Integration of modeling and simulation to support changes to ondansetron dosing following a randomized, double‐blind, placebo‐, and active‐controlled thorough QT study

Inhaled Isopropyl Alcohol for the Treatment of Nausea and Vomiting in a Patient Receiving Palliative Care: A Case Report

Nausea and vomiting are distressing symptoms experienced by many patients receiving palliative care for serious illness. Common pharmacologic management strategies include 5-HT3 receptor antagonists, antipsychotics, antihistamines, and antimuscarinic agents; however, these agents incur risks of adverse effects. One of the most worrisome risks of commonly used antiemetics is prolonging the QT interval and the associated risk of torsades de pointes. To avoid the dangers of pharmacologic treatment of nausea and vomiting, previous studies in emergency medicine and postoperative settings suggest that inhaled isopropyl alcohol is an inexpensive, safe, and effective nonpharmacologic intervention. This case report highlights the successful use of inhaled isopropyl alcohol for managing nausea and vomiting in a patient with heart failure receiving palliative care.

Ondansetron-induced QT prolongation among various age groups: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Ondansetron is a selective 5-hydroxytryptamine type 3 serotonin-receptor antagonist with antiemetic properties used inadvertently in the emergency department for controlling nausea. However, ondansetron is linked with a number of adverse effects, including prolongation of the QT interval. Therefore, the purpose of this meta-analysis was to assess the occurrence of QT prolongation in pediatric, adult, and elderly patients receiving oral or intravenously administered ondansetron.

METHODS

A thorough electronic search was conducted on PubMed (Medline) and Cochrane Library from the databases' inception to August 10, 2022. Only those studies were considered in which ondansetron was administered orally or intravenously to participants for the treatment of nausea and vomiting. The prevalence of QT prolongation in multiple predefined age groups was the outcome variable. Analyses were conducted using Review manager 5.4 (Cochrane collaboration, 2020).

RESULTS

A total of 10 studies involving 687 ondansetron group participants were statistically analyzed. The administration of ondansetron was associated with a statistically significant prevalence of QT prolongation in all age groups. An age-wise subgroup analysis was conducted which revealed that the prevalence of QT prolongation among participants younger than 18 years was not statistically significant, whereas it was statistically significant among participants aged 18-50 years and among patients older than 50 years.

CONCLUSIONS

The present meta-analysis provides further evidence that oral or intravenous administration of Ondansetron may lead to QT prolongation, particularly among patients older than 18 years of age.

Ondansetron Safety Regarding Prolong QTc for Children with Head Trauma

BACKGROUND

There have been recent reports of increased QT interval after head trauma in concussed athletes and adult patients. Ondansetron, which is widely used in treatment of nausea and vomiting symptoms in head injuries, was issued a safety warning from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration regarding QT prolongation and risk of fatal dysrhythmias.

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the safety of ondansetron regarding QT prolongation for patients experiencing nausea or vomiting after head trauma.

METHODS

Patients aged 1-20 years presenting to a pediatric emergency department with head trauma and who required a dose of ondansetron for nausea or vomiting were enrolled in the study. Patients received a baseline 12-lead electrocardiogram (ECG) prior to administration of either oral or IV ondansetron. A second post-ondansetron 12-lead ECG was performed after administration of ondansetron. All ECGs were reviewed and the QTc calculated manually by a board-certified pediatric cardiologist.

RESULTS

Forty-two patients met enrollment criteria. Five patients received IV ondansetron and 37 received oral ondansetron. Mean QTc pre ondansetron was 387.5 ms and mean QTc post ondansetron was 400.9 ms (p = 0.120). We found no statistically significant difference in other ECG parameters pre and post ondansetron.

CONCLUSIONS

Ondansetron is safe in regard to QTc prolongation in patients with head trauma. Based on this research, ondansetron should continue to be used for the treatment of nausea and vomiting in emergency department patients who present with head injury.

Lack of Electrocardiographic Effects of Deucravacitinib in Healthy Subjects

Deucravacitinib is a novel, oral, selective inhibitor of the intracellular signaling kinase tyrosine kinase 2. This phase 1, randomized, partially double‐blind, 4‐period crossover study in healthy adults was conducted to determine whether deucravacitinib 12 mg (therapeutic dose) or 36 mg (supratherapeutic dose) had a clinically relevant effect on the corrected QT interval and other electrocardiographic (ECG) parameters. Subjects received 1 of 4 sequences of placebo, deucravacitinib 12 mg, deucravacitinib 36 mg, and moxifloxacin 400 mg (positive control) in a randomized crossover fashion. The placebo‐corrected change from baseline for the QT interval corrected for heart rate using the Fridericia method (QTcF), ECG parameters, and safety measures were evaluated. A clinically meaningful QTcF prolongation of >10 milliseconds was not found for deucravacitinib at tested doses. Assay sensitivity was demonstrated by the observation of known QT effects of moxifloxacin in the study. Deucravacitinib had no clinically relevant effect on other parameters and was generally well tolerated. The majority of adverse events (AEs) were mild, and all AEs resolved by study's end. Three treatment‐related serious AEs of pharyngitis, cellulitis, and lymphadenopathy occurred in 1 subject following administration of deucravacitinib 12 mg, but resolved by end of study. This study demonstrated that a single oral dose of deucravacitinib 12 or 36 mg did not produce a clinically relevant effect on the corrected QT interval or other measured ECG parameters in healthy adults.

