Radiation therapy for nasal lymphoma
FIGURE 7. A contrast-enhanced transverse computed tomographic image of a cat with a history of chronic stertor, nasal discharge,
and decreased appetite. The mass occupies the entire right nasal passage and invades the nasopharynx. Histologic examination
of biopsy samples confirmed B-cell lymphoma of the nasal cavity.
|
Radiation therapy for regionally confined lymphoma can be rewarding. In cats, lymphoma is the most common nasal tumor (Figure 7). Although large prospective studies are lacking, evidence from a limited number of cats treated for nasal lymphoma with
radiation therapy was favorable, with treated cats achieving a median survival time of 19 months.23-25 In our experience, disease progression in cats with nasal lymphoma appears to be more often associated with local regrowth
rather than multicentric dissemination. So the benefit of treating feline nasal lymphoma with systemic chemotherapy in addition
to curative-intent radiation requires further investigation.
CONCLUSION
Lymphoma is a common hematologic malignancy in dogs and cats that usually responds well to therapy. Systemic chemotherapy
remains the cornerstone for treating disseminated disease, while radiation therapy may be useful for localized tumor burdens.
Most dogs and cats receiving therapy are provided with good quality-of-life scores and prolonged survival times. As newer
treatment protocols are investigated and validated for use in companion animals, veterinary practitioners will be able to
offer and successfully institute these additional therapeutic options.
Timothy M. Fan, DVM, DACVIM (internal medicine, oncology)
Louis-Philippe de Lorimier, DVM
Department of Veterinary Clinical Medicine
College of Veterinary Medicine
University of Illinois
Urbana, IL 61802
REFERENCES
1. Vail DM, MacEwen EG, Young KM. Canine lymphoma and lymphoid leukemias. In: Withrow SJ, MacEwen EG, eds. Small animal clinical oncology. 3rd Ed. Philadelphia, Pa: WB Saunders, 2001;558-590.
2. Dorn CR, Taylor DO, Schneider R. The epidemiology of canine leukemia and lymphoma. Bibl Haematol 1970;(36):403-415.
3. Chapman AL, Bopp WJ, Brightwell AS, et al. Preliminary report on virus-like particles in canine leukemia and derived cell
cultures. Cancer Res 1967;27:18-25.
4. Hahn KA, Richardson RC, Hahn EA, et al. Diagnostic and prognostic importance of chromosomal aberrations identified in 61
dogs with lymphosarcoma. Vet Pathol 1994;31:528-540.
5. Hayes HM, Tarone RE, Cantor KP. On the association between canine malignant lymphoma and opportunity for exposure to 2,4-dichlorophenoxyacetic
acid. Environ Res 1995;70:119-125.
6. Hayes HM, Tarone RE, Cantor KP, et al. Case-control study of canine malignant lymphoma: Positive association with dog owner's
use of 2,4-dichlorophenoxyacetic acid herbicides. J Natl Cancer Inst 1991;83:1226-1231.
7. Owen LN, Bostock DE, Halliwell REW. Cell-mediated and humoral immunity in dogs with spontaneous lymphosarcoma. Eur J Cancer 1975;11:187-191.
8. Reif JS, Lower KS, Ogilvie GK. Residential exposure to magnetic fields and risk of canine lymphoma. Am J Epidemiol 1995;141:352-359.
9. Francis DP, Cotter SM, Hardy WD Jr, et al. Comparison of virus-positive and virus-negative cases of feline leukemia and lymphoma.
Cancer Res 1979;39:3866-3870.
10. Hardy WD Jr, McClelland AJ, Zuckerman EE, et al. Development of virus non-producer lymphosarcomas in pet cats exposed to
FeLV. Nature 1980;288:90-92.
|
Featuring Information from:
