HT VET scanner now identifies mast cell tumors and lipomas without biopsy in 1,010-dog study

HT VET's Vista iQ scanner is expanding beyond general malignancy screening to identify specific canine tumor types, according to peer-reviewed research the company funded and published in the journal Veterinary Sciences.

What the 1,010-mass study found

The Vista iQ scanner ruled out malignancy in canine lumps with 92% sensitivity and a 98% negative predictive value in a study of 1,010 masses across 669 dogs. The sensitivity figure is the rate at which the scanner correctly identifies malignancy when it's present, and the negative predictive value is the rate at which a benign call is correct. New tumor-specific AI classifiers now target lipomas and mast cell tumors.

The study evaluated masses using heat diffusion imaging technology. The tumor-specific classifiers let clinicians adjust protocols before aspiration. According to the company, practices can administer antihistamines prior to aspiration for suspected mast cell tumors.

The study does not report whether the 92% sensitivity threshold meets any specific clinical standard, whether liability coverage will support scan-based decisions, or what the scanner costs relative to cytology.

The company says the technology is in use at more than 600 veterinary clinics worldwide, and 91% of user clinics reported testing a higher volume of masses after adoption, leading to an increase in diagnosed malignancies.

The study was funded by HT VET.

The decision the numbers frame

The 92% sensitivity figure decides whether this works in your practice. A sensitivity of 92% means the scanner will miss malignancy 8% of the time it's present. The 98% negative predictive value means that if the scanner says a mass is benign, it's wrong 2% of the time.

If your week runs on calls like this one, subscribe to VeterinaryPracticeNow.

What the scanner changes and what it does not

For the associate DVM: you need to know whether to trust a scan result or aspirate anyway, and whether your supervising veterinarian or corporate protocol even allows scan-only decisions. Our read: until your state board or your liability carrier publishes guidance on non-invasive screening as an acceptable standard of care, the scanner's value is in the masses it rules out with high confidence, not in the ones it calls malignant. The 8% miss rate on malignancy is the liability exposure.

For the owner-DVM: compare scanner costs to cytology costs, and own the liability if a scan misses a malignancy. Model whether client willingness to pay for scans offsets reduced cytology revenue, and whether this becomes a standard-of-care expectation that forces adoption even when the economics don't close. The 91% figure (practices testing a higher volume of masses after adoption) means the scanner is being used to catch cases that would have walked out untested. If that's the use case in your practice, the revenue consideration is whether the scanner pays for itself by converting more exam-only appointments into diagnostic workups, not whether it saves you money on cytology you're already doing.

The tumor-specific classifiers for mast cell tumors buy you the ability to premedicate with antihistamines before aspiration, which is a real clinical win. The lipoma classifier's value is in ruling out benign fatty masses, so you can tell the owner on the spot that it's not cancer and save them the wait for cytology results. Whether that client-experience improvement justifies the scanner cost is a practice-by-practice call.

Shani Toledano, cofounder and CEO of HT VET, said in the announcement: "With the majority of canine lumps and bumps currently left untested, veterinary medicine has lacked an immediate and non-invasive standard for early screening. This research demonstrates not only the strength of our technology in helping veterinary teams rule out malignancy, but the potential for AI to provide increasingly sophisticated insights into the masses they encounter every day."

Our read: the 92% sensitivity decides this. If your practice standard is to aspirate every mass regardless, the scanner doesn't change your protocol. It adds a step and a cost. If your practice standard is to watch-and-wait on masses the owner isn't worried about, the scanner gives you a data point to back up that decision or to override it, and the 98% negative predictive value is strong enough to support a benign call. What you need to know is whether your state board, your corporate employer, or your liability carrier will accept a scan-only decision when a missed malignancy turns into a lawsuit. Until that guidance exists, the scanner is a screening tool that prompts more FNAs, not a replacement for them.

← Back to the Newsdesk