Abstracts, Short Communications & Research

Decision-Making in Spinal Cord Disease

joanne mcallister — Tue, 14 Jul 2015 07:16:17 GMT

Current Revision posted to Abstracts, Short Communications & Research by joanne mcallister on 7/14/2015 7:16:17 AM

Abstracts, Short Communications & Research

Anonymous — Thu, 02 Jul 2015 07:03:40 GMT

Current Revision posted to Abstracts, Short Communications & Research by Anonymous on 7/2/2015 7:03:40 AM

24/7 and OOH Home Visits Consultation

grumpyoldman — Wed, 22 Jan 2014 23:00:37 GMT

Current Revision posted to Abstracts, Short Communications & Research by grumpyoldman on 1/22/2014 11:00:37 PM

The RCVS has called for evidence concerning the provision of 24 hr emergency cover.

This wiki page is a collaborative document which all members of vetsurgeon.org are invited to contribute to. To do so, press the EDIT tab at the top of the page.

The rules are simple. If you feel you can ADD an additional valid point to those listed below, please do.

Please DO NOT DELETE any existing content you see on the page.

There are two parts to this document which you might like to contribute to. First a list of issues you think the RCVS should consider as they review 24/7 cover, and secondly whether you think that the requirement to provide home visits should be removed.

This page will be submitted to the RCVS on 17th February

List of issues the RCVS should consider when reviewing the provision of 24/7 emergency cover:

At present, the professional responsibility for night visits falls on just a few because the code and its associated guidance are out of date and equivocal. Many vets do not offer 24/7 care but the code requires them to. (Visits and transfer of sick animals are both explored within Chikosi and Gillams 2013)
The present Code fudge leaves all unable to agree what is expected. Some sites pretend to offer 24/7 when in fact they farm it out. This helps their marketing, but is a breach of consumer trust .
Claiming 24/7 service when you close at 6 utilises a probably inappropriate PSS contract option - when you dont offer 24h care but want to be in the PSS. However it also seems to allow clinicians who dont have 24/7 care to fulfil code obligations to provide 24/7 to their patients.
You can be a VH without a 24/7 service.. is that OK?
Some practices very close to a full 24/7 VH or EC advertise a 24hr service. From a public and marketing point of view - these look similar to big sites with lots of night staff - but they are not businesses that are fully staffed and they don't have all the infrastructure and costs of 24 hr care. This advertising creep puts practices which have invested money, time, resources and effort at disadvantage.
Present 24/7 claims and advertising are often misleading and anticompetitive. It takes little time to examine the websites of practices that use an EC or VH for their OOH and see how honest they appear. In some cases marketing appears to be a lie and if it is a lie, then it is a matter that i already know trading standards will be very interested in - that is - if it is not sorted out at the next RCVS review "effectively".
24/7 OOH centers sites are commonly under-staffed and over-used by practices. The RCVS doesn't state what is the maximum number of vets practices or registered clients that a OOH should be able to provide cover for. This leaves single vets in OOH centers having to make patients wait for too long in emergency consultations. And exposing themselves to complaint.
Further relaxation of the requirement for all practices to make arrangements for 24/7 cover and for veterinary surgeons to visit when clinically necessary may result in considerable unnecessary animal suffering.
If visits are to remain mandatory then it should also be mandatory that OOH centres are always staffed by two veterinary surgeons so that, if one is called to the mandatory visit, there is always a VS available to cover in-patients and emergencies that may present.

The OOH service providers state in their literature that their vets are OOH specialists ,who are fresh faced and bushy tailed having not worked the previous day. But actually often they are just people who work for donor practices who are,moonlighting and are not speciaIsts in anything. They are in fact just doing a night shift for the extra income.

Should mandatory house visits be removed from the GTPC?

Arguments for

Would help reinforce the perception that owners have a responsibility for their own animals.
Could improve animal welfare, as animals can often be better treated in practice than at home.
It is often impossible to know if a visit is 'clinically' necessary on a phone conversation.

Arguments against

Could compromise animal welfare / cause unnecessary suffering if, as a result of removing the requirement to visit at home from GTPC, veterinary surgeons fail to provide home visits.

24/7 and OOH Home Visits Consultation

Anthony Todd — Wed, 15 Jan 2014 10:51:26 GMT

Revision 7 posted to Abstracts, Short Communications & Research by Anthony Todd on 1/15/2014 10:51:26 AM

The RCVS has called for evidence concerning the provision of 24 hr emergency cover.

This wiki page is a collaborative document which all members of vetsurgeon.org are invited to contribute to. To do so, press the EDIT tab at the top of the page.

The rules are simple. If you feel you can ADD an additional valid point to those listed below, please do.

Please DO NOT DELETE any existing content you see on the page.

