Skip to main content
Advertisement
  • Neurology.org
  • Journals
    • Neurology
    • Clinical Practice
    • Education
    • Genetics
    • Neuroimmunology & Neuroinflammation
  • Online Sections
    • Neurology Video Journal Club
    • Inclusion, Diversity, Equity, Anti-racism, & Social Justice (IDEAS)
    • Innovations in Care Delivery
    • Practice Buzz
    • Practice Current
    • Residents & Fellows
    • Without Borders
  • Collections
    • COVID-19
    • Disputes & Debates
    • Health Disparities
    • Infographics
    • Neurology Future Forecasting Series
    • Null Hypothesis
    • Patient Pages
    • Topics A-Z
    • Translations
  • Podcast
  • CME
  • About
    • About the Journals
    • Contact Us
    • Editorial Board
  • Authors
    • Submit a Manuscript
    • Author Center

Advanced Search

Main menu

  • Neurology.org
  • Journals
    • Neurology
    • Clinical Practice
    • Education
    • Genetics
    • Neuroimmunology & Neuroinflammation
  • Online Sections
    • Neurology Video Journal Club
    • Inclusion, Diversity, Equity, Anti-racism, & Social Justice (IDEAS)
    • Innovations in Care Delivery
    • Practice Buzz
    • Practice Current
    • Residents & Fellows
    • Without Borders
  • Collections
    • COVID-19
    • Disputes & Debates
    • Health Disparities
    • Infographics
    • Neurology Future Forecasting Series
    • Null Hypothesis
    • Patient Pages
    • Topics A-Z
    • Translations
  • Podcast
  • CME
  • About
    • About the Journals
    • Contact Us
    • Editorial Board
  • Authors
    • Submit a Manuscript
    • Author Center
  • Home
  • Latest Articles
  • Current Issue
  • Past Issues
  • Neurology Video Journal Club
  • Residents & Fellows

User menu

  • Subscribe
  • My Alerts
  • Log in
  • Log out

Search

  • Advanced search
Neurology
Home
The most widely read and highly cited peer-reviewed neurology journal
  • Subscribe
  • My Alerts
  • Log in
  • Log out
Site Logo
  • Home
  • Latest Articles
  • Current Issue
  • Past Issues
  • Neurology Video Journal Club
  • Residents & Fellows

Share

December 28, 2004; 63 (12 suppl 6) Articles

Mitoxantrone treatment of multiple sclerosis

Safety considerations

Bruce A. Cohen, Daniel D. Mikol
First published December 28, 2004, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1212/WNL.63.12_suppl_6.S28
Bruce A. Cohen
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Daniel D. Mikol
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Citation
Mitoxantrone treatment of multiple sclerosis
Safety considerations
Bruce A. Cohen, Daniel D. Mikol
Neurology Dec 2004, 63 (12 suppl 6) S28-S32; DOI: 10.1212/WNL.63.12_suppl_6.S28

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Permissions

Make Comment

See Comments

Downloads
1

Share

  • Article
  • Info & Disclosures
Loading

Abstract

Treatment of patients with mitoxantrone for worsening multiple sclerosis (MS) requires careful monitoring for possible adverse events. Common side effects that are minor and easily managed include transient leukopenia and elevated liver enzymes, nausea, alopecia, bluish discoloration of urine, and urinary tract infections. Amenorrhea, severe infection, cardiac toxicity, and toxic leukemias are more serious adverse events associated with mitoxantrone treatment but occur infrequently. The potential for clinically significant heart failure is low and is dose-related. Subclinical reductions in left ventricular ejection fraction may occur with serial doses, underscoring the importance of careful monitoring before initiating and during treatment. The risk for chronic cardiomyopathy limits the approved cumulative dose of mitoxantrone for treatment of MS to 140 mg/m2. Dexrazoxane has a cardioprotective effect when used with anthracycline in the treatment of patients with neoplasms. Studies under way address whether concomitant administration of dexrazoxane with mitoxantrone might decrease the risk for cardiac toxicity in MS patients and perhaps increase the allowable cumulative dose of mitoxantrone. A phase IV clinical study of mitoxantrone (RENEW) is in progress to assess the long-term safety and tolerability of treatment. Careful laboratory and cardiac monitoring can reduce the possibility of adverse events and enhance patient safety.