A pharmacogenomic investigation of the cardiac safety profile of ondansetron in children and pregnant women

BACKGROUND

Ondansetron is a highly effective antiemetic for the treatment of nausea and vomiting. However, this medication has also been associated with QT prolongation. Pharmacogenomic information on therapeutic response to ondansetron exists, but no investigation has been performed on genetic factors that influence the cardiac safety of this medication.

METHODS

Three patient groups receiving ondansetron were recruited and followed prospectively (pediatric post-surgical patients n = 101; pediatric oncology patients n = 98; pregnant women n = 62). Electrocardiograms were conducted at baseline, and 5- and 30-min post-ondansetron administration, to determine the effect of ondansetron treatment on QT interval. Pharmacogenomic associations were assessed via analyses of comprehensive CYP2D6 genotyping and genome-wide association study data.

RESULTS

In the entire cohort, 62 patients (24.1%) met the criteria for prolonged QT, with 1.2% of the cohort exhibiting unsafe QT prolongation. The most significant shift from baseline occurred at five minutes post-ondansetron administration (P = 9.8 × 10^-4). CYP2D6 activity score was not associated with prolonged QT. Genome-wide analyses identified novel associations with a missense variant in TLR3 (rs3775291; P = 2.00 × 10^-7) and a variant linked to the expression of SLC36A1 (rs34124313; P = 1.97 × 10^-7).

CONCLUSIONS

This study has provided insight into the genomic basis of ondansetron-induced cardiac changes and has emphasized the importance of genes that have been implicated in serotonin-related traits. These biologically-relevant findings represent the first step towards understanding this adverse event with the overall goal to improve the safety of this commonly used antiemetic medication.

The effect of oral ondansetron on QT interval in children with acute gastroenteritis; a retrospective observational study

BACKGROUND

In mildly to moderately dehydrated patients with acute gastroenteritis (AGE), oral rehydration therapy (ORT) is the treatment of choice. Though ondansetron is a very effective antiemetics and leads to succeed ORT, there have been reports QT prolongation in patients using it. We investigated the effect of oral ondansetron on QT interval in mildly to moderately dehydrated children with AGE.

METHODS

This retrospective observational study was conducted in a single pediatric emergency department (ED) of a tertiary university hospital. We collected the medical records of patients with a primary diagnosis of AGE who received oral ondansetron and underwent an electrocardiogram between January 2017 and June 2018. A pediatric emergency physician calculated the corrected QT interval (QTc) by Bazett's method, and the calculations were reviewed by a pediatric cardiologist. QTc values before (preQTc) and after (postQTc) ondansetron administration were analyzed. ΔQTc was calculated as the change from preQTc to postQTc. We also investigated any cardiac complications from oral ondansetron.

RESULTS

Total 80 patients were included. The mean age of the patients was 53.31 ± 32.42 months, and 45% were male. The mean dose of oral ondansetron was 0.18 ± 0.04 mg/kg. The mean interval from administration of ondansetron to performance of the electrocardiogram was 65 ± 26 min. The mean preQTc was 403.3 ± 24.0 ms, and the mean postQTc was 407.2 ± 26.7 ms. Two patients had a preQTc ≥460 ms, and one patient had a postQTc ≥460 ms. ΔQTc was ≥30 ms in seven patients (8.8%). No ΔQTc was ≥60 ms. No pre- or postQTc was ≥500 ms. No patient had a fatal cardiac arrhythmia after taking ondansetron.

CONCLUSION

Oral administration of a single dose of ondansetron in children with AGE did not cause high-risk QTc prolongation or fatal arrhythmia.

The Risk of QTc Prolongation with Antiemetics in the Palliative Care Setting: A Narrative Review

Nausea and vomiting are common within the palliative care population. Antiemetic agents may help control symptoms, but may also place patients at risk for QTc prolongation. This article reviews pharmacotherapy agents including anticholinergics, antihistamines, antidopaminergics, 5-HT3 receptor antagonists, dronabinol, and medical marijuana and their associated risk of QTc prolongation. A clinical treatment pathway is provided to help guide clinicians in choosing the most appropriate antiemetic based upon patient specific factors for QTc prolongation.