This page will be submitted to the RCVS on 17th February

List of issues the RCVS should consider when reviewing the provision of 24/7 emergency cover:

At present, the professional responsibility for night visits falls on just a few because the code and its associated guidance are out of date and equivocal. Many vets do not offer 24/7 care but the code requires them to. (Visits and transfer of sick animals are both explored within Chikosi and Gillams 2013)
The present Code fudge leaves all unable to agree what is expected. Some sites pretend to offer 24/7 when in fact they farm it out. This helps their marketing, but is a breach of consumer trust .
Claiming 24/7 service when you close at 6 utilises a probably inappropriate PSS contract option - when you dont offer 24h care but want to be in the PSS. However it also seems to allow clinicians who dont have 24/7 care to fulfil code obligations to provide 24/7 to their patients.
You can be a VH without a 24/7 service.. is that OK?
Some practices very close to a full 24/7 VH or EC advertise a 24hr service. From a public and marketing point of view - these look similar to big sites with lots of night staff - but they are not businesses that are fully staffed and they don't have all the infrastructure and costs of 24 hr care. This advertising creep puts practices which have invested money, time, resources and effort at disadvantage.
Present 24/7 claims and advertising are often misleading and anticompetitive. It takes little time to examine the websites of practices that use an EC or VH for their OOH and see how honest they appear. In some cases marketing appears to be a lie and if it is a lie, then it is a matter that i already know trading standards will be very interested in - that is - if it is not sorted out at the next RCVS review "effectively".
24/7 OOH centers sites are commonly under-staffed and over-used by practices. The RCVS doesn't state what is the maximum number of vets practices or registered clients that a OOH should be able to provide cover for. This leaves single vets in OOH centers having to make patients wait for too long in emergency consultations. And exposing themselves to complaint.
Further relaxation of the requirement for all practices to make arrangements for 24/7 cover and for veterinary surgeons to visit when clinically necessary may result in considerable unnecessary animal suffering.
If visits are to remain mandatory then it should also be mandatory that OOH centres are always staffed by two veterinary surgeons so that, if one is called to the mandatory visit, there is always a VS available to cover in-patients and emergencies that may present.

Should mandatory house visits be removed from the GTPC?

Arguments for

Would help reinforce the perception that owners have a responsibility for their own animals.
Could improve animal welfare, as animals can often be better treated in practice than at home.
It is often impossible to know if a visit is 'clinically' necessary on a phone conversation.

Arguments against

Could compromise animal welfare / cause unnecessary suffering if, as a result of removing the requirement to visit at home from GTPC, veterinary surgeons fail to provide home visits.

24/7 and OOH Home Visits Consultation

Arlo Guthrie — Fri, 10 Jan 2014 12:37:51 GMT

Revision 6 posted to Abstracts, Short Communications & Research by Arlo Guthrie on 1/10/2014 12:37:51 PM

The RCVS has called for evidence concerning the provision of 24 hr emergency cover.

This wiki page is a collaborative document which all members of vetsurgeon.org are invited to contribute to. To do so, press the EDIT tab at the top of the page.

The rules are simple. If you feel you can ADD an additional valid point to those listed below, please do.

Please DO NOT DELETE any existing content you see on the page.

This page will be submitted to the RCVS on 17th February

List of issues the RCVS should consider when reviewing the provision of 24/7 emergency cover:

At present, the professional responsibility for night visits falls on just a few because the code and its associated guidance are out of date and equivocal. Many vets do not offer 24/7 care but the code requires them to. (Visits and transfer of sick animals are both explored within Chikosi and Gillams 2013)
The present Code fudge leaves all unable to agree what is expected. Some sites pretend to offer 24/7 when in fact they farm it out. This helps their marketing, but is a breach of consumer trust .
Claiming 24/7 service when you close at 6 utilises a probably inappropriate PSS contract option - when you dont offer 24h care but want to be in the PSS. However it also seems to allow clinicians who dont have 24/7 care to fulfil code obligations to provide 24/7 to their patients.
You can be a VH without a 24/7 service.. is that OK?
Some practices very close to a full 24/7 VH or EC advertise a 24hr service. From a public and marketing point of view - these look similar to big sites with lots of night staff - but they are not businesses that are fully staffed and they don't have all the infrastructure and costs of 24 hr care. This advertising creep puts practices which have invested money, time, resources and effort at disadvantage.
Present 24/7 claims and advertising are often misleading and anticompetitive. It takes little time to examine the websites of practices that use an EC or VH for their OOH and see how honest they appear. In some cases marketing appears to be a lie and if it is a lie, then it is a matter that i already know trading standards will be very interested in - that is - if it is not sorted out at the next RCVS review "effectively".
24/7 OOH centers sites are commonly under-staffed and over-used by practices. The RCVS doesn't state what is the maximum number of vets practices or registered clients that a OOH should be able to provide cover for. This leaves single vets in OOH centers having to make patients wait for too long in emergency consultations. And exposing themselves to complaint.
Further relaxation of the requirement for all practices to make arrangements for 24/7 cover and for veterinary surgeons to visit when clinically necessary may result in considerable unnecessary animal suffering.

Should mandatory house visits be removed from the GTPC?

Arguments for

Would help reinforce the perception that owners have a responsibility for their own animals.
Could improve animal welfare, as animals can often be better treated in practice than at home.
It is often impossible to know if a visit is 'clinically' necessary on a phone conversation.

Arguments against

Could compromise animal welfare / cause unnecessary suffering if, as a result of removing the requirement to visit at home from GTPC, veterinary surgeons fail to provide home visits.

24/7 and OOH Home Visits Consultation

Arlo Guthrie — Fri, 10 Jan 2014 12:03:03 GMT

Revision 5 posted to Abstracts, Short Communications & Research by Arlo Guthrie on 1/10/2014 12:03:03 PM

The RCVS has called for evidence concerning the provision of 24 hr emergency cover.

This wiki page is a collaborative document which all members of vetsurgeon.org are invited to contribute to. To do so, press the EDIT tab at the top of the page.

The rules are simple. If you feel you can ADD an additional valid point to those listed below, please do.

Please DO NOT DELETE any existing content you see on the page.

This page will be submitted to the RCVS on 17th February

List of issues the RCVS should consider when reviewing the provision of 24/7 emergency cover:

At present, the professional responsibility for night visits falls on just a few because the code and its associated guidance are out of date and equivocal. Many vets do not offer 24/7 care but the code requires them to. (Visits and transfer of sick animals are both explored within Chikosi and Gillams 2013)
The present Code fudge leaves all unable to agree what is expected. Some sites pretend to offer 24/7 when in fact they farm it out. This helps their marketing, but is a breach of consumer trust .
Claiming 24/7 service when you close at 6 utilises a probably inappropriate PSS contract option - when you dont offer 24h care but want to be in the PSS. However it also seems to allow clinicians who dont have 24/7 care to fulfil code obligations to provide 24/7 to their patients.
You can be a VH without a 24/7 service.. is that OK?
Some practices very close to a full 24/7 VH or EC advertise a 24hr service. From a public and marketing point of view - these look similar to big sites with lots of night staff - but they are not businesses that are fully staffed and they don't have all the infrastructure and costs of 24 hr care. This advertising creep puts practices which have invested money, time, resources and effort at disadvantage.
Present 24/7 claims and advertising are often misleading and anticompetitive. It takes little time to examine the websites of practices that use an EC or VH for their OOH and see how honest they appear. In some cases marketing appears to be a lie and if it is a lie, then it is a matter that i already know trading standards will be very interested in - that is - if it is not sorted out at the next RCVS review "effectively".
24/7 OOH centers sites are commonly under-staffed and over-used by practices. The RCVS doesn't state what is the maximum number of vets practices or registered clients that a OOH should be able to provide cover for. This leaves single vets in OOH centers having to make patients wait for too long in emergency consultations. And exposing themselves to complaint.
Further relaxation of the requirement for all practices to make arrangements for 24/7 cover and for veterinary surgeons to visit when clinically necessary may result in considerable unnecessary animal suffering.

Should mandatory house visits be removed from the GTPC?

Arguments for

Would help reinforce the perception that owners have a responsibility for their own animals.
Could improve animal welfare, as animals can often be better treated in practice than at home.
It is often impossible to know if a visit is 'clinically' necessary on a phone conversation.

Arguments against

Could compromise animal welfare / cause unnecessary suffering if animals fail to get treatment as quickly as they might otherwise.

24/7 and OOH Home Visits Consultation

Hannah Wynne Richards — Fri, 10 Jan 2014 11:54:47 GMT

Revision 4 posted to Abstracts, Short Communications & Research by Hannah Wynne Richards on 1/10/2014 11:54:47 AM

The RCVS has called for evidence concerning the provision of 24 hr emergency cover.

This wiki page is a collaborative document which all members of vetsurgeon.org are invited to contribute to. To do so, press the EDIT tab at the top of the page.

The rules are simple. If you feel you can ADD an additional valid point to those listed below, please do.

Please DO NOT DELETE any existing content you see on the page.

This page will be submitted to the RCVS on 17th February

List of issues the RCVS should consider when reviewing the provision of 24/7 emergency cover:

At present, the professional responsibility for night visits falls on just a few because the code and its associated guidance are out of date and equivocal. Many vets do not offer 24/7 care but the code requires them to. (Visits and transfer of sick animals are both explored within Chikosi and Gillams 2013)
The present Code fudge leaves all unable to agree what is expected. Some sites pretend to offer 24/7 when in fact they farm it out. This helps their marketing, but is a breach of consumer trust .
Claiming 24/7 service when you close at 6 utilises a probably inappropriate PSS contract option - when you dont offer 24h care but want to be in the PSS. However it also seems to allow clinicians who dont have 24/7 care to fulfil code obligations to provide 24/7 to their patients.
You can be a VH without a 24/7 service.. is that OK?
Some practices very close to a full 24/7 VH or EC advertise a 24hr service. From a public and marketing point of view - these look similar to big sites with lots of night staff - but they are not businesses that are fully staffed and they don't have all the infrastructure and costs of 24 hr care. This advertising creep puts practices which have invested money, time, resources and effort at disadvantage.
Present 24/7 claims and advertising are often misleading and anticompetitive. It takes little time to examine the websites of practices that use an EC or VH for their OOH and see how honest they appear. In some cases marketing appears to be a lie and if it is a lie, then it is a matter that i already know trading standards will be very interested in - that is - if it is not sorted out at the next RCVS review "effectively".
24/7 OOH centers sites are commonly under-staffed and over-used by practices. The RCVS doesn't state what is the maximum number of vets practices or registered clients that a OOH should be able to provide cover for. This leaves single vets in OOH centers having to make patients wait for too long in emergency consultations. And exposing themselves to complaint.

Should mandatory house visits be removed from the GTPC?

Arguments for

Would help reinforce the perception that owners have a responsibility for their own animals.
Could improve animal welfare, as animals can often be better treated in practice than at home.
It is often impossible to know if a visit is 'clinically' necessary on a phone conversation.

Arguments against

Could compromise animal welfare if animals fail to get treatment as quickly as they might otherwise.

Further relaxation of the requirement for all practices to make arrangements for 24/7 cover and for veterinary surgeons to visit when clinically necessary will inevitably result in considerable unnecessary animal suffering, and so should be unequivocally opposed.

H W Richards

Penybryn Veterinary Cente

7/7 Sketty Ave

Swansea

SA2 0TE

24/7 and OOH Home Visits Consultation

Francisco Gomez — Fri, 10 Jan 2014 10:34:29 GMT

Revision 3 posted to Abstracts, Short Communications & Research by Francisco Gomez on 1/10/2014 10:34:29 AM

The RCVS has called for evidence concerning the provision of 24 hr emergency cover.

This wiki page is a collaborative document which all members of vetsurgeon.org are invited to contribute to. To do so, press the EDIT tab at the top of the page.

The rules are simple. If you feel you can ADD an additional valid point to those listed below, please do.

Please DO NOT DELETE any existing content you see on the page.

This page will be submitted to the RCVS on 17th February

List of issues the RCVS should consider when reviewing the provision of 24/7 emergency cover:

At present, the professional responsibility for night visits falls on just a few because the code and its associated guidance are out of date and equivocal. Many vets do not offer 24/7 care but the code requires them to. (Visits and transfer of sick animals are both explored within Chikosi and Gillams 2013)
The present Code fudge leaves all unable to agree what is expected. Some sites pretend to offer 24/7 when in fact they farm it out. This helps their marketing, but is a breach of consumer trust .
Claiming 24/7 service when you close at 6 utilises a probably inappropriate PSS contract option - when you dont offer 24h care but want to be in the PSS. However it also seems to allow clinicians who dont have 24/7 care to fulfil code obligations to provide 24/7 to their patients.
You can be a VH without a 24/7 service.. is that OK?
Some practices very close to a full 24/7 VH or EC advertise a 24hr service. From a public and marketing point of view - these look similar to big sites with lots of night staff - but they are not businesses that are fully staffed and they don't have all the infrastructure and costs of 24 hr care. This advertising creep puts practices which have invested money, time, resources and effort at disadvantage.
Present 24/7 claims and advertising are often misleading and anticompetitive. It takes little time to examine the websites of practices that use an EC or VH for their OOH and see how honest they appear. In some cases marketing appears to be a lie and if it is a lie, then it is a matter that i already know trading standards will be very interested in - that is - if it is not sorted out at the next RCVS review "effectively".
24/7 OOH centers sites are commonly under-staffed and over-used by practices. The RCVS doesn't state what is the maximum number of vets practices or registered clients that a OOH should be able to provide cover for. This leaves single vets in OOH centers having to make patients wait for too long in emergency consultations. And exposing themselves to complaint.

Should mandatory house visits be removed from the GTPC?

Arguments for

Would help reinforce the perception that owners have a responsibility for their own animals.
Could improve animal welfare, as animals can often be better treated in practice than at home.
It is often impossible to know if a visit is 'clinically' necessary on a phone conversation.

Arguments against

Could compromise animal welfare if animals fail to get treatment as quickly as they might otherwise.

24/7 and OOH Home Visits Consultation

Arlo Guthrie — Fri, 10 Jan 2014 10:00:32 GMT

Revision 2 posted to Abstracts, Short Communications & Research by Arlo Guthrie on 1/10/2014 10:00:32 AM

The RCVS has called for evidence concerning the provision of 24 hr emergency cover.

This wiki page is a collaborative document which all members of vetsurgeon.org are invited to contribute to. To do so, press the EDIT tab at the top of the page.

The rules are simple. If you feel you can ADD an additional valid point to those listed below, please do.

Please DO NOT DELETE any existing content you see on the page.

This page will be submitted to the RCVS on 17th February

List of issues the RCVS should consider when reviewing the provision of 24/7 emergency cover:

At present, the professional responsibility for night visits falls on just a few because the code and its associated guidance are out of date and equivocal. Many vets do not offer 24/7 care but the code requires them to. (Visits and transfer of sick animals are both explored within Chikosi and Gillams 2013)
The present Code fudge leaves all unable to agree what is expected. Some sites pretend to offer 24/7 when in fact they farm it out. This helps their marketing, but is a breach of consumer trust .
Claiming 24/7 service when you close at 6 utilises a probably inappropriate PSS contract option - when you dont offer 24h care but want to be in the PSS. However it also seems to allow clinicians who dont have 24/7 care to fulfil code obligations to provide 24/7 to their patients.
You can be a VH without a 24/7 service.. is that OK?
Some practices very close to a full 24/7 VH or EC advertise a 24hr service. From a public and marketing point of view - these look similar to big sites with lots of night staff - but they are not businesses that are fully staffed and they don't have all the infrastructure and costs of 24 hr care. This advertising creep puts practices which have invested money, time, resources and effort at disadvantage.
Present 24/7 claims and advertising are often misleading and anticompetitive. It takes little time to examine the websites of practices that use an EC or VH for their OOH and see how honest they appear. In some cases marketing appears to be a lie and if it is a lie, then it is a matter that i already know trading standards will be very interested in - that is - if it is not sorted out at the next RCVS review "effectively".

Should mandatory house visits be removed from the GTPC?

Arguments for

Would help reinforce the perception that owners have a responsibility for their own animals.
Could improve animal welfare, as animals can often be better treated in practice than at home.

