No abstract

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.

No abstract

No abstract

Counting mitotic figures (MF) in hematoxylin and eosin–stained histologic sections is an integral part of the diagnostic pathologist’s tumor evaluation. The mitotic count (MC) is used alone or as part of a grading scheme for assessment of prognosis and clinical decisions. Determining MCs is subjective, somewhat laborious, and has interobserver variation. Proposals for standardizing this parameter in the veterinary field are limited to terminology (use of the term MC) and area (MC is counted in an area measuring 2.37 mm2). Digital imaging techniques are now commonplace and widely used among veterinary pathologists, and field of view area can be easily calculated with digital imaging software. In addition to standardizing the methods of counting MF, the morphologic characteristics of MF and distinguishing atypical mitotic figures (AMF) versus mitotic-like figures (MLF) need to be defined. This article provides morphologic criteria for MF identification and for distinguishing normal phases of MF from AMF and MLF. Pertinent features of digital microscopy and application of computational pathology (CPATH) methods are discussed. Correct identification of MF will improve MC consistency, reproducibility, and accuracy obtained from manual (glass slide or whole-slide imaging) and CPATH approaches.

No abstract

Canine leishmaniasis is a vector-borne zoonotic disease caused by the protozoan parasite Leishmania infantum. In Romania between 1955 and 2013, no cases of human autochthonous visceral leishmaniasis were reported. Data regarding canine leishmaniasis is similarly scarce. Since the first report of clinical autochthonous canine leishmaniasis in 1935, there were only three sporadic reports of positive dogs all without any clinical signs. Our study reports the first clinical case of autochthonous canine leishmaniasis in the last 80 years, stressing the importance of a targeted surveillance of Leishmania infection, as infected dogs act as the primary reservoir for zoonotic visceral leishmaniasis.

No abstract