Although there have been several studies on the use of immunohistochemical biomarkers of canine mammary tumors (CMTs), the results are difficult to compare. This article provides guidelines on the most useful immunohistochemical markers to standardize their use and understand how outcomes are measured, thus ensuring reproducibility of results. We have reviewed the biomarkers of canine mammary epithelial and myoepithelial cells and identified those biomarkers that are most useful and those biomarkers for invasion and lymph node micrometastatic disease. A 10% threshold for positive reaction for most of these markers is recommended. Guidelines on immunolabeling for HER2, estrogen receptors (ERs), and progesterone receptors (PRs) are provided along with the specific recommendations for interpretation of the results for each of these biomarkers in CMTs. Only 3+ HER2-positive tumors should be considered positive, as found in human breast cancer. The lack of any known response to adjuvant endocrine therapy of ER- and PR-positive CMTs prevents the use of the biological positive/negative threshold used in human breast cancer. Immunohistochemistry results of ER and PR in CMTs should be reported as the sum of the percentage of positive cells and the intensity of immunolabeling (Allred score). Incorporation of these recommendations in future studies, either prospective or retrospective, will provide a mechanism for the direct comparison of studies and will help to determine whether these biomarkers have prognostic significance. Finally, these biomarkers may ascertain the most appropriate treatment(s) for canine malignant mammary neoplasms.

The authors review the clinical, macro- and microscopical features, and pathogenesis of viral haemorrhagic disease (VHD) of rabbits and the European brown hare syndrome (EBHS). The two diseases share similar clinical and pathological manifestations involving an acute syndrome, sometimes accompanied by nervous and respiratory symptoms and epistaxis, and in all cases by severe hepatic damage and multifocal haemorrhages leading to fatal shock. The hepatic lesions (necrosis and inflammation) result from direct cytolytic and indirect microthrombotic effects of the causal agent. Endothelial lesions and a primary or secondary defect of coagulation factors are possible causes of the haemorrhagic syndrome. Typical lesions consist of necrotic hepatitis and congestion, haemorrhaging and oedema of the lungs and trachea. The histological and ultrastructural alterations of the liver are similar to those found in certain cases of acute fatal hepatitis in man. The high correlation between histologically typical hepatic findings and immunohistochemistry and immunoelectron microscopy is of diagnostic value. Both microscopic lesions and pathogenesis favour the unifying definition of "infectious necrotic hepatitis of Leporids" for the two disease entities.

Neoplastic diseases are typically diagnosed by biopsy and histopathological evaluation. The pathology report is key in determining prognosis, therapeutic decisions, and overall case management and therefore requires diagnostic accuracy, completeness, and clarity. Successful management relies on collaboration between clinical veterinarians, oncologists, and pathologists. To date there has been no standardized approach or guideline for the submission, trimming, margin evaluation, or reporting of neoplastic biopsy specimens in veterinary medicine. To address this issue, a committee consisting of veterinary pathologists and oncologists was established under the auspices of the American College of Veterinary Pathologists Oncology Committee. These consensus guidelines were subsequently reviewed and endorsed by a large international group of veterinary pathologists. These recommended guidelines are not mandated but rather exist to help clinicians and veterinary pathologists optimally handle neoplastic biopsy samples. Many of these guidelines represent the collective experience of the committee members and consensus group when assessing neoplastic lesions from veterinary patients but have not met the rigors of definitive scientific study and investigation. These questions of technique, analysis, and evaluation should be put through formal scrutiny in rigorous clinical studies in the near future so that more definitive guidelines can be derived.

Background: Human breast cancer is classified by gene expression profile into subtypes consisting of two hormone (oestrogen and/or progesterone) receptor-positive types (luminal-like A and luminal-like B) and three hormone receptor-negative types [human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-expressing, basal-like, and unclassified ("normal-like")]. Immunohistochemical surrogate panels are also proposed to potentially identify the molecular-based groups. The present study aimed to apply an immunohistochemical panel (anti-ER, -PR, -ERB-B2, -CK 5/6 and -CK14) in a series of canine malignant mammary tumours to verify the molecular-based classification, its correlation with invasion and grade, and its use as a prognostic aid in veterinary practice.Results: Thirty-five tumours with luminal pattern (ER+ and PR+) were subgrouped into 13 A type and 22 B type, if ERB-B2 positive or negative. Most luminal-like A and basal-like tumours were grade 1 carcinomas, while the percentage of luminal B tumours was higher in grades 2 and 3 (Pearson Chi-square P = 0.009). No difference in the percentage of molecular subtypes was found between simple and complex/mixed carcinomas (Pearson Chi-square P = 0.47). No significant results were obtained by survival analysis, even if basal-like tumours had a more favourable prognosis than luminal-like lesions.Conclusion: The panel of antibodies identified only three tumour groups (luminal-like A and B, and basal-like) in the dog. Even though canine mammary tumours may be a model of human breast cancer, the existence of the same carcinoma molecular subtypes in women awaits confirmation. Canine mammary carcinomas show high molecular heterogeneity, which would benefit from a classification based on molecular differences. Stage and grade showed independent associations with survival in the multivariate regression, while molecular subtype grouping and histological type did not show associations. This suggests that caution should be used when applying this classification to the dog, in which invasion and grade supply the most important prognostic information.

Studies focusing on the molecular basis of canine mammary tumors (CMT) have long been hampered by limited numbers of molecular tools specific to the canine species. The lack of molecular information for CMT has impeded the identification of clinically relevant tumor markers beyond histopathology and the introduction of new therapeutic concepts. Additionally, the potential use for the dog as a model for human breast cancer is debatable until questions are answered regarding cellular origin, mechanisms, and cellular pathways. During the past years, increasing numbers of canine molecular tools have been developed on the genomic, RNA, and protein levels, and an increasing number of studies have shed light on specific aspects of canine carcinogenesis, particularly of the mammary gland. This review summarizes current knowledge on the molecular carcinogenesis of CMT, including the role of specific oncogenes, tumor suppressors, regulators of apoptosis and DNA repair, proliferation indices, adhesion molecules, circulating tumor cells, and mediators of angiogenesis in CMT progression and clinical behavior. Whereas the data available are far from complete, knowledge of molecular pathways has a significant potential to complement and refine the current diagnostic and therapeutic approach to this tumor type. Furthermore, current data show that significant similarities and differences exist between canine and human mammary tumors at the molecular level. Clearly, this is only the beginning of an understanding of the molecular mechanisms of CMT and their application in clinical patient management.

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.