Literature DB >> 17870094

Intravenous mitoxantrone and cyclophosphamide as second-line therapy in multiple sclerosis: an open-label comparative study of efficacy and safety.

Valentina Zipoli1, Emilio Portaccio, Bahia Hakiki, Gianfranco Siracusa, Sandro Sorbi, Maria Pia Amato.   

Abstract

The study's aim was to compare the efficacy and safety of intravenous cyclophosphamide (CTX) and mitoxantrone (MITO) as second-line therapy in a clinical sample of active relapsing-remitting (RR) or secondary-progressive (SP) multiple sclerosis subjects. MITO was administered at a dosage of 8 mg/m(2) monthly for 3 months, then every 3 months, until a dosage of 120 mg/m(2) was reached. CTX was administered at a dosage of 700 mg/m(2) monthly for 12 months, then bimonthly for another 24 months. We used the Kaplan-Meier curves to assess time to the first relapse in RR and SP patients with relapses, and time to progression on the Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS) in all the patients. MRI was assessed at baseline and after 12 months. Moreover, side effects were recorded. Seventy-five patients received MITO (31 RR, 44 SP) and 78 CTX (15 RR, 63 SP). The two groups differ only in terms of a significantly higher proportion of RR patients in the MITO group. After a mean follow-up of 3.6 years there was no significant difference in terms of time to the first relapse (MITO 2.6 years, CTX 2.5 years; p=0.50), whereas time to disease progression was slightly shorter in MITO than in CTX group (MITO 3.8 years, CTX 3.6 years; p=0.04). After 12 months of treatment, active MRI scans were reduced by 69% in MITO and 63% in CTX patients (p=0.10). Discontinuation due to side effects was more frequent in CTX patients. However, the overall tolerability profile was acceptable in both groups.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17870094     DOI: 10.1016/j.jns.2007.08.023

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Neurol Sci        ISSN: 0022-510X            Impact factor:   3.181


  8 in total

1.  Chemotherapeutics in the treatment of multiple sclerosis.

Authors:  Bernd C Kieseier; Douglas R Jeffery
Journal:  Ther Adv Neurol Disord       Date:  2010-09       Impact factor: 6.570

2.  Cyclophosphamide in multiple sclerosis: scientific rationale, history and novel treatment paradigms.

Authors:  Amer Awad; Olaf Stüve
Journal:  Ther Adv Neurol Disord       Date:  2009-11       Impact factor: 6.570

3.  Current role of chemotherapy and bone marrow transplantation in multiple sclerosis.

Authors:  Nuria Sola-Valls; María Sepúlveda; Yolanda Blanco; Albert Saiz
Journal:  Curr Treat Options Neurol       Date:  2015-01       Impact factor: 3.598

Review 4.  Role of immunosuppressive therapy for the treatment of multiple sclerosis.

Authors:  James M Stankiewicz; Hadar Kolb; Arnon Karni; Howard L Weiner
Journal:  Neurotherapeutics       Date:  2013-01       Impact factor: 7.620

Review 5.  Fertility, pregnancy and childbirth in patients with multiple sclerosis: impact of disease-modifying drugs.

Authors:  Maria Pia Amato; Emilio Portaccio
Journal:  CNS Drugs       Date:  2015-03       Impact factor: 5.749

Review 6.  Induction vs. escalating therapy in multiple sclerosis: practical implications.

Authors:  Giancarlo Comi
Journal:  Neurol Sci       Date:  2008-09       Impact factor: 3.307

7.  Cyclophosphamide therapy in pediatric multiple sclerosis.

Authors:  N Makhani; M P Gorman; H M Branson; L Stazzone; B L Banwell; T Chitnis
Journal:  Neurology       Date:  2009-05-13       Impact factor: 9.910

8.  Lights and shadows of cyclophosphamide in the treatment of multiple sclerosis.

Authors:  Francesco Patti; Salvatore Lo Fermo
Journal:  Autoimmune Dis       Date:  2011-03-15
  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.