Oral melanoma is a common canine cancer with a historically poor prognosis. Recent evidence suggests that a subset of cases may have a more favorable outcome, defined as long-term survival in the absence of intervention other than initial surgery. Traditional histological parameters have had prognostic significance in some studies but not in others, potentially due to interobserver variation. We evaluated the prognostic utility of Ki67 immunohistochemistry in a group of 79 canine oral melanomas using a technique easily applied in a veterinary diagnostic laboratory. A threshold Ki67 value of >19.5 had a sensitivity and specificity of 87.1% and 85.4%, respectively, at predicting death or euthanasia due to melanoma by 1 year postdiagnosis. Threshold values for classical histological parameters were also identified for most cases and were >4 (>30%; sensitivity = 83.9%, specificity = 86.0%) for the nuclear atypia score and >4/10 hpfs (sensitivity = 90.3%, specificity = 84.4%) for the mitotic index. In this study, the percentages correctly classified with respect to death by 1 year postdiagnosis were comparable for Ki67 (86.1%, 68/79), the nuclear atypia score (86.3%, 63/73), and the mitotic index (86.8%, 66/76). High pigmentation (>50%) had a high negative predictive value of 90.9% (18/20), but overall, only 61.0% (47/77) of cases could be correctly classified by this parameter. Based on these results, we recommend a panel of prognostic parameters, including the nuclear atypia score, the mitotic index, Ki67, and pigmentation quantification to more accurately predict the likely outcome of canine oral melanomas.

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.

Summary Melanoma represents a significant malignancy in humans and dogs. Different from genetically engineered models, sporadic canine melanocytic neoplasms share several characteristics with human disease that could make dogs a more relevant pre-clinical model. Canine melanomas rarely arise in sun-exposed sites. Most occur in the oral cavity, with a subset having intraepithelial malignant melanocytes mimicking the in situ component of human mucosal melanoma. The spectrum of canine melanocytic neoplasia includes benign lesions with some analogy to nevi, as well as invasive primary melanoma, and widespread metastasis. Growing evidence of distinct subtypes in humans, differing in somatic and predisposing germ-line genetic alterations, cell of origin, epidemiology, relationship to ultraviolet radiation and progression from benign to malignant tumors, may also exist in dogs. Canine and human mucosal melanomas appear to harbor BRAF, NRAS and c-kit mutations uncommonly, compared to human cutaneous melanomas, although both species share AKT and MAPK signaling activation. We conclude that there is significant overlap in the clinical and histopathological features of canine and human mucosal melanomas. This represents opportunity to explore canine oral cavity melanoma as a pre-clinical model.

Abstract. Postsurgical follow-up information was obtained on 64 dogs with 69 histologically welldifferentiated melanocytic neoplasms that involved the mucous membranes of the lips and oral cavity. The patients received no adjunct therapy. Sixty one of 64 dogs (95%) were alive at the end of the study or had died of causes unrelated to the tumor, with a mean survival of 23.4 months and a median survival of 34 months after surgery. Twenty-eight dogs alive at the end of the study had a mean survival of 31.3 months after surgery. There were 2 dogs, which had recurrent tumors, that were still alive at the end of the study. All dogs that died of tumor-related causes (3) and all dogs with recurrent tumors (2) had tumors in the oral cavity.Results of this study indicate that a favorable clinical course and prolonged survival can be expected in most dogs with histologically well-differentiated melanocytic neoplasms of the mucous membranes of the lips and oral cavity, with only local excision of the lesions and no adjunct therapy.

Findings do not support the hypotheses that specific brands or types of vaccine within antigen class, vaccine practices such as reuse of syringes, concomitant viral infection, history of trauma, or residence either increase or decrease the risk of vaccine-associated sarcoma formation in cats. There was evidence to suggest that certain long-acting injectable medications may also be associated with sarcoma formation.

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.

Many studies have evaluated various prognostic markers for canine melanocytic neoplasms either as primary or secondary goals; however, design, methodology, and statistical validation vary widely across these studies. The goal of this article was to evaluate and compare published canine melanocytic neoplasm studies in relation to the principals established in the Recommended Guidelines for the Conduct and Evaluation of Prognostic Studies in Veterinary Oncology. Based on this evaluation, we determined which parameters currently have the most statistically supported validity for prognostic use in canine melanocytic neoplasia. This information can also be used as part of evidence-based prospective evaluations of treatment regimens. Additionally, we highlight areas in which the current data are incomplete and that warrant further evaluation. This article represents an initiative of the American College of Veterinary Pathologists' Oncology Committee and has been reviewed and endorsed by the World Small Animal Veterinary Association.

Standardization of tumor assessment lays the foundation for validation of grading systems, permits reproducibility of oncologic studies among investigators, and increases confidence in the significance of study results. Currently, there is minimal methodological standardization for assessing tumors in veterinary medicine, with few attempts to validate published protocols and grading schemes. The current article attempts to address these shortcomings by providing standard guidelines for tumor assessment parameters and protocols for evaluating specific tumor types. More detailed information is available in the Supplemental Files, the intention of which is 2-fold: publication as part of this commentary, but more importantly, these will be available as “living documents” on a website ( www.vetcancerprotocols.org ), which will be updated as new information is presented in the peer-reviewed literature. Our hope is that veterinary pathologists will agree that this initiative is needed, and will contribute to and utilize this information for routine diagnostic work and oncologic studies. Journal editors and reviewers can utilize checklists to ensure publications include sufficient detail and standardized methods of tumor assessment. To maintain the relevance of the guidelines and protocols, it is critical that the information is periodically updated and revised as new studies are published and validated with the intent of providing a repository of this information. Our hope is that this initiative (a continuation of efforts published in this journal in 2011) will facilitate collaboration and reproducibility between pathologists and institutions, increase case numbers, and strengthen clinical research findings, thus ensuring continued progress in veterinary oncologic pathology and improving patient care.