Browsing by Author "Kitchell, B. E."

Now showing 1 - 4 of 4
  • Thumbnail Image
    Combined Gemcitabine and Carboplatin Therapy for Carcinomas in Dogs
    Dominguez, Pedro A.; Dervisis, Nikolaos G.; Cadile, Casey D.; Sarbu, L.; Kitchell, B. E. (Wiley-Blackwell, 2009-01-01)
    Background: Response and adverse reactions to combined gemcitabine (GEM) and carboplatin (CARBO) therapy in dogs with carcinomas are not documented. Hypothesis: GEM and CARBO are safe for the treatment of dogs with carcinomas. Animals: Thirty-seven dogs with histologically or cytologically confirmed carcinomas. Methods: Prospective clinical trial. Dogs were treated with GEM (2 mg/kg, 20–30-minute infusion IV) on Days 1 and 8 and 4 hours later, CARBO (10 mg/kg IV) on Day 1. The cycle was repeated on Day 22. Results: Thirty-seven dogs (29 with measurable tumor) received a median of 2 cycles (range 0.5–6) for a total of 101 cycles administered. Twelve dogs (32%) developed neutropenia (3 Grade 3, and 5 Grade 4) and 9 (24%) thrombocytopenia (2 Grade 3, and 1 Grade 4). Dogs 420 kg were twice as likely to develop thrombocytopenia (P 5 .023). Twenty-seven dogs (73%) had evidence of gastrointestinal (GI) toxicosis, but most signs were of mild to moderate severity and self-limiting. One dog died of treatment-related complications. Overall tumor response rate was 13%. One dog with metastatic prostatic carcinoma achieved a complete remission and 1 dog with intestinal adenocarcinoma and 1 with tonsillar squamous cell carcinoma achieved partial remission. Twelve dogs achieved stable disease for a median of 72 days. Conclusion and Clinical Importance: GEM and CARBO combination causes mild to moderate hematologic and GI toxicosis in dogs with carcinoma. Response rate in this study was modest, and optimization of dosing of this combination is required.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Recommended Guidelines for the Conduct and Evaluation of Prognostic Studies in Veterinary Oncology
    Webster, J. D.; Dennis, M. M.; Dervisis, Nikolaos G.; Heller, J.; Bacon, N. J.; Bergman, P. J.; Bienzle, D.; Cassali, G.; Castagnaro, M.; Cullen, J.; Esplin, D. G.; Pena, L.; Goldschmidt, M. H.; Hahn, K. A.; Henry, C. J.; Hellmen, E.; Kamstock, D.; Kirpensteijn, J.; Kitchell, B. E.; Amorim, R. L.; Lenz, S. D.; Lipscomb, T. P.; McEntee, M.; McGill, L. D.; McKnight, C. A.; McManus, P. M.; Moore, A. S.; Moore, P. F.; Moroff, S. D.; Nakayama, H.; Northrup, N. C.; Sarli, G.; Scase, T.; Sorenmo, K.; Schulman, F. Y.; Shoieb, A. M.; Smedley, R. C.; Spangler, W. L.; Teske, E.; Thamm, D. H.; Valli, V. E.; Vernau, W.; von Euler, H.; Withrow, S. J.; Weisbrode, S. E.; Yager, J.; Kiupel, M. (SAGE, 2011-01-01)
    There is an increasing need for more accurate prognostic and predictive markers in veterinary oncology because of an increasing number of treatment options, the increased financial costs associated with treatment, and the emotional stress experienced by owners in association with the disease and its treatment. Numerous studies have evaluated potential prognostic and predictive markers for veterinary neoplastic diseases, but there are no established guidelines or standards for the conduct and reporting of prognostic studies in veterinary medicine. This lack of standardization has made the evaluation and comparison of studies difficult. Most important, translating these results to clinical applications is problematic. To address this issue, the American College of Veterinary Pathologists’ Oncology Committee organized an initiative to establish guidelines for the conduct and reporting of prognostic studies in veterinary oncology. The goal of this initiative is to increase the quality and standardization of veterinary prognostic studies to facilitate independent evaluation, validation, comparison, and implementation of study results. This article represents a consensus statement on the conduct and reporting of prognostic studies in veterinary oncology from veterinary pathologists and oncologists from around the world. These guidelines should be considered a recommendation based on the current state of knowledge in the field, and they will need to be continually reevaluated and revised as the field of veterinary oncology continues to progress. As mentioned, these guidelines were developed through an initiative of the American College of Veterinary Pathologists’ Oncology Committee, and they have been reviewed and endorsed by the World Small Animal Veterinary Association.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Safety of concurrent administration of dexrazoxane and doxorubicin in the canine cancer patient
    FitzPatrick, W. M.; Dervisis, Nikolaos G.; Kitchell, B. E. (Wiley-Blackwell, 2010-12-01)
    Doxorubicinmay cause a rare but serious cardiotoxicity. Dexrazoxane is a cardioprotectant drug used to reduce the risk of cardiotoxicity in human patients. In this study, 25 tumour-bearing dogs were treated with concurrent doxorubicin and dexrazoxane. The total number of doses of dexrazoxane given was 54 (range 1–5 doses per dog, median 2 doses). Five dogs receivedmore than 165 mg m2 cumulative doxorubicin dose before starting dexrazoxane. Haematologic, gastrointestinal and cardiovascular toxicities were considered tolerable. The combination of doxorubicin with dexrazoxane was well tolerated with minimal side-effects in this patient cohort. Future studies are required to evaluate potential cardioprotective effects of dexrazoxane given concurrently with doxorubicin.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Treatment with DAV for Advanced-Stage Hemangiosarcoma in Dogs
    Dervisis, Nikolaos G.; Dominguez, Pedro A.; Newman, R. G.; Cadile, Casey D.; Kitchell, B. E. (American Animal Hospital Association, 2011-05-01)
    Hemangiosarcoma (HSA) is an aggressive disease that is fairly common in the dog. The authors evaluated a doxorubicin, dacarbazine, and vincristine (DAV) combination protocol in dogs with nonresectable stage II and stage III HSA. Twenty-four dogs were enrolled in this prospective, phase 2 study. Doxorubicin and dacarbazine were administered on day 1 while vincristine was administered on days 8 and 15. The protocol was repeated every 21 days for a maximum of six cycles or until disease progression. Toxicity and efficacy were assessed by clinical and laboratory evaluation and by questionnaires completed by the owners. Of the 24 included dogs, 19 were evaluable for response. The response rate (including five complete responses and four partial responses) was 47.4%. Median time to tumor progression was 101 days and median overall survival was 125 days. Significant toxicities were noted, including 41 high-grade hematologic and 12 high-grade gastrointestinal toxic events. Five dogs discontinued treatment due to chemotherapy-related toxicities, but no treatment-related deaths occurred. Multivariate analysis identified patient age (relative risk [RR], 2.3, P¼0.049) to be negatively associated with time to progression whereas dacarbazine dose reductions (RR, 0.06, P¼0.031) were positively associated with time to progression. Dacarbazine dose reduction was the sole factor positively associated with overall survival (RR, 0.28, P¼0.015). In conclusion, the DAV combination appears to offer clinical responses and may prolong survival in dogs with advanced-stage HSA.