Mitoxantrone is an anthracenedione agent approved for the treatment of patients with worsening multiple sclerosis (MS). Mitoxantrone is probably of greatest benefit in patients with most active disease, typically younger patients with relapsing–remitting MS (RRMS) or early secondary progressive MS (SPMS) refractory to primary immune modulating agents. Patients with more indolent progression and less inflammatory activity are less likely to benefit from intense immune suppressive agents. The use of mitoxantrone requires careful monitoring for potential adverse events. A number of common side effects are minor and easily managed. However, others, although infrequent, are potentially life-threatening. This article reviews the safety profile of mitoxantrone and suggests strategies for monitoring therapy to enhance its use in treating patients with MS.

Common side effects.

Transitory leukopenia and neutropenia are anticipated effects of mitoxantrone, with nadir typically reached 10 to 14 days post infusion. During the period of leukopenia after treatment, patients should avoid individuals with active infections. Although reductions in platelet count occur after infusion, severe thrombocytopenia with <50,000 platelets/μL is uncommon. Anemia is also uncommon at doses recommended for MS, but may occur.

Modest elevation of hepatic transaminases and sometimes bilirubin is infrequent at typical treatment doses, and may be transient. Elevation of liver enzymes is reason to defer a scheduled infusion.

Nausea is commonly seen with mitoxantrone infusions and is usually successfully addressed by premedication with antiemetics such as ondansetron. In some cases nausea may persist for several days and require more prolonged antiemetic therapy. Alopecia, typically manifesting as a thinning of hair and loss of hair with combing, may occur. A bluish discoloration of urine is typically reported for up to 24 hours after infusion. A bluish discoloration of the sclera may also occur. Asthenia is a common minor side effect.

Menstrual changes may occur in women receiving mitoxantrone. In women under 35 years of age, prolonged amenorrhea has been reported in up to 7% of cases in a large French series.1 Permanent amenorrhea is more likely in older women and may occur in as many as 14% of women over the age of 35.

Urinary tract infections are common in MS patients and may occur in individuals with existing colonization at the time of treatment-induced immune suppression. The risk for urinary infection is greater in patients with urinary dysfunction, particularly retention. Pneumonia may also occur in patients treated with mitoxantrone. The risk for pneumonia is greatest in individuals who have little mobility or who are at risk for aspiration.

Cardiac toxicity.

Types.

One of the more serious adverse events associated with mitoxantrone treatment is cardiac toxicity. The potential for myocardial damage resulting in congestive heart failure is the factor limiting the total dose in MS patients. The risk for myocardial toxicity increases with cumulative doses >100 mg/m2, and the total approved dose for use in worsening MS is 140 mg/m2. Consequently, cardiac function monitoring is required periodically and is recommended before every infusion once a cumulative dose of 100 mg/m2 has been reached.

Mitoxantrone should not be used in MS patients with pre-existing cardiomyopathy, patients with active or documented cardiovascular disease, patients who have received previous treatment with anthracyclines or mediastinal radiation, or patients whose baseline pretreatment systolic left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) is <50%. In individuals with baseline LVEFs in the low-normal range, it is prudent to reassess cardiac function more frequently. In the case of anthracyclines, cardiac toxicity is, in part, related to peak plasma concentration.2,3⇓ Because of the increased risk for cardiotoxicity with more rapid infusions, it has been suggested that mitoxantrone should be infused over at least 30 minutes.4 An uncommon cardiac toxicity reported in non-MS patients given mitoxantrone is an acute cardiac arrhythmia during the infusion, which is believed to be related to the infusion rate.

Putative mechanism.

Mitoxantrone intercalates into DNA, causing strand breaks and crosslinks. It is also a potent inhibitor of topoisomerase II, thus impairing DNA repair, and it exerts cytocidal effects on both proliferating and non-proliferating cells. The drug is taken up by myocardial cells, in which it chelates with iron and forms complexes. Cardiomyopathy is thought to result from intracellular generation of reactive oxygen intermediates via iron or enzyme-mediated oxidation–reduction reactions. Cardiac myocytes appear to be selectively susceptible to mitoxantrone-induced damage due to their relative lack of defense mechanisms such as catalase and superoxide dismutase.5,6⇓

Histopathology.

In animal models, the histopathologic changes associated with mitoxantrone, an anthracenedione, are similar to those produced by anthracyclines such as doxorubicin but appear to require higher doses than with anthracyclines. Reported histopathologic findings include myofibrillar degeneration, focal mitochondrial enlargement, sarcoplasmic reticulum tubule dilatation, intracellular edema and vacuolization, and myocyte drop-out. Mitochondrial alterations were found to be more pronounced in an animal model after exposure to mitoxantrone in comparison to doxorubicin.5 The modest reduction in myocytes is consistent with the hypothesis that cardiac toxicity due to these agents results from structural changes in the myocytes rather than from necrosis or apoptosis.5,6⇓

Clinical experience with mitoxantrone in MS.

Experience with mitoxantrone in clinical practice suggests that the doses used for treating MS are infrequently associated with symptomatic congestive heart failure. A review of the data from three clinical trials revealed only two cases in 1378 patient records, resulting in an estimated prevalence of 0.15%. Asymptomatic reduction in LVEF of <50% occurred more commonly, being observed in 2.18% of 779 patients who underwent both baseline and follow-up LVEF testing. The risk appeared to be dose-related, with a strong trend to increase with cumulative doses ≥100 mg/m2 (1.8% versus 5%; p = 0.06).7 In clinical practice, the risk for LVEF reduction may be greater,8 supporting more frequent measurements of LVEF before a cumulative dose of 100 mg/m2.

Diastolic measures of contractility may be more sensitive to changes induced by mitoxantrone than systolic LVEF. In a comparison of 30 matched MS subjects, 15 of whom were given ≥5 infusions (mean dose 75 ± 0.9 mg/m2) and 15 additional healthy controls, a significant reduction of the mean velocity gradient in early diastole (using Doppler myocardial imaging) was observed in the patients receiving mitoxantrone.9

There is evidence that prostacyclin, generated from cyclooxygenase-2 (COX-2), is cardioprotective.10 Therefore, a potential risk factor for mitoxantrone-induced myocardial toxicity is concurrent treatment with COX-2 inhibitors. Inhibition of COX-2 has been shown to aggravate doxorubicin-mediated cardiac injury.11 Although no data exist regarding the safety of COX-2 inhibitors in patients receiving mitoxantrone, a similar interaction might occur. These findings suggest that prostacyclin analogues might be cardioprotective against injury and that COX-2 inhibitors should be avoided or used with caution in patients receiving mitoxantrone.

It is not known whether treatment with mitoxantrone monotherapy in doses used for MS might be associated with a late cardiac toxicity. No current data on MS patients beyond 4 years after completion of treatment are available. Later cardiac disease is seen in cancer patients after anthracycline therapy, with the greatest incidence observed in pediatric populations.12 This late cardiac toxicity has been associated with mediastinal radiotherapy and combination chemotherapy with paclitaxel and cyclophosphamide. In patients with previous exposure to potentially cardiotoxic agents, it is prudent to consider the possibility of an increased risk with mitoxantrone and to follow such patients with more frequent cardiac monitoring. Studies (e.g., RENEW, which is discussed later) are under way that may help to clarify the risk for late cardiac toxicity.

Possible cardioprotective strategy with dexrazoxane.

Dexrazoxane chelates iron, thereby preventing its complexing with mitoxantrone and potentially inhibiting the generation of reactive oxygen intermediates.6 Dexrazoxane has established efficacy in mitigating high-dose anthracycline cardiotoxicity and is given 30 minutes before infusion of the chemotherapeutic agent in a 10–20:1 dose ratio. Based on comparative potency with mitoxantrone, this would correspond to a ∼50:1 dose ratio.13–15⇓⇓ Potential adverse effects are associated with the concomitant use of dexrazoxane, such as additive myelosuppression and an increased risk for local phlebitis. At present there are not sufficient data to mandate the routine use of dexrazoxane in combination with mitoxantrone.

In a safety study, Mikol et al.16 found that dexrazoxane suppressed a decrease in LVEF after 48 mg/m2. It is, of course, important to show that dexrazoxane does not interfere with mitoxantrone’s efficacy, and studies are under way that address this question. Nevertheless, it is somewhat reassuring that dexrazoxane increased the therapeutic efficacy of mitoxantrone in an experimental autoimmune encephalomyelitis model of MS.17 Therefore, dexrazoxane might have both a cardioprotective and an additive therapeutic effect on mitoxantrone-induced immune suppression.

Cardioprotective strategy using liposomes.

Different delivery systems can favorably alter the pharmacokinetics and safety profile of a given drug. Liposome-entrapped mitoxantrone regimens have been compared to conventional mitoxantrone infusions in murine leukemia models. The liposomal form had lower concentrations in cardiac muscle, along with a maintained efficacy against leukocytes.18 The significant decrease in toxicity observed with the liposomal form might provide a safer alternative formulation for clinical use in MS patients.

Toxic leukemias.

Putative mechanism.

Mitoxantrone causes topoisomerase II inhibition, which impairs DNA repair mechanisms. Intercalation of mitoxantrone into DNA and RNA might cause direct damage. Topoisomerase II inhibitors are associated with characteristic toxic acute myelogenous leukemias (AMLs) that differ from those reported with alkylating agents. Topoisomerase II-related AMLs exhibit shorter latency (median 2 years), absence of a myelodysplastic phase, and characteristic chromosomal aberrations.19

Clinical experience with mitoxantrone.

Cancer treatment.

An increased risk for leukemia has been observed in breast cancer patients when mitoxantrone was used in combination with alkylating agents and radiotherapy. In a series of breast cancer patients, the prognosis for toxic AML was poorer than for those with de novo cases of AML.19,20⇓

MS treatment.

In MS patients treated with mitoxantrone monotherapy, reported cases of leukemia have thus far been rare. A Medline search revealed six cases of toxic AML and two cases of promyelocytic leukemia reported in association with mitoxantrone therapy for MS.21–27⇓⇓⇓⇓⇓⇓ The AML patients have demonstrated the characteristics of topoisomerase inhibitor-related cases. Response to treatment of the leukemia has been favorable in most of the cases. Because the total number of patients treated with mitoxantrone is unknown, it is difficult to determine an accurate incidence rate. However, an estimate of 0.07% has been reported based on a review of three series comprising over 1,300 patients.25

In contrast to the experience with breast cancer patients, most of the MS cases had a favorable response to therapy for the leukemia. It is possible that previous exposure to alkylating agents might increase the risk for mitoxantrone-associated leukemia and account for some of the difference in the two populations. The cancer patients may also have received higher doses. Ongoing registries will help to further determine the frequency of toxic leukemias in association with mitoxantrone monotherapy for MS. At the same time, mitoxantrone should be used with caution in patients who have received previous cytotoxic therapy (e.g., cyclophosphamide).

RENEW: study of safety and tolerability.

Overview.

A phase IV study of long-term safety and tolerability is currently under way in 509 MS patients aged 18 to 65 years who have been treated with mitoxantrone. Patients were enrolled by December 2002 and will be followed for 5 years, including treatment and post-treatment periods. Fifty participating MS treatment centers are involved in the study. The results are reported to the FDA and study investigators every 3 months for the first 2 years and every 6 months for the remaining 3 years.

Specific study objectives.

The primary study objective is to evaluate the long-term safety of mitoxantrone used as monotherapy for MS. The long-term effects of mitoxantrone on cardiac function will be evaluated, as will hepatotoxic and myelosuppressive effects, including serious infectious complications. Serious adverse events will be collected and evaluated, patients will be monitored for clinical relapses, and effects will be evaluated as a function of cumulative mitoxantrone dose.

Demographic characteristics as of July 14, 2003.

A total of 509 patients have been enrolled in the study.28 Most of the patients are female (67%), white (88.5%), and middle-aged (mean age 46 years; range 19 to 68 years). Their most frequent diagnosis is SPMS (77.3%), followed by worsening RRMS (16.3%) and progressive relapsing MS (PRMS; 6.4%). The median Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS) score at entry is 6.0 (range 0 to 9.0); the median duration from onset of MS is 11.9 years (range 0.4 to 45.3 years); and the median time from MS diagnosis is 8.6 years (range 0.0 to 39.9 years). The median time between initiation of mitoxantrone therapy and the most recent relapse is 0.4 years (range 0.0 to 20.3 years).

As of January 2004, the mean duration of therapy with mitoxantrone is 1.2 years (0 to 2.8) and the mean cumulative dose received is 59.7 mg/m2.29 A total of 89 adverse events were noted in 67 patients, of which 21 were considered possibly related and 11 probably related, in addition to two cases of neutropenic fever that were definitely related to mitoxantrone therapy. Serious adverse events included two cases of congestive heart failure, a Zoster eruption, a case of cellulitis, two cases of urosepsis, two urinary tract infections, and two cases of neutropenic fever. No cases of leukemia have occurred to date. Asymptomatic depression of LVEF by ≥10% from baseline has occurred in 23 individuals, and 29 others have increased LVEF ≥10%. Five deaths have occurred, one from meningitis considered possibly related, one from a pulmonary embolus, one from a cardiac arrest, one from pneumonia, and one from sepsis.

In a French study of 802 patients treated with mitoxantrone at 12 centers, there was one case of congestive heart failure and 4.2% had asymptomatic reductions of LVEF ≥10% from baseline with 1% persistent reductions.1 Six patients had infection related to neutropenia, and prolonged amenorrhea occurred in 14% of women over 35 years of age and 7% of women younger than 35 years. There were two cases of toxic leukemia, one of which proved fatal.

Monitoring for adverse events and patient safety.

Hematologic monitoring.

A CBC with platelets should be obtained before each infusion and treatment should be deferred in patients who fail to exhibit hematologic recovery. It has been suggested that, in cases where CBC parameters are below normal just before a scheduled mitoxantrone infusion, dosing should be reduced.4 The risk for infection is increased in the neutropenic state. Therefore, to minimize this potential risk, the absolute neutrophil count (ANC) should be ≥1,500 before each infusion of mitoxantrone. When CBC values are unacceptably low (e.g., when ANC<1,500), the infusion should be temporarily suspended. Administration of growth factors to stimulate neutrophil expansion, such as granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (GCSF), should be used with caution and only in cases of serious neutropenic infection, because GCSF has been shown to trigger attacks of MS.27

Hepatotoxicity monitoring.

Clearance of mitoxantrone is reduced in patients with hepatic impairment. Because mitoxantrone is cleared through biliary excretion, drug levels may increase markedly in patients with abnormal biliary function. Serum levels of bilirubin and alkaline phosphatase should be monitored. Both transaminases and biliary tract function should be assessed before each infusion. If there are LFT abnormalities, treatment should be deferred.

Pregnancy monitoring.

Mitoxantrone is teratogenetic. Therefore, the possibility of pregnancy should be excluded before each infusion in women of childbearing potential. Such women considered for mitoxantrone treatment should be willing to use effective birth control methods.

Other issues.

Clearance of mitoxantrone is not affected in patients with impaired renal function. Some authorities recommend urinary screening for urinary tract infection before each infusion and antibiotic prophylaxis during the period of induced immune suppression for patients who show evidence of bacterial colonization. Individuals receiving mitoxantrone should not be given live-virus vaccinations. Other types of vaccines should be given at least 4 to 6 weeks after the most recent dosing and when return of normal leukocyte counts has been established. Patients receiving mitoxantrone in combination with beta-interferon may require more frequent monitoring of blood counts and liver enzymes.

Cardiac monitoring.

At present it is recommended that therapy with mitoxantrone be initiated only in patients who have a baseline LVEF ≥50% and with no evidence of pre-existing cardiac disease. At our treatment centers, we prefer following multiple gated acquisition (MUGA) scans (over echocardiograms) because of their greater objectivity and easier reproducibility. We also obtain electrocardiograms and echocardiograms at baseline as part of the evaluation to exclude occult cardiac disease before mitoxantrone administration. Repeat measurement of LVEF is recommended by the FDA if the patient develops clinical symptoms or signs suggesting heart failure or at 2 years of therapy and before each infusion once the cumulative dose is 100 mg/m2. We, as do many clinicians, recommend more frequent cardiac monitoring (every 6 to 12 months) before reaching a cumulative dose of 100 mg/m2. In a patient with low (50% to 59%) LVEF at baseline, more frequent monitoring seems particularly prudent. Cardiac indications for discontinuing mitoxantrone include clinical cardiac disease, LVEF <50%, or a significant drop from baseline LVEF (defined as a 10% decrease from baseline).30 Although there are no data to indicate that COX-2 inhibitors potentiate treatment-induced cardiotoxicity, it appears sensible to avoid use of these agents in patients treated with mitoxantrone.

Safety issues to be resolved.

A number of questions regarding treatment of MS with mitoxantrone remain to be resolved. Why are some individuals more sensitive to mitoxantrone-associated cardiac toxicity? Is dexrazoxane useful in limiting cardiac toxicity, and will the use of dexrazoxane or other protectants enable higher cumulative doses in MS patients? Can patients at high risk for cardiotoxicity be identified before toxicity occurs? Is the concomitant use of mitoxantrone with beta-interferon or glatiramer acetate both safe and synergistically beneficial? Do COX-2 inhibitors increase the risk for myocardial toxicity when used concurrently with mitoxantrone? Will the low incidence of leukemia in patients treated with mitoxantrone continue with long-term follow-up? Is the toxicity profile different in younger MS patients versus older patients? What are the efficacies and toxicities of dosing regimens other than the FDA-approved regimen (i.e., different doses and/or frequencies of infusion)?

Conclusions.

Mitoxantrone, at current recommended dosages used as monotherapy for MS, can be administered with reasonable safety and tolerance in the majority of treated patients. The potential for serious adverse effects, including cardiac toxicity and toxic leukemias, appears quite low. However, further monitoring of large populations for longer time periods is required and is under way in the RENEW study. Physicians who administer or recommend treatment with mitoxantrone to their MS patients should be familiar with the risks of therapy and the monitoring procedures to limit those risks. In patients with worsening relapsing MS, the potential benefits of this potent agent may often outweigh the potential risks.

Acknowledgments

Publication of this supplement was supported by an educational grant from Serono Inc. The sponsor has provided the authors with an honorarium for their participation in this project. During their careers, the sponsor has provided the authors with other honoraria (in excess of $10,000 to B.A.C.).