Arguments against

Could compromise animal welfare if animals fail to get treatment as quickly as they might otherwise.

24/7 and OOH Home Visits Consultation

Arlo Guthrie — Fri, 10 Jan 2014 09:59:44 GMT

Revision 1 posted to Abstracts, Short Communications & Research by Arlo Guthrie on 1/10/2014 9:59:44 AM

The RCVS has called for evidence concerning the provision of 24 hr emergency cover.

This wiki page is a collaborative document which all members of vetsurgeon.org are invited to contribute to.

The rules are simple. If you feel you can ADD an additional valid point to those listed below, please do.

Please DO NOT DELETE an existing content you see on the page.

This page will be submitted to the RCVS on 17th February

List of issues the RCVS should consider when reviewing the provision of 24/7 emergency cover:

At present, the professional responsibility for night visits falls on just a few because the code and its associated guidance are out of date and equivocal. Many vets do not offer 24/7 care but the code requires them to. (Visits and transfer of sick animals are both explored within Chikosi and Gillams 2013)
The present Code fudge leaves all unable to agree what is expected. Some sites pretend to offer 24/7 when in fact they farm it out. This helps their marketing, but is a breach of consumer trust .
Claiming 24/7 service when you close at 6 utilises a probably inappropriate PSS contract option - when you dont offer 24h care but want to be in the PSS. However it also seems to allow clinicians who dont have 24/7 care to fulfil code obligations to provide 24/7 to their patients.
You can be a VH without a 24/7 service.. is that OK?
Some practices very close to a full 24/7 VH or EC advertise a 24hr service. From a public and marketing point of view - these look similar to big sites with lots of night staff - but they are not businesses that are fully staffed and they don't have all the infrastructure and costs of 24 hr care. This advertising creep puts practices which have invested money, time, resources and effort at disadvantage.
Present 24/7 claims and advertising are often misleading and anticompetitive. It takes little time to examine the websites of practices that use an EC or VH for their OOH and see how honest they appear. In some cases marketing appears to be a lie and if it is a lie, then it is a matter that i already know trading standards will be very interested in - that is - if it is not sorted out at the next RCVS review "effectively".

Should mandatory house visits be removed from the GTPC?

Arguments for

Would help reinforce the perception that owners have a responsibility for their own animals.
Could improve animal welfare, as animals can often be better treated in practice than at home.

Arguments against

Could compromise animal welfare if animals fail to get treatment as quickly as they might otherwise.

Innovative treatment for Feline fibrosarcoma to be launched this autumn

kdelange — Thu, 13 Jun 2013 15:13:15 GMT

Current Revision posted to Abstracts, Short Communications & Research by kdelange on 6/13/2013 3:13:15 PM

Lisbon, 29 May 2013 - “On average, European veterinary practitioners see between two and three cases of feline fibrosarcoma each year,” reported Pascal Fayard, European marketing manager, citing a survey held among 500 general practitioners in five countries. Speaking at a Merial Conference held in Lisbon on 29 of May, on the eve of the congress of European Society of Veterinary Oncology, he announced the European-wide launch, coming autumn, of a novel immunotherapeutic drug, Oncept IL-2, for the treatment of fibrosarcoma in cats.

Speakers at the Merial Conference. From left, Patrick Devauchelle (Animal Oncology Centre, Maisons-Alfort), Dominique Jas (R&D Merial), Catherine Pépin (Technical manager companion animals, Merial), Pascal Fayard (Marketing manager companion animals, Merial), Ana Lara (Royal Veterinary College, London), Hervé Poulet (R&D Merial), Jolle Kirpensteijn (Utrecht University, moderator).

Interleukin: stimulating anti-tumour defense

“Interleukin 2 (IL-2) stimulates the growth and activity of T-lymphocytes and natural killer cells, the production of other cytokines like interferon gamma (IFNg) and improves the specific tumour-protective memory immune response,” explained Hervé Poulet, Head of bio development Europe and R&D leader at Merial. “In humans, high-dose systemic IL-2 has been approved for the treatment of metastatic melanoma and renal cell carcinoma”.

However, large doses of systemic IL-2 are associated with several toxic side effects, including the capillary leak syndrome while its clinical efficacy is hampered by the short half-life of IL-2 (a few days). To overcome this, several local IL-2-delivery systems have been studied, including free recombinant IL-2, or bound to DNA plasmids, viral vectors, IL-2 secreting cells and antibody-targeted IL. The therapeutic effects of local IL-2 therapy have been demonstrated in several cancers, including equine sarcoids, canine melanoma and non-resectable mast cell tumours.

“For feline fibrosarcoma, we chose an IL-2 expressing canarypox virus vector (ALVAC^®): it is very safe as it does not replicate and expresses IL-2 locally. It was found to be an efficacious adjunct treatment to surgery and radiotherapy,” Dr Poulet concluded.

Reducing the risk of relapse by 65%

Results of a monocentric controlled clinical trial were presented by Dominique Jas (Merial R&D) to confirm the efficacy and safety of the product. Seventy-one cats with a first occurrence of feline fibrosarcoma were referred for post-surgical radiotherapy. They were assigned to three treatment groups: controls (surgery + radiotherapy), low-dose IL-2 treatment (surgery + radiotherapy + IL-2) and high-dose IL-2 treatment (surgery + radiotherapy + IL-2). Cats were enrolled 1 month after surgery, which was not necessarily done in referral practices. However, the percentage of cats with dirty surgical margins was comparable in all groups. Treatment (D0, D7, D14, D21, D35, D49) was initiated the day before the start of radiotherapy (D1 and D3). Cats were checked every three months and underwent a CT scan at 3, 6, 12 and 24 months. The high-dose group – to test safety – was monitored for a year, the low-dose group – to test efficacy – for two years.

