Prevalence of malignancy in masses from the mammary gland region of dogs with single or multiple masses

John Litterine-Kaufman 1Department of Surgery, Angell Animal Medical Center, 350 S Huntington Ave, Boston, MA 02130.

Search for other papers by John Litterine-Kaufman in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed Close
 VMD
,
Sue A. Casale 1Department of Surgery, Angell Animal Medical Center, 350 S Huntington Ave, Boston, MA 02130.

Search for other papers by Sue A. Casale in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed Close
 DVM
, and
Pamela J. Mouser 2Department of Pathology, Angell Animal Medical Center, 350 S Huntington Ave, Boston, MA 02130.

Search for other papers by Pamela J. Mouser in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed Close
 DVM
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.2460/javma.255.7.817
Volume/Issue:
Volume 255: Issue 7
Online Publication Date:
01 Oct 2019
Restricted access
Sign In Reprints and Permissions Purchase Article

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

To determine the prevalence of malignancy in masses from the mammary gland region of dogs with single or multiple masses.

ANIMALS

95 female dogs from which mammary gland masses had been excised.

PROCEDURES

Medical records of all female dogs from which mammary gland tissue was submitted to the Angell Animal Medical Center Pathology Department from 2009 through 2014 were reviewed. For each dog, data were obtained on breed, body weight, age, reproductive status, and number, location, and histologic classification of masses. The prevalence of malignancy was compared between dogs with single versus multiple masses and among the 5 pairs of mammary glands. Dogs with single versus multiple masses were also compared with respect to age and reproductive status.

RESULTS

Among 161 evaluated masses, 137 (85%) were classified as benign or nonneoplastic and 24 (15%) as malignant. Five of 95 (5%) dogs had masses that were not of mammary gland origin. Age, reproductive status, and quantity of masses (single vs multiple) were not significantly associated with the prevalence of malignancy. The prevalence of malignancy in masses from the fourth (caudal abdominal) mammary gland was significantly lower than that in the other 4 mammary glands combined.

CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Dogs with multiple masses in the mammary gland region were not significantly more likely than dogs with single masses to have a malignancy, suggesting that these 2 groups could be managed similarly. Further studies are needed to evaluate the clinical relevance of the lower prevalence of malignancy in masses from the fourth mammary gland.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

To determine the prevalence of malignancy in masses from the mammary gland region of dogs with single or multiple masses.

ANIMALS

95 female dogs from which mammary gland masses had been excised.

PROCEDURES

Medical records of all female dogs from which mammary gland tissue was submitted to the Angell Animal Medical Center Pathology Department from 2009 through 2014 were reviewed. For each dog, data were obtained on breed, body weight, age, reproductive status, and number, location, and histologic classification of masses. The prevalence of malignancy was compared between dogs with single versus multiple masses and among the 5 pairs of mammary glands. Dogs with single versus multiple masses were also compared with respect to age and reproductive status.

RESULTS

Among 161 evaluated masses, 137 (85%) were classified as benign or nonneoplastic and 24 (15%) as malignant. Five of 95 (5%) dogs had masses that were not of mammary gland origin. Age, reproductive status, and quantity of masses (single vs multiple) were not significantly associated with the prevalence of malignancy. The prevalence of malignancy in masses from the fourth (caudal abdominal) mammary gland was significantly lower than that in the other 4 mammary glands combined.

CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Dogs with multiple masses in the mammary gland region were not significantly more likely than dogs with single masses to have a malignancy, suggesting that these 2 groups could be managed similarly. Further studies are needed to evaluate the clinical relevance of the lower prevalence of malignancy in masses from the fourth mammary gland.

Contributor Notes

Address correspondence to Dr. Litterine-Kaufman (john.litterine-kaufman@bluepearlvet.com).
Cover Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association
Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association
Publication Date:
01 Oct 2019

  • 1. Dobson JM, Samuel S, Milstein H, et al. Canine neoplasia in the UK: estimates of incidence rates from a population of insured dogs. J Small Anim Pract 2002;43:240–246.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • 2. Merlo DF, Rossi L, Pellegrino C, et al. Cancer incidence in pet dogs: findings of the animal tumor registry of Genoa, Italy. J Vet Intern Med 2008;22:976–984.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • 3. Rostami M, Tateyama S, Uchida K, et al. Tumors in domestic animals examined during a ten-year period (1980 to 1989) at Miyazaki University. J Vet Med Sci 1994;56:403–405.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • 4. Van Nimwegen S, Kirpensteijn J. Specific disorders. In: Tobias K, Johnston S, eds. Veterinary surgery: small animal. St Louis: Saunders, 2012;1320–1327.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • 5. Schafer KA, Kelly G, Schrader R, et al. A canine model of familial mammary gland neoplasia. Vet Pathol 1998;35:168–177.

