (2014-2022) were retrospectively compared between cMCTs and scMCTs. Based on these results, we grossly classified an additional 25 MCTs (2007-2013) into two forms using photographic observations. These observations were then compared with the results of histological classification performed by a blinded pathologist. Results: The most notable difference between the two forms was hair loss on the tumor surface. Hair loss was prominent in all 36 cMCTs but minimal or absent in all 16 scMCTs. Histologically, only the cMCT showed prominent follicular reduction due to MCT infiltration. Using the hair loss feature, we classified an additional 25 MCTs: 15 cMCTs, 7 scMCTs, and 3 unclassifiable cases with overlapping features. Agreement with histological classification was 80% (12/15) for cMCT and 100% (7/7) for scMCT. Among the unclassifiable cases, one was cMCT, and two were scMCT. Large tumors (3.5-10.5 cm) were found in two of the three unclassifiable cases and in all three cases without agreement. Conclusion: Hair loss on the tumor surface is a distinct feature of cMCT that enables accurate visual differentiation from scMCT, except for some large MCTs. This may assist in surgical planning, specifically for sc-MCT.
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.