Local ALVAC IL-2-treated cats showed a significantly longer median time to relapse (>730 days) than in the reference treatment group (287 days). Results also showed a significant reduction of relapse risk compared to the control group, both after one year (56%) and after two years (65%). Oncept IL-2 was well tolerated, and the time without relapse was significantly increased with no alteration of quality of life.

“This study showed that the control group, that did not undergo immunotherapy, did had poorer results than either treatment group – in spite of the cats receiving a total of thirty injections," Dr Jas confirmed, in answer to the question whether treatment injections were not a risk factors for the development of FISS.

Colleagues from Spain, where there is no radiotherapy available for pets, asked about the possible benefits in cats with surgery alone. “We currently only have a claim for an adjunct therapy to surgery and radiotherapy, stressed Dr Jas, but she added that this was currently being investigated.

An EU-wide launch this autumn

“We’re very excited and proud to announce the forthcoming launch of a new immunotherapy, a recombinant canarypox virus expressing feline IL-2 at the site of injection, added Catherine Pépin, Merial’s technical manager for companion animals. “The claim is for an adjunct treatment in cats with fibrosarcoma (2-5 cm diameter) without metastasis or lymph node involvement, in order to reduce the risk of relapse and to increase the relapse-free interval.”

Oncept IL-2, result of a long-standing collaboration between Merial R&D and leading oncology experts, is the first cancer immunotherapeutic drug approved for veterinary use in Europe.

“We expect to launch Oncept IL-2 throughout the EU this coming autumn, added Pascal Fayard. He also presented the packaging (“one box contains 6 doses, equal to one course of treatment”) and storage requirements (“in the refrigerator, just like vaccines”). However, the expected retail price was not yet known – but would no doubt be “well over a hundred euros”.

Oncept IL-2: Six sessions, five injections, one treatment

Six sessions with local infiltration (five injections each) in the tumour scar tissue are required. The product’s claim is specific: “reducing the risk of relapse and increasing the time to relapse in cats with fibrosarcoma (2-5 cm diameter) without metastasis or lymph node involvement, in addition to surgery and radiotherapy.”

After reconstitution, five subcutaneous injections (0.2 ml each) are made in and around the tumour excision site: “one injection at each corner and one injection at the centre of a 5 cm x 5 cm square centered on the middle of the surgical scar.”

A treatment course consists of four sessions at 1-week intervals (day 0, D7, D14, D21) followed by two treatment sessions at 2-week intervals (D35, D49). Treatment is started the day before commencing radiation therapy, preferably within one month after surgical excision.

However, no particular precautions are necessary for administration, as “canarypox recombinants are safe, and feline IL-2 has a very low biological activity in humans”.

First surgical attempt = main prognostic factor

“An association between injections and the development of feline injection-site sarcomas (FISS) was first observed in the 1980s”, recalled Ana Lara (Royal Veterinary College, UK). Subsequent studies showed a link with a range of injectable drugs triggering local inflammation followed by an abnormal proliferation of fibroblasts and myofibroblasts. “These sarcomas were found to be highly locally infiltrative but with a relatively low (0-24%) metastatic rate.” Although it is a neoplasia that is associated to veterinary practice, there is a potential for prevention and early diagnosis: “we know the risk-population (those receiving injections) and the location (site of injection)”. For these reasons, a benefit-risk analysis is required prior to vaccination while vaccinate in the distal extremities should be considered to maximise the chance of cure in the advent of FISS.

“If FISS is suspected, never perform excisional biopsy - it has a detrimental impact on prognosis,” warned Dr Lara. “In fact, the number one prognostic factor is the first attempt at surgery - which should be aggressive: margins should be 4-5 cm wide and at least 2 fascial layers deep.”

She also recalled the 3-2-1 rule: “biopsy if the lump persists for more than 3 months, if it is larger than 2 cm or if it has appeared within 1 month of injection.” Adding radiotherapy increases the disease-free interval, but not the cure rate – and is not available in all European countries. Chemotherapy is only of interest in cats with unresectable or metastatic tumours.

•

Tags: sarcoma, Oncology, fibroma, fibrosarcoma, immunotherapy, Cats

Innovative treatment for Feline fibrosarcoma to be launched this autumn

kdelange — Thu, 13 Jun 2013 15:12:38 GMT

Revision 6 posted to Abstracts, Short Communications & Research by kdelange on 6/13/2013 3:12:38 PM

Interleukin: stimulating anti-tumour defense

Reducing the risk of relapse by 65%

An EU-wide launch this autumn

Oncept IL-2, result of a long-standing collaboration between Merial R&D and leading oncology experts, is the first cancer immunotherapeutic drug approved for veterinary use in Europe.

Oncept IL-2: Six sessions, five injections, one treatment

However, no particular precautions are necessary for administration, as “canarypox recombinants are safe, and feline IL-2 has a very low biological activity in humans”.

