Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40677085›Full record

ArticleVeterinary and comparative oncology2025

Evaluating the Impact of Elective Nodal Irradiation for Dogs With Oral Malignant Melanoma Undergoing Hypofractionated Radiotherapy.

Patricia Gualtieri, Lisa Group, David M Ruslander, Michael W Nolan, Mary-Keara Boss

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Veterinary and comparative oncology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Patricia GualtieriDepartment of Clinical Sciences, College of Veterinary Medicine and Biomedical Sciences, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, Colorado, USA.
Lisa GroupDepartment of Environmental and Radiological Health Sciences, College of Veterinary Medicine and Biomedical Sciences, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, Colorado, USA.
David M RuslanderBluePearl Pet Hospital, Cary, North Carolina, USA.
Michael W NolanDepartment of Clinical Sciences, College of Veterinary Medicine, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, North Carolina, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4432-9700
Mary-Keara BossDepartment of Clinical Sciences, College of Veterinary Medicine and Biomedical Sciences, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, Colorado, USA.

Funding

Impact of lymph node sparing on the anti-tumor response for head and neck cancer treated with radiation and immunotherapyK01OD031809 · OD · COLORADO STATE UNIVERSITY · PI Mary-Keara Boss · 2022 to 2026
$621k
NIH HHS K01 OD031809
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Hypofractionated radiotherapy (hRT) is often used to treat dogs with oral malignant melanoma (OMM); however, there is no consensus as to whether clinically uninvolved regional lymph nodes should be prophylactically irradiated. The objective of this retrospective study is to compare outcomes for dogs with OMM treated with hRT+/- elective nodal irradiation (ENI). Dogs with nonmetastatic OMM undergoing hRT+/- ENI with a prescription of ≥ 30 Gy were included. Survival statistics were evaluated with Kaplan-Meier curves and log-rank testing. Univariable and multivariable Cox proportional hazard models were used to assess how survival was impacted by the use of ENI, WHO T-stage, mitotic count, RT technique, and use of Oncept melanoma vaccine. Data from four institutions and 100 dogs (80 with ENI and 20 without) were included. In the ENI group, nodal and distant metastases were documented in 4 and 30 dogs, respectively. In the non-ENI group, nodal and distant metastases were documented in 6 and 4 dogs, respectively. There was no significant difference in the 1-year nodal or distant progression-free intervals (p = 0.174, and 0.563, respectively). The only variable maintaining significance on multivariable analysis was T-stage (overall progression-free survival, HR 1.393, p = 0.006; overall survival time, HR 1.426, p = 0.005; distant progression-free interval, HR 1.521, p = 0.033). ENI did not measurably alter the oncologic outcomes in this study population. Results should be interpreted cautiously given the lack of standardised staging/restaging and the heterogenous nature of this clinical population. Future investigations are needed to clarify the role of ENI in the treatment of canine OMM.

Indexed as

Dog DiseasesMelanomaMouth NeoplasmsAnimalsDogsFemaleLymphatic MetastasisLymph NodesMaleRadiation Dose HypofractionationRetrospective Studiesdoglymph nodemelanomaradiotherapy

Identifiers

PMID40677085
PMCPMC12617689

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.