4.2 Article

Evaluation of adverse effects in tamoxifen exposed healthy female dogs

Journal

ACTA VETERINARIA SCANDINAVICA
Volume 52, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

BMC
DOI: 10.1186/1751-0147-52-67

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. CNPq
  2. FAPEMIG - Brazil

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background: Mammary tumors are among the most frequent neoplasms in female dogs, but the strategies employed in animal treatment are limited. In human medicine, hormone manipulation is used in cancer therapy. Tamoxifen citrate is a selective inhibitor of oestrogen receptors and exerts a potent anti-oestrogen effect on the mammary gland. The aim of this study was to evaluate the adverse effects when exposing healthy female dogs to tamoxifen. Methods: Tamoxifen was administered for 120 days at a dose of 0.5 or 0.8 mg/kg/day to either intact or spayed female dogs. The effects were assessed through clinical examination, haematology, serum biochemistry, ophthalmology and bone marrow aspirate examination. Ovariohysterectomy was performed and the uterus examined by histopathology. Results: Vulva oedema and purulent vaginal discharge developed with 10 days of tamoxifen exposure in all groups. Pyometra was diagnosed after around 90 days of exposure in intact females with frequencies increasing during the following 30 days of exposure. Up to 50% of dogs within the groups developed retinitis but none of the dogs had signs of reduced visual acuity. The prevalence of retinitis in each group was similar after 120 days of exposure. Haematological, biochemical and bone marrow changes were not observed. Due to the high risk of developing pyometra after prolonged exposure to tamoxifen, only spayed animals should be given this medication. Conclusions: A dose of 0.8 mg tamoxifen/kg body weight/day is recommended when treating tamoxifen-responsive canine mammary tumors. Due to the high risk of developing pyometra, ovariohysterectomy is recommended.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.2
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available