First surgical attempt = main prognostic factor

•

Tags: cats, sarcoma, fibroma, fibrosarcoma, oncology, immunotherapy

Innovative treatment for Feline Injection Site Sarcoma to be launched this autumn

kdelange — Tue, 11 Jun 2013 13:13:37 GMT

Revision 5 posted to Abstracts, Short Communications & Research by kdelange on 6/11/2013 1:13:37 PM

Lisbon, 29 May 2013 - “On average, European veterinary practitioners see between two and three cases of feline sarcoma each year,” reported Pascal Fayard, European marketing manager, citing a survey held among 500 general practitioners in five countries. Speaking at a Merial Conference held in Lisbon on 29 of May, on the eve of the congress of European Society of Veterinary Oncology, he announced the European-wide launch, coming autumn, of a novel immunotherapeutic drug, Oncept IL-2, for the treatment of fibrosarcoma in cats.

Interleukin: stimulating anti-tumour defence

Reducing the risk of relapse by 65%

Results of a monocentric clinical trial were presented by Dominique Jas (Merial R&D) to confirm the efficacy and safety of the product. Seventy-one cats with a first occurrence of feline fibrosarcoma were referred for post-surgical radiotherapy. They were assigned to three treatment groups: controls (surgery + radiotherapy), low-dose IL-2 treatment (surgery + radiotherapy + IL-2) and high-dose IL-2 treatment (surgery + radiotherapy + IL-2). Cats were enrolled 1 month after surgery, which was not necessarily done in referral practices. However, the percentage of cats with dirty surgical margins was comparable in all groups. Treatment (D0, D7, D14, D35, D49) was initiated the day before the start of radiotherapy (D1 and D3). Cats were checked every three months and underwent a CT scan at 3, 6, 12 and 24 months. The high-dose group – to test safety – was monitored for a year, the low-dose group – to test efficacy – for two years.

An EU-wide launch this autumn

Oncept IL-2, result of a long-standing collaboration between Merial R&D and leading oncology experts, is the first cancer immunotherapeutic drug approved for veterinary use in Europe.

Oncept IL-2: Six sessions, five injections, one treatment

Six sessions of local infiltration in the tumour scar tissue are required. The product’s claim is specific: “reducing the risk of relapse and increasing the time to relapse in cats with fibrosarcoma (2-5 cm diameter) without metastasis or lymph node involvement, in addition to surgery and radiotherapy.”

A treatment course consists of four sessions at 1-week intervals (day 0, D7, D14, D21) followed by two treatment sessions at 2-week intervals (D35, D49). Treatment should start the day before commencing radiation therapy, preferably within one month after surgical excision.

However, no particular precautions are necessary for administration, as “canarypox recombinants are safe, and feline IL-2 has a very low biological activity in humans”.

First surgical attempt = main prognostic factor

She also recalled the 3-2-1 rule: “biopsy if the lump persists for more than 3 months, if it is larger than 2 cm or if it has appeared within 1 month of injection.” Adding radiotherapy increases the disease-free interval, but not the cure rate – and is not available in all European countries. Chemotherapy may be of interest in cats with unresectable or metastatic tumours.

•

Tags: cats, sarcoma, fibroma, fibrosarcoma, oncology, immunotherapy

Innovative treatment for Feline Injection Site Sarcoma to be launched this autumn

kdelange — Tue, 11 Jun 2013 12:06:15 GMT

Revision 4 posted to Abstracts, Short Communications & Research by kdelange on 6/11/2013 12:06:15 PM

Interleukin: stimulating anti-tumour defence

Reducing the risk of relapse by 65%

An EU-wide launch this autumn

Oncept IL-2, result of a long-standing collaboration between Merial R&D and leading oncology experts, is the first cancer immunotherapeutic drug approved for veterinary use in Europe.

Oncept IL-2: Six sessions, five injections, one treatment

However, no particular precautions are necessary for administration, as “canarypox recombinants are safe, and feline IL-2 has a very low biological activity in humans”.

First surgical attempt = main prognostic factor

She also recalled the 3-2-1 rule: “biopsy if the lump persists for more than 3 months, if it is larger than 2 cm or if it has appeared within 1 month of injection.” Adding radiotherapy increases the disease-free interval, but not the cure rate – and is not available in all European countries. Chemotherapy may be of interest in cats with unresectable or metastatic tumours.

•

Tags: cats, sarcoma, fibroma, fibrosarcoma, oncology, immunotherapy

Innovative treatment for Feline Injection Site Sarcoma to be launched this autumn

kdelange — Tue, 11 Jun 2013 12:04:34 GMT

Revision 3 posted to Abstracts, Short Communications & Research by kdelange on 6/11/2013 12:04:34 PM

Interleukin: stimulating anti-tumour defence

Reducing the risk of relapse by 65%

An EU-wide launch this autumn<o:p></o:p>

Oncept IL-2, result of a long-standing collaboration between Merial R&D and leading oncology experts, is the first cancer immunotherapeutic drug approved for veterinary use in Europe.

Oncept IL-2: Six sessions, five injections, one treatment

However, no particular precautions are necessary for administration, as “canarypox recombinants are safe, and feline IL-2 has a very low biological activity in humans”.

