Genomic mapping in outbred mice reveals overlap in genetic susceptibility for HZE ion- and γ-ray-induced tumors.

Cancer risk from galactic cosmic radiation exposure is considered a potential showstopper for a manned mission to Mars. Calculating the actual risks confronted by spaceflight crews is complicated by our limited understanding of the carcinogenic effects of high-charge, high-energy (HZE) ions, a radiation type for which no human exposure data exist. Using a mouse model of genetic diversity, we find that the histotype spectrum of HZE ion-induced tumors is similar to the spectra of spontaneous and γ-ray-induced tumors and that the genomic loci controlling susceptibilities overlap between groups for some tumor types. Where it occurs, this overlap indicates shared tumorigenesis mechanisms regardless of the type of radiation exposure and supports the use of human epidemiological data from γ-ray exposures to predict cancer risks from galactic cosmic rays

Recommended Guidelines for the Conduct and Evaluation of Prognostic Studies in Veterinary Oncology.

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\u2019 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 veterinary oncology continues to progress. As mentioned, these guidelines were developed through an initiative of the American College of Veterinary Pathologists\u2019 Oncology Committee, and they have been reviewed and endorsed by the World Small Animal Veterinary Association

Recommended Guidelines for Submission, Trimming, Margin Evaluation, and Reporting of Tumor Biopsy Specimens in Veterinary Surgical Pathology

eoplastic 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