Peer-reviewed veterinary case report
Treatment comparison for dogs with unknown brain inflammation
By Smith, P M et al.·Published in Journal of veterinary internal medicine·2009·Department of Veterinary Medicine, United Kingdom·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 We do not publish original research — every detail traces back to the citation above.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: Comparison of two regimens for the treatment of meningoencephalomyelitis of unknown etiology.
- Species:
- dog
Plain-English summary
Nineteen dogs with neurological problems were treated for a serious condition called meningoencephalomyelitis of unknown etiology (MUE), which causes inflammation in the brain and spinal cord. They received either a combination of prednisolone with vincristine and cyclophosphamide or with cytosine arabinoside. While some dogs in both treatment groups survived for over a year, the group treated with vincristine and cyclophosphamide had too many side effects, making it a poor choice. The results suggest that using cytosine arabinoside might be safer, but it's still unclear if it works better than just using prednisolone alone.
People also search for: dog neurological problems treatment · meningoencephalomyelitis in dogs · dog brain inflammation medication
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The optimal treatment for meningoencephalomyelitis of unknown etiology (MUE) remains unknown, despite the widespread use of a variety of immunosuppressive drugs. OBJECTIVE/HYPOTHESIS: To compare the efficacy of prednisolone combined with either vincristine and cyclophosphamide (COP group; n= 10) or with cytosine arabinoside (AraC group; n= 9). ANIMALS: Nineteen dogs with neurological deficits, neuroimaging, and cerebrospinal fluid abnormalities consistent with a diagnosis of MUE. METHODS: Prospective, blinded, and randomized clinical trial. Dogs fulfilling the inclusion criteria were randomly allocated to receive 1 drug regimen. RESULTS: Four of 10 dogs in the COP group and 5/9 in the AraC group survived > 12 months but neither the survival time nor the time-to-treatment failure differed between the 2 groups. Treatment with COP resulted in an unacceptable incidence of adverse effects. CONCLUSIONS: The adverse effects of COP make it an unsuitable treatment for MUE. Although survival of animals treated with AraC was broadly similar to that reported in recently published studies describing this treatment, it remains unclear whether it confers any benefit over using prednisolone alone.
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/19645837/