Nausea and Vomiting in 2021: A Comprehensive Update

GOAL

A comprehensive review of treatments for nausea and vomiting (N/V).

BACKGROUND

N/V are common symptoms encountered in medicine. While most cases of acute N/V related to a specific cause can be straightforward to manage, other cases of acute N/V such as chemotherapy-induced N/V and especially chronic unexplained N/V can be difficult to control, leading to a significant decline in the patient's quality of life and increased cost of medical care from repeated hospitalizations.

STUDY

Traditional management has relied on pharmacotherapy which may be inadequate in a certain proportion of these patients. Many of the medications used in the management of N/V have significant side effect profiles making the need for new and improved interventions of great importance.

RESULTS

This review covers a broad review of the pathophysiology of N/V, pharmacotherapy, including safety concerns and controversies with established pharmaceuticals, newer immunotherapies, bioelectrical neuromodulation (including gastric electrical stimulation), behavioral and surgical therapies, and complementary medicine.

CONCLUSION

On the basis of emerging understandings of the pathophysiology of N/V, improved therapies are becoming available.

Intravenous Amisulpride Does Not Meaningfully Prolong the QTc Interval at Doses Effective for the Management of Postoperative Nausea and Vomiting

BACKGROUND

Postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) are significant issues in surgical patients, and additional treatment options are needed. Dopaminergic antiemetics have been popular for their efficacy, but their use has been limited by safety concerns, especially the potential for torsade de pointes arising from QT interval prolongation. Intravenous (IV) amisulpride, a dopamine D2 and D3 antagonist shown to be effective at preventing and treating PONV at doses of 5 and 10 mg, respectively, has a dose-dependent effect on QT but at 5 mg is not associated with clinically meaningful prolongation of the heart rate-corrected QT (QTc) interval. This study was designed to evaluate the QT effect of a 10-mg dose of amisulpride, alone and when simultaneously coadministered with ondansetron, an antiemetic of a different class, also known to prolong the QT interval.

METHODS

In this randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, 3-period, crossover study, healthy male and female volunteers 18-65 years of age received IV, in a random sequence: (1) amisulpride 10 mg given twice, 2 hours apart; (2) amisulpride 10 mg and ondansetron 4 mg, given simultaneously; and (3) placebo.

RESULTS

Thirty subjects were enrolled, and 29 completed all 3 treatment periods. The largest mean placebo-corrected change-from-baseline QT interval corrected for heart rate using Fridericia's formula (QTcF) (ΔΔQTcF) after the first and second amisulpride dose was 5.2 milliseconds (90% confidence interval [CI], 3.53-6.96 milliseconds) and 8.0 milliseconds (90% CI, 5.49-10.58 milliseconds), respectively. After coadministration of amisulpride and ondansetron, the largest mean ΔΔQTcF was 7.3 milliseconds (90% CI, 5.48-9.16 milliseconds). The slope of the amisulpride concentration-change-from-baseline QTcF (ΔQTcF) relationship was 0.006 ms/ng/mL (90% CI, 0.0020-0.0098). No QTc outliers (absolute QTcF value >480 milliseconds or increase from baseline >30 milliseconds) were seen in any period.

CONCLUSIONS

A 10-mg dose of IV amisulpride, given alone or in combination with ondansetron, does not have a clinically significant effect on the QT interval.

Drugs for preventing postoperative nausea and vomiting in adults after general anaesthesia: a network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) is a common adverse effect of anaesthesia and surgery. Up to 80% of patients may be affected. These outcomes are a major cause of patient dissatisfaction and may lead to prolonged hospital stay and higher costs of care along with more severe complications. Many antiemetic drugs are available for prophylaxis. They have various mechanisms of action and side effects, but there is still uncertainty about which drugs are most effective with the fewest side effects.

OBJECTIVES

• To compare the efficacy and safety of different prophylactic pharmacologic interventions (antiemetic drugs) against no treatment, against placebo, or against each other (as monotherapy or combination prophylaxis) for prevention of postoperative nausea and vomiting in adults undergoing any type of surgery under general anaesthesia • To generate a clinically useful ranking of antiemetic drugs (monotherapy and combination prophylaxis) based on efficacy and safety • To identify the best dose or dose range of antiemetic drugs in terms of efficacy and safety SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, Embase, the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (WHO ICTRP), ClinicalTrials.gov, and reference lists of relevant systematic reviews. The first search was performed in November 2017 and was updated in April 2020. In the update of the search, 39 eligible studies were found that were not included in the analysis (listed as awaiting classification).