References

  1. ↵
    Edan G, Brochet B, Clanet M, et al. Safety profile of mitoxantrone in a cohort of 802 multiple sclerosis patients: a 4 year mean follow-up study. Neurology. 2004; 62 (suppl 5): A493. Abstract.
    OpenUrl
  2. ↵
    Pai VB, Nahata MC. Cardiotoxicity of chemotherapeutic agents: incidence, treatment and prevention. Drug Safety. 2000; 22: 263–302.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  3. ↵
    Keefe DL. Anthracycline-induced cardiomyopathy. Semin Oncol. 2001; 28: 2–7.
  4. ↵
    Gonsette RE. Mitoxantrone in progressive multiple sclerosis: when and how to treat? J Neurol Sci. 2003; 206: 203–208.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  5. ↵
    Herman EH, Zhang J, Hasinoff BB, Clark JR Jr, Ferrans VJ. Comparison of the structural changes induced by doxorubicin and mitoxantrone in the heart, kidney and intestine and characterization of the Fe(III)-mitoxantrone complex. J Mol Cell Cardiol. 1997; 29: 2415–2430.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  6. ↵
    Speyer J, Wasserheit C. Strategies for reduction of anthracycline cardiac toxicity. Semin Oncol. 1998; 25: 525–537.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  7. ↵
    Ghalie RG, Edan G, Laurent M, et al. Cardiac adverse effects associated with mitoxantrone (Novantrone) therapy in patients with MS. Neurology. 2002; 59: 909–913.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  8. ↵
    Avasarala JR, Cross AH, Clifford DB, et al. Rapid onset mitoxantrone-induced cardiotoxicity in secondary progressive multiple sclerosis. Mult Scler. 2003; 9: 59–62.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  9. ↵
    Strotmann JM, Spindler M, Weilbach FX, et al. Myocardial function in patients with multiple sclerosis treated with low-dose mitoxantrone. Am J Cardiol. 2002; 89: 1222–1225.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  10. ↵
    Parente L, Perretti M. Advances in the pathophysiology of constitutive and inducible cyclooxygenases: two enzymes in the spotlight. Biochem Pharmacol. 2003; 65: 153–159.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  11. ↵
    Dowd NP, Scully M, Adderley SR, Cunningham AJ, Fitzgerald DJ. Inhibition of cyclooxygenase-2 aggravates doxorubicin-mediated cardiac injury in vivo. J Clin Invest. 2001; 108: 585–590.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  12. ↵
    Grenier MA, Lipshultz SE. Epidemiology of anthracycline cardiotoxicity in children and adults. Semin Oncol. 1998; 25: 72–85.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  13. ↵
    Von Hoff DD, Pollard E, Kuhn J, Murray E, Coltman CA Jr. Phase I clinical investigation of 1,4-dihydroxy-5,8-bis (((2-[(2-hydroxy-ethyl)amino]ethyl) amino))-9,10-anthracenedione dihydrochloride (NSC 301739), a new anthracenedione. Cancer Res. 1980; 40: 1516–1518.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  14. ↵
    Henderson BM, Dougherty WJ, James VC, Tilley LP, Noble JF. Safety assessment of a new anticancer compound, mitoxantrone, in beagle dogs: comparison with doxorubicin. I. Clinical observations. Cancer Treat Rep. 1982; 66: 1139–1143.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  15. ↵
    Sparano BM, Gordon G, Hall C, Iatropoulos MJ, Noble JF. Safety assessment of new anticancer compound, mitoxantrone, in beagle dogs: comparison with doxorubicin. II. Histologic and ultrastructural pathology. Cancer Treat Rep. 1982; 66: 1145–1158.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  16. ↵
    Mikol DD, LaHoud O, Bernitsas E. Safety of mitoxantrone plus dexrazoxane in multiple sclerosis patients. Neurology. 2003; 60 (suppl 1): A478. Abstract.
    OpenUrl
  17. ↵
    Weilbach FX, Chan A, Toyka KV, Gold R. The cardioprotector dexrazoxane augments therapeutic efficacy of mitoxantrone in experimental autoimmune encephalomyelitis. Clin Exp Immunol. 2004; 135: 49–55.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  18. ↵
    Gokhale PC, Pei J, Zhang C, et al. Improved safety, pharmacokinetics and therapeutic efficacy profiles of a novel liposomal formulation of mitoxantrone. Anticancer Res. 2001; 21: 3313–3321.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  19. ↵
    Linassier C, Barin C, Calais G, et al. Early secondary acute myelogenous leukemia in breast cancer patients after treatment with mitoxantrone, cyclophosphamide, fluorouracil and radiation therapy. Ann Oncol. 2000; 11: 1289–1294.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  20. ↵
    Chaplain G, Milan C, Sgro C, Carli PM, Bonithon-Kopp C. Increased risk of acute leukemia after adjuvant chemotherapy for breast cancer: a population-based study. J Clin Oncol. 2000; 18: 2836–2842.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  21. ↵
    Goodkin DE. Therapy-related leukemia in mitozantrone treated patients. Mult Scler. 2003; 9: 426. Abstract.
    OpenUrlFREE Full Text
  22. ↵
    Cattaneo C, Almici C, Borlenghi E, Motta M, Rossi G. A case of acute promyelocytic leukaemia following mitoxantrone treatment of multiple sclerosis. Leukemia. 2003; 17: 985–986.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  23. ↵
    Mogenet I, Simiand-Erdociain E, Canonge JM, Pris J. Acute myelogenous leukemia following mitoxantrone treatment for multiple sclerosis. Ann Pharmacother. 2003; 37: 747–748.
    OpenUrlFREE Full Text
  24. ↵
    Heesen C, Bruegmann M, Gbdamosi J, et al. Therapy-related acute myelogenous leukaemia (t-AML) in a patient with multiple sclerosis treated with mitoxantrone. Mult Scler. 2003; 9: 213–214.
    OpenUrlFREE Full Text
  25. ↵
    Ghalie RG, Mauch E, Edan G, et al. A study of therapy-related acute leukaemia after mitoxantrone therapy for multiple sclerosis. Mult Scler. 2002; 8: 441–445.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  26. ↵
    Brassat D, Recher C, Waubant E, et al. Therapy-related acute myeloblastic leukemia after mitoxantrone treatment in a patient with MS. Neurology. 2002; 59: 954–955.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  27. ↵
    Vicari AM, Ciceri F, Folli F, et al. Acute promyelocytic leukemia following mitoxantrone as single agent for the treatment of multiple sclerosis. Leukemia. 1998; 12: 441–442.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  28. ↵
    Data on File. Serono-Pfizer.
  29. ↵
    Smith CH, Lopez-Bresnahan MV, Beagan J. Safety and tolerability of Novantrone® (mitoxantrone) in clinical practice: status report from the Registry to Evaluate Novantrone® Effects in Worsening MS (RENEW) Study. Neurology. 2004; 62 (suppl 5): A489. Abstract.
    OpenUrl
  30. ↵
    Hartung HP, Gonsette R, Konig N, et al. Mitoxantrone in progressive multiple sclerosis: a placebo-controlled, double-blind, randomised, multicentre trial. Lancet. 2002; 360: 2018–2025.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed

Letters: Rapid online correspondence

  • Reply to Pratt et al
    • Bruce A. Cohen M.D., Davee Dept of Neurology, Feinberg School of Medicine, Northwestern University, 710 North Lake Shore Drive, Abbott Hall 1121, Chicago Illinois 60611bac106@northwestern.edu
    • Daniel D. Mikol, M.D. Ph.D
    Submitted June 07, 2005
  • Mitoxantrone treatment of multiple sclerosis: Safety considerations
    • Robert G. Pratt, PharmD, FDA, Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, 5600 Fishers Lane, HFD-430 Rockville, MD 20857prattr@cder.fda.gov
    • Gerard A. Boehm, MD, MPH, Cindy M. Kortepeter, PharmD, Judith A. Racoosin, MD, MPH
    Submitted June 07, 2005
Comment

REQUIREMENTS

If you are uploading a letter concerning an article:
You must have updated your disclosures within six months: http://submit.neurology.org

Your co-authors must send a completed Publishing Agreement Form to Neurology Staff (not necessary for the lead/corresponding author as the form below will suffice) before you upload your comment.

If you are responding to a comment that was written about an article you originally authored:
You (and co-authors) do not need to fill out forms or check disclosures as author forms are still valid
and apply to letter.

Submission specifications:

  • Submissions must be < 200 words with < 5 references. Reference 1 must be the article on which you are commenting.
  • Submissions should not have more than 5 authors. (Exception: original author replies can include all original authors of the article)
  • Submit only on articles published within 6 months of issue date.
  • Do not be redundant. Read any comments already posted on the article prior to submission.
  • Submitted comments are subject to editing and editor review prior to posting.

More guidelines and information on Disputes & Debates

Compose Comment

More information about text formats

Plain text

  • No HTML tags allowed.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
Author Information
NOTE: The first author must also be the corresponding author of the comment.
First or given name, e.g. 'Peter'.
Your last, or family, name, e.g. 'MacMoody'.
Your email address, e.g. higgs-boson@gmail.com
Your role and/or occupation, e.g. 'Orthopedic Surgeon'.
Your organization or institution (if applicable), e.g. 'Royal Free Hospital'.
Publishing Agreement
NOTE: All authors, besides the first/corresponding author, must complete a separate Publishing Agreement Form and provide via email to the editorial office before comments can be posted.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.

Vertical Tabs

You May Also be Interested in

Back to top
  • Article
    • Abstract
    • Common side effects.
    • Cardiac toxicity.
    • Toxic leukemias.
    • RENEW: study of safety and tolerability.
    • Monitoring for adverse events and patient safety.
    • Safety issues to be resolved.
    • Conclusions.
    • Acknowledgments
    • References
  • Info & Disclosures
Advertisement

Hemiplegic Migraine Associated With PRRT2 Variations A Clinical and Genetic Study

Dr. Robert Shapiro and Dr. Amynah Pradhan

► Watch

Related Articles

  • No related articles found.

Alert Me

  • Alert me when eletters are published
Neurology: 100 (5)

Articles

  • Ahead of Print
  • Current Issue
  • Past Issues
  • Popular Articles
  • Translations

About

  • About the Journals
  • Ethics Policies
  • Editors & Editorial Board
  • Contact Us
  • Advertise

Submit

  • Author Center
  • Submit a Manuscript
  • Information for Reviewers
  • AAN Guidelines
  • Permissions

Subscribers

  • Subscribe
  • Activate a Subscription
  • Sign up for eAlerts
  • RSS Feed
Site Logo
  • Visit neurology Template on Facebook
  • Follow neurology Template on Twitter
  • Visit Neurology on YouTube
  • Neurology
  • Neurology: Clinical Practice
  • Neurology: Education
  • Neurology: Genetics
  • Neurology: Neuroimmunology & Neuroinflammation
  • AAN.com
  • AANnews
  • Continuum
  • Brain & Life
  • Neurology Today

Wolters Kluwer Logo

Neurology | Print ISSN:0028-3878
Online ISSN:1526-632X

© 2023 American Academy of Neurology

  • Privacy Policy
  • Feedback
  • Advertise