82 dogs with B-cell lymphoma lived a median 660 days after CHOP plus adoptive T-cell therapyMontana practice hired an associate to split on-call dutyMost cats with surgically repaired spinal fractures walk again within 8 weeksInappetence in geriatric patients signals pain or nausea, not pickinessAAHA publishes 2026 parasite guidelines built around emerging threats and One Health framingFeline chronic rhinosinusitis accounts for 35% of nasal disease casesFDA approves ready-to-use cefovecin for dogs that contains excipients toxic to catsRed Bank Veterinary Hospital reports two PET/CT cases that drove opposite clinical decisions82 dogs with B-cell lymphoma lived a median 660 days after CHOP plus adoptive T-cell therapyMontana practice hired an associate to split on-call dutyMost cats with surgically repaired spinal fractures walk again within 8 weeksInappetence in geriatric patients signals pain or nausea, not pickinessAAHA publishes 2026 parasite guidelines built around emerging threats and One Health framingFeline chronic rhinosinusitis accounts for 35% of nasal disease casesFDA approves ready-to-use cefovecin for dogs that contains excipients toxic to catsRed Bank Veterinary Hospital reports two PET/CT cases that drove opposite clinical decisions
The Exam RoomBy The VeterinaryPracticeNow Desk3 min readNovember 2, 2026
82 dogs with B-cell lymphoma lived a median 660 days after CHOP plus adoptive T-cell therapy
A retrospective study of 82 dogs treated between 2017 and 2025 found median post-ACT survival of 368 days and a 5% adverse event rate.
A retrospective study in the Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association reviewed medical records of 82 dogs with B-cell lymphoma that had received adoptive T-cell therapy following CHOP chemotherapy, covering dogs treated between 2017 and 2025.
What the study found
The study reported median overall survival from diagnosis of 660 days, with a 95% confidence interval of 539 to 781 days. According to the study, median post-ACT survival was "368 days (95% CI, 261 to 474 days)." The study reported that "median time to next anti-lymphoma treatment was 317 days," with a 95% confidence interval of 284 to 350 days.
Adverse events were associated with 4 of 82 dogs (5%). Most were grade 1 or 2, and one grade 3 event was reported. The study stated that "adoptive T-cell therapy was generally well tolerated following CHOP chemotherapy."
How the study was built
This was a retrospective medical record review. The authors used Kaplan-Meier analysis to estimate survival outcomes. The study defined "overall survival" as "the time from lymphoma diagnosis to death from any cause or last follow-up," "post-ACT survival" as "the time from first ACT infusion to death from any cause or last follow-up," and "time to next anti-lymphoma treatment" as "the time from first ACT infusion to initiation of subsequent lymphoma-directed therapy."
The number, and its error bars
The 95% confidence interval for median overall survival from diagnosis ran from 539 to 781 days. Post-ACT survival carried an interval from 261 to 474 days, and time to next treatment ran from 284 to 350 days. The width of each interval reflects the variability in outcomes across the dogs studied.
The authors write that "clinical outcomes varied among dogs with B-cell lymphoma treated with ACT following CHOP chemotherapy." They state that "these findings provide clinical data on the use of ACT in this patient population and may inform the design of prospective controlled studies evaluating ACT in canine B-cell lymphoma." The retrospective design describes what happened in this patient population but cannot establish whether ACT was associated with the survival times observed or whether other factors contributed. The study does not include a control group of dogs that received CHOP alone during the same period.
Who paid for it
The abstract does not state who funded the study or what conflicts of interest were declared.
What this means for your practice
VeterinaryPracticeNow's read, not the study's. Everything in this section is our editorial interpretation for practice owners. The study does not claim any of it.
This is a reference point when an owner asks what comes after CHOP. The survival figures and the adverse event profile, four dogs out of the full cohort, mostly low-grade, give you something concrete to bring to the conversation, with the caveat that this is retrospective data without a control group.
The decision depends on local access to ACT, client willingness to pay for experimental therapy, and whether the dog is a strong initial responder. The study does not tell us which dogs are the best candidates or what ACT costs. Lymphoma cases are the ones where owners most often ask about options beyond standard protocols. We'd bring this study to that conversation, with the understanding that prospective controlled trials are still needed to establish whether ACT is associated with better outcomes compared to CHOP alone.
Get the next issue in your inbox. Free, weekly, no fluff.
