The updated VCOG‐CTCAE v2 guidelines contain several important updates and additions since the last update (v1.1) was released in 2011 and published within Veterinary and Comparative Oncology in 2016. As the Veterinary Cooperative Oncology Group (VCOG) is no longer an active entity, the original authors and contributors to the VCOG‐CTCAE v1.0 and v1.1 were consulted for input, and additional co‐authors sought for expansion and refinement of the adverse event (AE) categories. VCOG‐CTCAE v2 includes expanded neurology, cardiac and immunologic AE sections, and the addition of procedural‐specific AEs. It is our intent that, through inclusion of additional authors from ACVIM subspecialties and the American College of Veterinary Surgery, that we can more comprehensively capture AEs that are observed during clinical studies conducted across a variety of disease states, clinical scenarios, and body systems. It is also our intent that these updated veterinary CTCAE guidelines will offer improved application and ease of use within veterinary practice in general, as well as within clinical trials that assess new therapeutic strategies for animals with a variety of diseases. Throughout the revision process, we strived to ensure the grading structure for each AE category was reflective of the decision‐making process applied to determination of dose‐limiting events. As phase I trial decisions are based on these criteria and ultimately determine the maximally tolerated dose, there is impact on standard dosing recommendations for any new drug registration or application. This document should be updated regularly to reflect ongoing application to clinical studies carried out in veterinary patients.

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.

OBJECTIVE To determine whether conservative lateral surgical margins (equal to tumor diameter for tumors < 2 cm in diameter or 2 cm for larger tumors) were noninferior to wide (3-cm) lateral surgical margins for achieving tumor-free histologic margins following excision of grade I and II cutaneous mast cell tumors (MCTs) in dogs. ANIMALS 83 grade I and II MCTs excised with a deep surgical fascial margin and requisite lateral surgical margins from 68 dogs from 2007 to 2017. Tumors representing scar revision or local recurrence were excluded. PROCEDURES A pathology department database was searched to identify qualifying MCTs, and medical records were cross-referenced to obtain data regarding patients and tumors. Outcome (complete vs incomplete excision as histologically determined) was compared between conservative- and wide-margin groups. A noninferiority margin of ≥ 0.9 was used for the risk ratio (probability of complete excision for the conservative- vs wide-margin group), implying that noninferiority would be established if the data indicated that the true risk of complete excision with the conservative-margin approach was at worst 90% of that for the wide-margin approach. RESULTS The proportion of excised MCTs with tumor-free histologic margins was similar between the conservative- (43/46 [93%]) and wide- (34/37 [92%]) margin groups. There were no differences in tumor diameter or location between treatment groups. The risk ratio (1.02; 95% confidence interval, 0.89 to 1.19) met the criterion for noninferiority. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE The conservative-margin approach appeared to be noninferior to the wide-margin approach for achieving tumor-free histologic margins in the dogs of this study, and its use could potentially reduce the risk of postoperative complications. (J Am Vet Med Assoc 2020;256:567-572

Results indicated that LAS was technically feasible in dogs and not associated with major complications. Further evaluation is required; however, in appropriately selected patients, LAS may offer the benefits of a minimally invasive technique, including a smaller incision and improved illumination and magnification during exploration and staging.

OBJECTIVE To provide updated information on the distribution of histopathologic types of primary pulmonary neoplasia in dogs and evaluate the effect of postoperative adjuvant chemotherapy in dogs with pulmonary carcinoma. ANIMALS 340 dogs. PROCEDURES Medical records of dogs that underwent lung lobectomy for removal of a primary pulmonary mass were reviewed, and histopathologic type of lesions was determined. The canine lung carcinoma stage classification system was used to determine clinical stage for dogs with pulmonary carcinoma. RESULTS Pulmonary carcinoma was the most frequently encountered tumor type (296/340 [87.1%]), followed by sarcoma (26 [7.6%]), adenoma (11 [3.2%]), and pulmonary neuroendocrine tumor (5 [1.5%]); there was also 1 plasmacytoma and 1 carcinosarcoma. Twenty (5.9%) sarcomas were classified as primary pulmonary histiocytic sarcoma. There was a significant difference in median survival time between dogs with pulmonary carcinomas (399 days), dogs with histiocytic sarcomas (300 days), and dogs with neuroendocrine tumors (498 days). When dogs with pulmonary carcinomas were grouped on the basis of clinical stage, there were no significant differences in median survival time between dogs that did and did not receive adjuvant chemotherapy. CLINICAL RELEVANCE Results indicated that pulmonary carcinoma is the most common cause of primary pulmonary neoplasia in dogs; however, nonepithelial tumors can occur. Survival times were significantly different between dogs with pulmonary carcinoma, histiocytic sarcoma, and neuroendocrine tumor, emphasizing the importance of recognizing the relative incidence of these various histologic diagnoses. The therapeutic effect of adjuvant chemotherapy in dogs with pulmonary carcinoma remains unclear and warrants further investigation.