PetCaseFinder

Peer-reviewed veterinary case report

Does adding L-asparaginase change lymphoma chemo results in dogs

By MacDonald, Valerie S et al.·Published in Journal of veterinary internal medicine·2005·Department of Medical 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 We do not publish original research — every detail traces back to the citation above.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: Does L-asparaginase influence efficacy or toxicity when added to a standard CHOP protocol for dogs with lymphoma?

Species:
dog
LymphomaStomach & digestionDogs

Plain-English summary

A group of 115 dogs with lymphoma were treated with a standard chemotherapy protocol called CHOP, some receiving an additional drug called L-asparaginase (L-ASP) while others did not due to supply issues. The study found that there was no significant difference in how long the dogs remained in remission or their overall survival, whether they received L-ASP or not. Both groups had similar response rates and experienced comparable side effects like vomiting and diarrhea. The findings suggest that L-ASP may be better reserved for dogs whose lymphoma returns after initial treatment rather than as a routine part of the first treatment.

People also search for: dog lymphoma treatment options · L-asparaginase for dogs · CHOP chemotherapy for dogs · side effects of lymphoma treatment in dogs

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to evaluate response rates, 1st remission duration (FRD), and toxicity in dogs with previously untreated lymphoma receiving an identical CHOP-based combination chemotherapy protocol with or without L-asparaginase (LASP). One hundred fifteen dogs with lymphoma were scheduled to receive an identical CHOP-based chemotherapy protocol that included L-ASP. However, because of manufacturer-imposed random rationing, 31 dogs did not receive L-ASP as scheduled. The 2 treatment groups were statistically similar with respect to signalment and presence of historical negative prognostic factors. No difference was observed in the median FRD whether dogs did or did not receive L-ASP (206 versus 217 days, respectively; P = .67). No difference was observed in the median overall survival times between dogs receiving or not receiving L-ASP (310 versus 308 days, respectively; P = .84). No statistical difference was observed with respect to overall response rate between dogs that did or did not receive L-ASP (89.3% versus 87.1%, respectively; P = .75). Complete response rates between the groups also were no different (83.3% and 77.4% for L-ASP and non-L-ASP groups, respectively; P = .59). Prevalence of toxicity (neutropenia, diarrhea, or vomiting) and treatment delays (P = .80) also were similar between groups. The results of this study suggest that exclusion of L-ASP in this multidrug protocol does not significantly impact outcome. Therefore, it may be more appropriate to reserve the use of L-ASP for treating relapse in dogs with lymphoma that have failed induction therapy.

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/16231719/