Talk:Pixantrone

Impact

The last section recently added with comments from individuals, only backed up with press-releases is more close to a commercial statement than encyclopedic style. Additionally it goes against WP:MEDRS and WP:MEDMOS. I am going to procceed to eliminate them. Bests.--Garrondo (talk) 13:40, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

Table

I have eliminated the table per WP:MEDMOS, audience: it is written for professionals. It contains statistical values of efficacy (p values), number of subjects, which are of no use for a general audience. Bests. --Garrondo (talk) 13:50, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

Comments on mitoxantrone and MS

Inclusion of efficacy of mitoxantrone as a reason for the efficacy of pixantrone in the same disease is original research unless backed up by specific reliable sources which state it.Removed. Bests. --Garrondo (talk) 13:58, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

Clinical trial leads to full EU approval for some nHL

Clinical trial leads to full EU approval for some nHL [1] - Rod57 (talk) 11:14, 23 June 2019 (UTC)

Could we add a mechanism of action section

Mechanism of action is mentioned in History (may vary by indication as in Research). Could be helpful to highlight in own section as in many other drug articles ?
Would it be fair to call it a chemotherapy since/if it acts by preventing cell division generally ? - Rod57 (talk) 11:19, 23 June 2019 (UTC)