Blood gene signatures may predict lymphoma treatment response: full analysis
A new study from Tufts University and UMass Chan Medical School suggests that a simple blood test may help predict treatment response in pet dogs with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma, one of the most common aggressive hematologic cancers in dogs. Published March 25, 2026, in Scientific Reports, the work focused on gene-expression patterns in circulating immune cells rather than tumor tissue, offering a less invasive way to identify which patients are likely to do well and which may relapse early. (now.tufts.edu)
The research builds on a prior clinical trial in pet dogs treated with a caninized anti-CD20 monoclonal antibody, low-dose doxorubicin, and one of three immune-modulating drugs: TAK-981, KPT-9274, or RV1001. According to the paper, those regimens were previously shown to be well tolerated, with median survival times comparable to or better than CHOP-based expectations, but outcomes still varied meaningfully across dogs. That variability set up the central question for this follow-on analysis: whether the immune landscape in blood could flag likely responders before relapse becomes clinically obvious. (nature.com)
To answer that, investigators analyzed peripheral blood mononuclear cells collected at four time points: baseline, seven days after treatment initiation, after the first chemo-immunotherapy cycle, and at relapse or 400 days post-treatment for dogs that remained cancer-free. Using the NanoString Canine IO panel, they found that CD1E and CCL14 were associated with long-term survivorship, while genes including CCR9, CD209, CMKLR, DDX58, and interferon-stimulated genes such as PSMB9, OAS2, ISG15, and MX1 tracked with shorter survival and poorer response. The study defined favorable response as progression-free survival beyond 90 days and/or overall survival beyond 400 days. Investigators also developed qPCR assays for THBD, NPNT, and ISG20 as a step toward a more practical point-of-care format. (nature.com)
In Tufts’ announcement, senior author Jillian Richmond said the findings show that “certain immune-related genes circulating in the blood were linked to either a good or a poor response to treatment.” The university said two of the immunotherapies studied are also being tested in humans, underscoring the comparative-oncology angle. That framing fits with a broader body of canine lymphoma research positioning spontaneous canine DLBCL as a useful translational model for human non-Hodgkin lymphoma, especially for immunotherapy and biomarker development. (now.tufts.edu)
For veterinary professionals, the most important takeaway is not that a new test is ready tomorrow, but that the field may be getting closer to a clinically useful blood-based prognostic tool. Reviews of canine lymphoma biomarkers have long noted the appeal of serum and circulating markers for diagnosis, prognosis, and treatment monitoring, while also warning that many candidates stall before practice adoption because of validation, reproducibility, and endpoint-selection challenges. This study is notable because it links serial blood sampling to clinically meaningful outcomes in a defined treatment setting and begins translating discovery markers into qPCR assays, which is the kind of bridge required for real-world use. (pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov)
If validated, this kind of assay could help oncologists identify poor responders earlier, tailor monitoring intensity, and have more informed discussions with pet parents about expected benefit from lower-toxicity or investigational protocols. It may also help refine enrollment and stratification in future lymphoma trials. More broadly, the work aligns with a wider push in veterinary oncology toward liquid biopsy and other minimally invasive biomarkers, including circulating nucleosomes, cell-free DNA, extracellular vesicles, and plasma RNA markers, though none has yet become a universal standard for predicting response in canine lymphoma. (pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov)
What to watch: The immediate question is whether these signatures hold up in larger, independent cohorts and across more routine treatment settings, including standard CHOP-based care. Watch, too, for whether the qPCR-based candidates can be standardized into a commercially viable assay with turnaround times and performance characteristics that fit referral and general practice workflows. (nature.com)