A study was carried out to test the accuracy and consistency of veterinary pathologists, not specialists in hematopathology, in applying the World Health Organization (WHO) system of classification of canine lymphomas. This study represents an initiative of the ACVP Oncology Committee, and the classification has been endorsed by the World Small Animal Veterinary Association (WASVA). Tissue biopsies from cases of canine lymphoma were received from veterinary oncologists, and a study by pathologists given only signalment was carried out on 300 cases. Twenty pathologists reviewed these 300 cases with each required to choose a diagnosis from a list of 43 B and T cell lymphomas. Three of the 20 were hematopathologists who determined the consensus diagnosis for each case. The 17 who formed the test group were experienced but not specialists in hematopathology, and most were diplomates of the American or European Colleges of Veterinary Pathology. The overall accuracy of the 17 pathologists on the 300 cases was 83%. When the analysis was limited to the 6 most common diagnoses, containing 80% of all cases, accuracy rose to 87%. In a test of reproducibility enabled by reintroducing 5% of cases entered under a different identity, the overall agreement between the first and second diagnosis ranged from 40 to 87%. The statistical review included 43,000 data points for each of the 20 pathologists.

Tumor grading is a method to quantify the putative clinical aggressiveness of a neoplasm based on specific histological features. A good grading system should be simple, easy to use, reproducible, and accurately segregate tumors into those with low versus high risk. The aim of this review is to summarize the histological and, when available, cytological grading systems applied in veterinary pathology, providing information regarding their prognostic impact, reproducibility, usefulness, and shortcomings. Most of the grading schemes used in veterinary medicine are developed for common tumor entities. Grading systems exist for soft tissue sarcoma, osteosarcoma, multilobular tumor of bone, mast cell tumor, lymphoma, mammary carcinoma, pulmonary carcinoma, urothelial carcinoma, renal cell carcinoma, prostatic carcinoma, and central nervous system tumors. The prognostic relevance of many grading schemes has been demonstrated, but for some tumor types the usefulness of grading remains controversial. Furthermore, validation studies are available only for a minority of the grading systems. Contrasting data on the prognostic power of some grading systems, lack of detailed instructions in the materials and methods in some studies, and lack of data on reproducibility and validation studies are discussed for the relevant grading systems. Awareness of the limitations of grading is necessary for pathologists and oncologists to use these systems appropriately and to drive initiatives for their improvement.

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.

Perivascular wall tumors (PWTs) are defined as neoplasms deriving from mural cells of blood vessels, excluding the endothelial lining. The spectrum of human cutaneous PWT includes glomus tumor, hemangiopericytoma (HEP), myopericytoma, angioleiomyoma/sarcoma, angiomyofibroblastoma, and angiofibroma. The purpose of this study was to revise clinical presentation, cytology, histopathology, and immunohistology of canine cutaneous PWT with cytology typical of canine HEP. Diagnosis was established on the basis of vascular growth patterns (staghorn, placentoid, perivascular whorling, bundles from media) and immunohistology, including 7 smooth muscle markers and the cell membrane ganglioside of unknown origin recognized by the antibody 3G5 (CMG-3G5). Twenty cases were included. Ages ranged from 6 to 13 years; 12 dogs were males and 8 were females, and there was a prevalence of crossbreeds. Tumors arose from a single site with preferential acral location (10/20). Cytology revealed moderate to high cellularity in all cases, cohesive groups of cells (19/20), capillaries (18/20), and bi- to multinucleated cells (18/20). Six myopericytomas, 5 angioleiomyomas, 2 angioleiomyosarcomas, 2 HEP, 1 angiofibroma, and 1 adventitial tumor were identified. A definitive diagnosis was not possible in 3 cases. Smoothelin, heavy caldesmon, desmin, myosin, calponin, and CMG-3G5 were the most valuable markers to differentially diagnose canine PWT. Similar to reports in humans, canine HEP embodied a spectrum of neoplastic entities arising from different vascular mural cells. Before canine PWTs are assimilated into one prognostic category, a consistent classification and characterization of their biology is necessary. As proposed in humans, HEP should also be considered a diagnosis of exclusion in dogs.

Objective—To determine factors predicting survival in dogs with high-grade multicentric lymphoma. Design—Retrospective cohort study. Animals—127 dogs with high-grade multicentric lymphoma evaluated at 4 veterinary hospitals from 2000 to 2009. Procedures—Records were reviewed to identify dogs with completely staged high-grade multicentric lymphoma treated with chemotherapy. Data collected included signalment, history, hematologic findings, tumor characteristics, treatment, and outcome. Long-term survival was defined as surviving > 2 years after diagnosis. Variables were analyzed for associations with dogs living > 2 years. Results—Among the 127 enrolled dogs, 13 (10%) survived > 2 years with a median survival time of 914 days (range, 740 to 2,058 days). Survival rates at 3, 4, and 5 years were 4%, 3%, and 1 %, respectively. At diagnosis, 11 of the 13 long-term survivors had a body weight ≥ 10 kg, PCV ≥ 35%, absence of ionized hypercalcemia, centroblastic lymphoma, immunophenotype B, absence of bone marrow involvement, and lymphoma stages I through IV and were not previously treated with corticosteroids. The same combination of factors was present in 26 of 114 (23%) dogs surviving ≤ 2 years, yielding a negative predictive value of 97.8% for long-term survivors. Four of the 6 long-term survivors that died during the study died of another cancer; 3 of them had osteosarcoma. Conclusions and Clinical Relevance—Absence of the aforementioned combination of variables at diagnosis may help identify dogs with lymphoma that will not survive > 2 years. Other types of neoplasia, in particular osteosarcoma, may develop in long-term–surviving dogs.