Thomas Newland, DVM
Adobe Animal Hospital | Scottsdale, AZ
Case Overview
I evaluated a young, 10-month-old mini dachshund referred for ongoing management of severe, persistent, non-regenerative anemia that had not shown durable response to prior medical therapy. Based on diagnostic workup completed before referral, the case had been characterized as myelofibrosis.
By the time I became involved, the patient had already required multiple blood transfusions and had been treated appropriately with immunosuppressive medications. For privacy, the patient’s name and owner-identifying details have been anonymized.
Presenting Signs & Clinical History
According to the owner’s history and referral records, the patient had exhibited signs of illness for several months prior to presentation. The owner later reported that, in retrospect, the dog’s gums appeared lighter than normal as early as 4 months, although this was not formally documented at that time.
Approximately seven months prior to referral, the dog was evaluated by a primary care veterinarian for lethargy and was initially suspected to have a urinary tract infection. Bloodwork performed during that visit revealed severe anemia, prompting further investigation and intervention.
Over the following months, the patient received four blood transfusions while being treated with cyclosporine and high-dose prednisone, based on concern for a possible immune-mediated process. Despite these interventions, the anemia persisted.
The patient was ultimately evaluated by an internal medicine specialist in the Phoenix area, where a bone marrow biopsy was performed. Based on those findings, the working diagnosis was myelofibrosis, which is considered a rare and likely genetic condition in dogs.
Baseline Objective Assessment
Upon reviewing the most recent laboratory data from the internal medicine specialist, the patient’s red blood cell (RBC) count was 2.65 million/µL. The laboratory reference interval listed a normal range of approximately 5.84 to 8.95 million/µL.
This degree of anemia was consistent with the patient’s clinical history and prior need for repeated transfusions. At that time, the patient was still receiving immunosuppressive therapy. Given the chronic nature of the condition and the diagnostic findings, I discussed next steps with the owner, including options for ongoing monitoring and supportive management.
Procedure & Therapy (as performed in this case)
After reviewing the case history and available laboratory data, I elected to proceed with therapy at my discretion.
The initial intervention was performed on November 13, 2025. At that visit, the patient received:
- 1.0 mLAlphaFlo® intravenously (IV)
- 1.0 mLAlphaFlo® intraperitoneally (IP) into the falciform fat.
Following this intervention, cyclosporine was discontinued, and prednisone was tapered over approximately two weeks.
A follow-up complete blood count performed on November 26, 2025, showed an increase in RBC count to 3.91 million/µL.
Based on this change, I elected to repeat the same protocol. A second administration was performed on December 15, again consisting of:
- 1.0 mLAlphaFlo® IV
- 1.0 mLAlphaFlo® IP into the falciform fat.
At the time of case discussion, the patient was scheduled for a third administration on January 13, 2026, using the same IV and IP dosing approach. The longer-term plan discussed with the owner was to continue monthly bloodwork, with the intention of transitioning to treatment every three months if hematologic values remained stable.
Follow-Up & Observations
Serial bloodwork served as the primary objective monitoring tool in this case.
- Baseline (prior toAlphaFlo®):
- RBC count: 2.65 million/µL
- After first administration and steroid taper:
- RBC count: 3.91 million/µL
Subsequent laboratory data, referenced from another veterinarian involved in the case, indicated an RBC count of 5.24 million/µL on December 10, 2025, and 5.22 million/µL on January 7, 2026. At that time, the patient was also receiving iron supplementation.
In addition to numeric changes, the owners reported noticeable improvement in the dog’s overall demeanor and energy level as RBC values increased. Even the change from the mid-2 million/µL range into the high-3 million/µL range was associated with observable improvement at home, according to the owner.
Discussion
This case illustrates the complexity of managing suspected myelofibrosis in a young dog and the challenges associated with persistent, non-regenerative anemia. By the time I became involved, the patient had already undergone extensive intervention, including immunosuppressive therapy and multiple blood transfusions.
My discussion with the owner emphasized that myelofibrosis presents multiple challenges. While circulating red blood cell values can be monitored over time, progressive changes within the bone marrow i.e. Fibrosis may continue independently. We discussed the option of repeat bone marrow evaluation; however, both the owner and I agreed that we did not want to pursue another invasive procedure at this time, particularly given that it was unlikely to alter the immediate management plan.
It is also important to note that this report reflects a single case, and multiple interventions occurred over time, including transfusions, immunosuppressive therapy, iron supplementation, and supportive care. As such, observed changes in laboratory values cannot be attributed to any single factor in isolation.
Continued longitudinal monitoring remains essential in this patient, both to track hematologic trends and to guide decisions regarding ongoing care frequency.
Disclaimer
This case summary reflects the veterinarian’s clinical experience and observations. AlphaLogix did not author or verify these statements. This content is not medical advice.
About the Author
Thomas Newland, DVM, is a veterinarian at Adobe Animal Hospital in Scottsdale, Arizona. A Purdue University graduate and recipient of Petplan Veterinarian of the Year, Dr. Newland is known for his long-standing clinical interest in complex medical cases, the use of regenerative products, and advancing standards of care in veterinary practice.