  • 6. Moe L. Population-based incidence of mammary tumours in some dog breeds. J Reprod Fertil Suppl 2001;57:439–443.

  • 7. Benjamin SA, Lee AC, Saunders WJ. Classification and behavior of canine mammary epithelial neoplasms based on life-span observations in Beagles. Vet Pathol 1999;36:423–436.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • 8. Zatloukal J, Lorenzova J, Tichy F, et al. Breed and age as risk factors for canine mammary tumours. Acta Vet Brno 2005;74:103–109.

  • 9. Schneider R. Comparison of age, sex, and incidence rates in human and canine breast cancer. Cancer 1970;26:419–426.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • 10. Cotchin E. Mammary neoplasms of the bitch. J Comp Pathol Ther 1958;68:1–22.

  • 11. Fowler EH, Wilson GP, Koestner A. Biologic behavior of canine mammary neoplasms based on a histogenic classification. Vet Pathol 1974;11:212–229.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • 12. Mitchell L, De la Iglesia FA, Wenkoff MS, et al. Mammary tumors in dogs: survey of clinical and pathological characteristics. Can Vet J 1974;15:131–138.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • 13. Sorenmo KU, Kristiansen VM, Cofone MA, et al. Canine mammary gland tumours; a histological continuum from benign to malignant; clinical and histopathological evidence. Vet Comp Oncol 2009;7:162–172.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • 14. Sorenmo K. Canine mammary gland tumors. Vet Clin North Am Small Anim Pract 2003;33:573–596.

  • 15. Sorenmo K, Worley D, Goldschmidt M. Tumors of the mammary gland. In: Withrow and MacEwen's small animal clinical oncology. 5th ed. St Louis: Saunders, 2012;538–552.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • 16. Schneider R, Dorn CR, Taylor DO. Factors influencing canine mammary cancer development and postsurgical survival. J Natl Cancer Inst 1969;43:1249–1261.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • 17. Yang WY, Liu CH, Chang CJ, et al. Proliferative activity, apoptosis and expression of oestrogen receptor and Bcl-2 oncoprotein in canine mammary gland tumours. J Comp Pathol 2006;134:70–79.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • 18. Støvring M, Moe L, Glattre E. A population-based case control study of canine mammary tumours and clinical use of medroxyprogesterone acetate. APMIS 1997;105:590–596.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • 19. Goldschmidt M, Peña L, Rasotto R, et al. Classification and grading of canine mammary tumors. Vet Pathol 2011;48:117–131.

  • 20. Marconato L, Romanelli G, Stefanello D, et al. Prognostic factors for dogs with mammary inflammatory carcinoma: 43 cases (2003–2008). J Am Vet Med Assoc 2009;235:967–972.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • 21. Perez Alenza MD, Peña L, Del Castillo N, et al. Factors influencing the incidence and prognosis of canine mammary tumours. J Small Anim Pract 2000;41:287–291.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • 22. Bostock DE. The prognosis following the surgical excision of canine mammary neoplasms. Eur J Cancer 1975;11:389–396.

  • 23. Novosad CA. Principles of treatment for mammary gland tumors. Clin Tech Small Anim Pract 2003;18:107–109.

  • 24. Stratmann N, Failing K, Richter A, et al. Mammary tumor recurrence in bitches after regional mastectomy. Vet Surg 2008;37:82–86.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • 25. Yamagami T, Kobayashi T, Takahashi K, et al. Prognosis for canine malignant mammary tumors based on TNM and histologic classification. J Vet Med Sci 1996;58:1079–1083.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • 26. Sonnenschein EG, Glickman LT, Goldschmidt MH, et al. Body conformation, diet, and risk of breast cancer in pet dogs: a case-control study. Am J Epidemiol 1991;133:694–703.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • 27. Lim HY, Im KS, Kim NH, et al. Effects of obesity and obesity-related molecules on canine mammary gland tumors. Vet Pathol 2015;52:1045–1051.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • 28. Hellmén E, Bergstrom R, Holmberg L. Prognostic factors in canine mammary tumors: a multivariate study of 202 consecutive cases. Vet Pathol 1993;30:20–27.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

Advertisement