Difference in outcome between curative intent vs marginal excision as a first treatment in dogs with oral malignant melanoma and the impact of adjuvant CSPG4-DNA electrovaccination: A retrospective study on 155 cases.
Adjuvants, Immunologic
/ therapeutic use
Animals
Cancer Vaccines
/ therapeutic use
DNA
Dog Diseases
/ drug therapy
Dogs
Margins of Excision
Melanoma
/ drug therapy
Mouth Neoplasms
/ drug therapy
Retrospective Studies
Skin Neoplasms
Treatment Outcome
Vaccines, DNA
/ therapeutic use
Melanoma, Cutaneous Malignant
CSPG4
DNA electrovaccination
adjuvant immunotherapy
dog
oral malignant melanoma
surgery
Journal
Veterinary and comparative oncology
ISSN: 1476-5829
Titre abrégé: Vet Comp Oncol
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101185242
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Dec 2021
Dec 2021
Historique:
revised:
26
02
2021
received:
20
11
2020
accepted:
05
03
2021
pubmed:
23
3
2021
medline:
27
1
2022
entrez:
22
3
2021
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Canine oral malignant melanoma is locally invasive and highly metastatic. At present, the best option for local control is en bloc excision followed by radiation if excision margins are incomplete. Adjuvantly, the role of chemotherapy is dubious while immunotherapy appears encouraging. This retrospective study evaluated 155 dogs with oral malignant melanomas (24 stage I, 54 stage II, 66 stage III and 11 stage IV) managed in a single institution. The aim was to evaluate the differences in median survival time (MST) and disease-free interval (DFI) between dogs which, at presentation, were treated surgically with a curative intent (group 1) vs those marginally excised only (group 2). MST in group 1 was longer than in group 2 (594 vs 458 days), but no significant difference was found (P = .57); a statistical difference was, however, found for DFI (232 vs 183 days, P = .008). In the subpopulation of vaccinated dogs, the impact of adjuvant anti-CSPG4 DNA electrovaccination was then evaluated (curative intent, group 3, vs marginal, group 4); a significant difference for both MST (1333 vs 470 days, respectively, P = .03) and DFI (324 vs 184 days, respectively, P = .008) was found. Progressive disease was significantly more common in dogs undergoing marginal excision than curative intent excision for both the overall population (P = .03) and the vaccinated dogs (P = .02). This study pointed out that, after staging, wide excision together with adjuvant immunotherapy was an effective approach for canine oral malignant melanoma.
Identifiants
pubmed: 33751759
doi: 10.1111/vco.12690
pmc: PMC9290641
doi:
Substances chimiques
Adjuvants, Immunologic
0
Cancer Vaccines
0
Vaccines, DNA
0
DNA
9007-49-2
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
651-660Informations de copyright
© 2021 The Authors. Veterinary and Comparative Oncology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
Références
J Am Vet Med Assoc. 2013 May 15;242(10):1392-7
pubmed: 23634684
J Vet Med Sci. 2016 Jun 1;78(5):845-50
pubmed: 26781703
Am J Vet Res. 2011 Dec;72(12):1631-8
pubmed: 22126691
Front Vet Sci. 2020 Sep 29;7:575911
pubmed: 33134356
Vet Comp Oncol. 2021 Dec;19(4):651-660
pubmed: 33751759
J Am Vet Med Assoc. 2014 Dec 1;245(11):1266-73
pubmed: 25406707
Vet Comp Oncol. 2016 Dec;14(4):e146-e157
pubmed: 25382434
J Cell Biol. 2004 Jun 21;165(6):881-91
pubmed: 15210734
J Am Vet Med Assoc. 2014 Aug 15;245(4):401-7
pubmed: 25075823
Vet J. 2011 Nov;190(2):e26-e30
pubmed: 21482159
Vet Surg. 2018 Jul;47(5):629-633
pubmed: 30129062
Vet Pathol. 2006 Mar;43(2):136-49
pubmed: 16537931
Vet Pathol. 2017 Jul;54(4):579-587
pubmed: 28346126
J Am Vet Med Assoc. 2003 May 1;222(9):1234-6
pubmed: 12725311
Vet Radiol Ultrasound. 2003 May-Jun;44(3):352-9
pubmed: 12816381
Vet Comp Oncol. 2017 Jun;15(2):462-469
pubmed: 26833575
J Am Vet Med Assoc. 2015 Nov 15;247(10):1146-53
pubmed: 26517618
Pigment Cell Melanoma Res. 2011 Dec;24(6):1148-57
pubmed: 22004131
Clin Cancer Res. 2003 Apr;9(4):1284-90
pubmed: 12684396
J Am Vet Med Assoc. 2004 Feb 1;224(3):388-94
pubmed: 14765798
Vet Radiol Ultrasound. 2020 Jul;61(4):471-480
pubmed: 32323424
Vet Comp Oncol. 2013 Sep;11(3):219-29
pubmed: 23909996
J Am Vet Med Assoc. 2001 May 1;218(9):1444-8
pubmed: 11345308
Vet Comp Oncol. 2017 Mar;15(1):208-214
pubmed: 26040551
Vet Comp Oncol. 2017 Sep;15(3):881-889
pubmed: 27196324
Vet Comp Oncol. 2018 Dec;16(4):562-570
pubmed: 29989306
J S Afr Vet Assoc. 2015 Apr 30;86(1):1246
pubmed: 26016668
J Vet Dent. 2002 Sep;19(3):122-6
pubmed: 12382529
Cancer Immunol Immunother. 2019 Nov;68(11):1839-1853
pubmed: 31222484
Vet Comp Oncol. 2014 Mar;12(1):78-84
pubmed: 22737988
Vet Pathol. 2000 Nov;37(6):597-608
pubmed: 11105949
J Transl Med. 2017 Jul 1;15(1):151
pubmed: 28668095
Res Vet Sci. 2019 Feb;122:40-49
pubmed: 30453179
Crit Rev Immunol. 2004;24(4):267-96
pubmed: 15588226
J Am Vet Med Assoc. 2019 Apr 15;254(8):938-943
pubmed: 30938614
Clin Cancer Res. 2014 Jul 15;20(14):3753-62
pubmed: 24874834
J Vet Intern Med. 2003 Jan-Feb;17(1):96-101
pubmed: 12564733
Vet Pathol. 2011 Jan;48(1):54-72
pubmed: 21266721
J Vet Dent. 2019 Jun;36(2):97-103
pubmed: 31431132
Vet Sci. 2016 Feb 19;3(1):
pubmed: 29056717
N Z Vet J. 2013 Jan;61(1):25-31
pubmed: 22913610
Radiol Oncol. 2020 Mar 7;54(1):68-78
pubmed: 32187017
Vet Comp Oncol. 2014 Dec;12(4):310-8
pubmed: 23095099
Vet Pathol. 2011 Jan;48(1):41-53
pubmed: 21123859
Vet Comp Oncol. 2005 Dec;3(4):222-9
pubmed: 19754777
Vet Comp Oncol. 2017 Sep;15(3):996-1013
pubmed: 27146852
Vaccine. 2006 May 22;24(21):4582-5
pubmed: 16188351