Skip to main content

Table 3 Proportions of the different histological types of malignant CMT diagnosed between 2011 and 2020

From: Epidemiology of canine mammary tumours on the Canary Archipelago in Spain

Histological type

Proportion (CI95%)

Trend test p-value*

Complex carcinoma

40.16% (38.55%; 41.78%)

0.0014

Tubulopapillary carcinoma

24.72% (23.31%; 26.16%)

0.0131

Carcinoma arising in mixed benign tumour

20.80% (19.48%; 22.16%)

0.0044

Solid carcinoma

6.86% (6.06%; 7.73%)

0.0084

Carcinosarcoma

1.89% (1.47%; 2.39%)

0.0502

Anaplastic carcinoma

1.19% (0.87%; 1.61%)

0.1250

Squamous cell carcinoma

1.11% (0.79%; 1.51%)

0.4040

Carcinoma NOSa

0.61% (0.38%; 0.92%)

0.1450

Osteosarcoma

0.56% (0.34%; 0.86%)

0.4110

Fibrosarcoma

0.42% (0.23%; 0.69%)

0.0477

Ductal carcinoma

0.39% (0.21%; 0.65%)

0.0019

Haemangiosarcoma

0.39% (0.21%; 0.65%)

0.2370

Sarcoma NOSb

0.19% (0.08%; 0.40%)

0.0446

In situ carcinoma

0.17% (0.06%; 0.36%)

0.1560

Inflammatory carcinoma

0.17% (0.06%; 0.36%)

0.4150

Carcinoma and malignant myoepithelioma

0.11% (0.03%; 0.28%)

0.6620

Malignant myoepithelioma

0.11% (0.03%; 0.28%)

0.1430

Lipid-rich (secretory) carcinoma

0.08% (0.02%; 0.24%)

0.1610

Intraductal papillary carcinoma

0.06% (0.01%; 0.20%)

0.9460

Micropapillary invasive carcinoma

0.03% (0.00%; 0.15%)

0.8270

  1. a Carcinoma NOS refers to those diagnoses where the histological type of carcinoma has not been indicated
  2. b Sarcoma NOS refers to those diagnoses where the histological type of sarcoma has not been indicated
  3. *A significant p-value (less than 0.05) implies some kind of trend (upward or downward) on the relative proportion of the histological type over the study period. Otherwise, the relative proportion has remained stable