ArticleVeterinary and comparative oncology2025
Evaluating the Impact of Elective Nodal Irradiation for Dogs With Oral Malignant Melanoma Undergoing Hypofractionated Radiotherapy.
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.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Evaluating the Impact of Elective Nodal Irradiation for Dogs With Oral Malignant Melanoma Undergoing Hypofractionated Radiotherapy.Veterinary and comparative oncology · 2025Article
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
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
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.