Peer-reviewed veterinary case report
Predicting dog mast cell tumor treatment success using c-Kit mutation
By Weishaar, K M et al.·Published in Journal of veterinary internal medicine·2018·Department of Clinical Sciences, United States·View original on PubMed →
PetCaseFinder translated the abstract of this peer-reviewed paper into plain English so pet owners can read it. We do not publish original research — every detail traces back to the citation above. How we work →
Original publication title: c-Kit Mutation and Localization Status as Response Predictors in Mast Cell Tumors in Dogs Treated with Prednisone and Toceranib or Vinblastine.
- Species:
- dog
Plain-English summary
A group of 88 dogs with mast cell tumors (a type of skin cancer) were treated with either toceranib (TOC) or vinblastine (VBL) to see which was more effective. The study found that about 46% of dogs responded to TOC, while 30% responded to VBL, but neither treatment showed a significant difference in how long the dogs lived or how long their tumors remained stable. Interestingly, the presence of c-kit mutations in the tumors did not help predict which treatment would work better. Overall, both treatments had similar outcomes for these dogs.
People also search for: dog mast cell tumor treatment · toceranib vs vinblastine for dogs · dog skin cancer survival rate
Abstract
BACKGROUND: KIT inhibitors, such as toceranib (TOC), and vinblastine (VBL) have not been prospectively compared in the treatment of macroscopic mast cell tumors (MCTs). Also, it is unknown whether VBL or TOC is superior for treating MCT without c-kit mutations. HYPOTHESIS/OBJECTIVES: To determine the value of KIT genotyping and localization in treatment decisions for dogs with macroscopic MCT. We hypothesized that c-kit mutated MCT would have a better response to TOC than VBL. ANIMALS: Eighty-eight client-owned dogs with macroscopic MCT. METHODS: Prospective, randomized trial. Dogs were randomized to TOC (2.75 mg/kg EOD) or VBL (2.5 mg/mweekly × 4 then EOW) by KIT localization and c-kit mutation status using an adaptive randomization scheme. RESULTS: Sixty dogs were allocated to TOC and 28 to VBL. Of the dogs receiving TOC, 20% had c-kit mutations, compared to 30% receiving VBL (P = 0.74). Overall response rates were 46% (TOC) and 30% (VBL) (odds ratio = 1.56 [0.62-3.92]; P = 0.28). Median progression-free survival (PFS) for dogs receiving VBL was 78 days (7-1,521) and for TOC 95.5 (14-990); hazard ratio (HR) = 1.34 [0.72-2.50]; P = 0.36. Median overall survival (OS) was 241.5 days (10-1,521) for the VBL group and 159 (20-990) for the TOC group; HR = 0.80 ([0.45-1.41]; P = 0.44). CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL IMPORTANCE: Neither PFS nor OS was significantly different between treatment groups. As the proportion of dogs with c-kit mutations was not different between treatment groups in this population of dogs, c-kit mutation status did not predict treatment response.
Find similar cases for your pet
PetCaseFinder finds other peer-reviewed reports of pets with the same symptoms, plus a plain-English summary of what was tried across them.
Search related cases →Original publication on PubMed: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/29194765/