First surgical attempt = main prognostic factor<o:p></o:p>

She also recalled the 3-2-1 rule: “biopsy if the lump persists for more than 3 months, if it is larger than 2 cm or if it has appeared within 1 month of injection.” Adding radiotherapy increases the disease-free interval, but not the cure rate – and is not available in all European countries. Chemotherapy may be of interest in cats with unresectable or metastatic tumours.

•

Tags: cats, sarcoma, fibroma, fibrosarcoma, oncology, immunotherapy

Innovative treatment for Feline Injection Site Sarcoma to be launched this autumn

kdelange — Tue, 11 Jun 2013 12:02:34 GMT

Revision 2 posted to Abstracts, Short Communications & Research by kdelange on 6/11/2013 12:02:34 PM

Lisbon, 29 May 2013 - “On average, European veterinary practitioners see between two and three cases of feline sarcoma each year,” reported Pascal Fayard, European marketing manager, citing a survey held among 500 general practitioners in five countries. Speaking at a Merial Conference held in Lisbon on 29 of May, on the eve of the congress of European Society of Veterinary Oncology, he announced the European-wide launch, coming autumn, of a novel immunotherapeutic drug, Oncept IL-2, for the treatment of fibrosarcoma in cats.

Interleukin: stimulating anti-tumour defence<o:p></o:p>

Reducing the risk of relapse by 65%

An EU-wide launch this autumn<o:p></o:p>

Oncept IL-2, result of a long-standing collaboration between Merial R&D and leading oncology experts, is the first cancer immunotherapeutic drug approved for veterinary use in Europe.

Oncept IL-2: Six sessions, five injections, one treatment

However, no particular precautions are necessary for administration, as “canarypox recombinants are safe, and feline IL-2 has a very low biological activity in humans”.

First surgical attempt = main prognostic factor<o:p></o:p>

She also recalled the 3-2-1 rule: “biopsy if the lump persists for more than 3 months, if it is larger than 2 cm or if it has appeared within 1 month of injection.” Adding radiotherapy increases the disease-free interval, but not the cure rate – and is not available in all European countries. Chemotherapy may be of interest in cats with unresectable or metastatic tumours.

•

Tags: cats, sarcoma, fibroma, fibrosarcoma, oncology, immunotherapy

Property Letting Services for Forum members

Neal Palk — Thu, 14 Feb 2013 17:37:03 GMT

Current Revision posted to Abstracts, Short Communications & Research by Neal Palk on 2/14/2013 5:37:03 PM

I hope a quick plug for a new service is OK here (Arlo please remove/relocate/chastise as appropriate).

Via my company I have signed up as a lettings agent for a large national lettings company so would be delighted to hear from any members on here who have rooms, apartments, houses or maybe even commercial premises for which a tenant is needed.

The rates are low and the service extends to the administration of rent, lease, EPCs, gas safety, tenant referencing etc all at fixed (and communicated in advance!) prices.

Most importantly, the tenant find service is charged ONLY once a tenant has been found and a tenancy agreed and the first month's rent paid. So, no tenant = no fee!

UK coverage - please post up or message me if you'd like to discuss.

Of course if you or perhaps a newly recruited vet/nurse is in need of accommodation I'd be delighted to help also.

Employment Law Changes Oct 2012

Neal Palk — Wed, 26 Sep 2012 13:26:09 GMT

Current Revision posted to Abstracts, Short Communications & Research by Neal Palk on 9/26/2012 1:26:09 PM

Nothing too startling or unexpected....

1. Minimum wage increases to £6.19 per hour for 21+. The apprentice rate increases to £2.65, but the Youth Rate remains unchanged.

2. The auto-enrollment to a qualifying workplace pension scheme or NEST begins - but ONLY for large organisations employing 120k+ people.

3. The default retirement age use will end! No more compulsory retirement at 65.....

Worth reading up on point 2 ready for 2013 implementation and be VERY alert to the implications of 3.!

Queen's Speech - Early indications

Neal Palk — Wed, 09 May 2012 15:53:01 GMT

Current Revision posted to Abstracts, Short Communications & Research by Neal Palk on 5/9/2012 3:53:01 PM

The ceremony of the Queen's Speech usually overshadows the nitty-gritty of what's really on the plans, but from what I've read, the 'employment headlines' are:

- Some actions on executive pay.......unlikely to affect anyone on this Forum directly!

- Further adjustments to the workplace dispute processes which look to be introducing early/earlier conciliation in-house to avoid ET hearings etc subsequently. No bad thing at first sight, but may shift more burden ONTO employers?

- The Children & Families Bill loosens up some parental rights and introduces parental leave 'swapping' and earlier returns to work for Mothers.

The headline quote reads 'Legislation will be introduced to reduce burdens on business by repealing unnecessary legislation'.............I've been waiting 30 years for someone to do that!

Summary - keep an eye out for changes to the internal grievance procedure 'best practices'.......

Unfair Dismissal Eligibility - Changes 6th April

Neal Palk — Wed, 14 Mar 2012 15:38:02 GMT

Current Revision posted to Abstracts, Short Communications & Research by Neal Palk on 3/14/2012 3:38:02 PM

Following from the previous Wiki, the return to a 2 year qualifying period for unfair dismissal claims commences April 6th 2012 - BUT note that the clock is zeroed at April 6th, so someone who commenced employment (say) May 1st 2011 will only need a one year qualifying period.

The above of course does not include dismissals where there is no qualifying period currently - so no change in some circumstances (ERA 1996)