Ar. Imondi et al., DOSE-RESPONSE RELATIONSHIP OF DEXRAZOXANE FOR PREVENTION OF DOXORUBICIN-INDUCED CARDIOTOXICITY IN MICE, RATS, AND DOGS, Cancer research, 56(18), 1996, pp. 4200-4204
Dexrazoxane [(DZR), ADR 529, ICRF-187] ameliorates doxorubicin (DOX)-i
nduced cardiotoxicity in animals, and is recommended as a cardioprotec
tant in patients receiving cumulative doses of DOX above 300 mg/m(2),
A DZR:DOX dose ratio of 10:1 is recommended based on studies in patien
ts receiving 50 mg/m(2). Since DOX may he used at much higher doses in
certain clinical settings, we evaluated the ability of DZR to protect
against cardiomyopathy in animals given bolus doses of DOX at varying
dose levels, The severity and extent of the cardiomyopathy were evalu
ated histologically and expressed as the mean total score (MTS). Mice
were given 10 doses of DOX (2 or 4 mg/kg) over a 7-week period, Withou
t DZR, the MTS 4 weeks after the last treatment was 3.7 with 4 mg/kg D
OX and 1.3 with 2 mg/kg DOX, DZR at 5:1, 10:1, and 20:1 dose ratios ca
used a dose-dependent decrease in the MTS but was less efficacious wit
h the higher, more cardiotoxic dose of DOS, Rats were given DOX at 0.2
, 0.4, and 0.8 mg/kg with a 20:1 ratio of DZR weekly for 13 weeks. Car
diomyopathy was most severe with the highest dose of DOX in the absenc
e of DZR, especially in males, and progressed during the 6 weeks follo
wing the last treatment, DZR reduced the MTS in both sexes but in the
males given the highest dose of DOX, there was still a significant amo
unt of cardiac damage compared to vehicle-treated controls, Dogs were
given 0.1, 0.3, and 0.8 mg/kg DOX with 20:1 DZR for 13 weeks, DZR redu
ced the MTS significantly (P < 0.05) in males and females but cardiac
lesions were still present in each of the DZR-treated dogs. The result
s indicate that although DZR is highly effective in attenuating the ca
rdiomyopathy caused by DOX, dose ratios of DZR:DOX capable of providin
g total or nearly complete cardioprotection at low doses of DOX are le
ss efficacious at higher doses of DOX. One possible explanation for th
is effect is the marked pharmacokinetic difference between DZR and DOX
, with DZR undergoing a much more rapid rate of elimination from the b
ody compared to DOX, These findings point to the need for further stud
ies to optimize the dose scheduling of DZR before using it clinically
with bolus doses of DOX above those currently recommended.