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing effectiveness or side effects of single antiemetic drugs in any dose or combination against each other or against an inactive control in adults undergoing any type of surgery under general anaesthesia. All antiemetic drugs belonged to one of the following substance classes: 5-HT₃ receptor antagonists, D₂ receptor antagonists, NK₁ receptor antagonists, corticosteroids, antihistamines, and anticholinergics. No language restrictions were applied. Abstract publications were excluded.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

A review team of 11 authors independently assessed trials for inclusion and risk of bias and subsequently extracted data. We performed pair-wise meta-analyses for drugs of direct interest (amisulpride, aprepitant, casopitant, dexamethasone, dimenhydrinate, dolasetron, droperidol, fosaprepitant, granisetron, haloperidol, meclizine, methylprednisolone, metoclopramide, ondansetron, palonosetron, perphenazine, promethazine, ramosetron, rolapitant, scopolamine, and tropisetron) compared to placebo (inactive control). We performed network meta-analyses (NMAs) to estimate the relative effects and ranking (with placebo as reference) of all available single drugs and combinations. Primary outcomes were vomiting within 24 hours postoperatively, serious adverse events (SAEs), and any adverse event (AE). Secondary outcomes were drug class-specific side effects (e.g. headache), mortality, early and late vomiting, nausea, and complete response. We performed subgroup network meta-analysis with dose of drugs as a moderator variable using dose ranges based on previous consensus recommendations. We assessed certainty of evidence of NMA treatment effects for all primary outcomes and drug class-specific side effects according to GRADE (CINeMA, Confidence in Network Meta-Analysis). We restricted GRADE assessment to single drugs of direct interest compared to placebo.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 585 studies (97,516 randomized participants). Most of these studies were small (median sample size of 100); they were published between 1965 and 2017 and were primarily conducted in Asia (51%), Europe (25%), and North America (16%). Mean age of the overall population was 42 years. Most participants were women (83%), had American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) physical status I and II (70%), received perioperative opioids (88%), and underwent gynaecologic (32%) or gastrointestinal surgery (19%) under general anaesthesia using volatile anaesthetics (88%). In this review, 44 single drugs and 51 drug combinations were compared. Most studies investigated only single drugs (72%) and included an inactive control arm (66%). The three most investigated single drugs in this review were ondansetron (246 studies), dexamethasone (120 studies), and droperidol (97 studies). Almost all studies (89%) reported at least one efficacy outcome relevant for this review. However, only 56% reported at least one relevant safety outcome. Altogether, 157 studies (27%) were assessed as having overall low risk of bias, 101 studies (17%) overall high risk of bias, and 327 studies (56%) overall unclear risk of bias. Vomiting within 24 hours postoperatively Relative effects from NMA for vomiting within 24 hours (282 RCTs, 50,812 participants, 28 single drugs, and 36 drug combinations) suggest that 29 out of 36 drug combinations and 10 out of 28 single drugs showed a clinically important benefit (defined as the upper end of the 95% confidence interval (CI) below a risk ratio (RR) of 0.8) compared to placebo. Combinations of drugs were generally more effective than single drugs in preventing vomiting. However, single NK₁ receptor antagonists showed treatment effects similar to most of the drug combinations. High-certainty evidence suggests that the following single drugs reduce vomiting (ordered by decreasing efficacy): aprepitant (RR 0.26, 95% CI 0.18 to 0.38, high certainty, rank 3/28 of single drugs); ramosetron (RR 0.44, 95% CI 0.32 to 0.59, high certainty, rank 5/28); granisetron (RR 0.45, 95% CI 0.38 to 0.54, high certainty, rank 6/28); dexamethasone (RR 0.51, 95% CI 0.44 to 0.57, high certainty, rank 8/28); and ondansetron (RR 0.55, 95% CI 0.51 to 0.60, high certainty, rank 13/28). Moderate-certainty evidence suggests that the following single drugs probably reduce vomiting: fosaprepitant (RR 0.06, 95% CI 0.02 to 0.21, moderate certainty, rank 1/28) and droperidol (RR 0.61, 95% CI 0.54 to 0.69, moderate certainty, rank 20/28). Recommended and high doses of granisetron, dexamethasone, ondansetron, and droperidol showed clinically important benefit, but low doses showed no clinically important benefit. Aprepitant was used mainly at high doses, ramosetron at recommended doses, and fosaprepitant at doses of 150 mg (with no dose recommendation available). Frequency of SAEs Twenty-eight RCTs were included in the NMA for SAEs (10,766 participants, 13 single drugs, and eight drug combinations). The certainty of evidence for SAEs when using one of the best and most reliable anti-vomiting drugs (aprepitant, ramosetron, granisetron, dexamethasone, ondansetron, and droperidol compared to placebo) ranged from very low to low. Droperidol (RR 0.88, 95% CI 0.08 to 9.71, low certainty, rank 6/13) may reduce SAEs. We are uncertain about the effects of aprepitant (RR 1.39, 95% CI 0.26 to 7.36, very low certainty, rank 11/13), ramosetron (RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.05 to 15.74, very low certainty, rank 7/13), granisetron (RR 1.21, 95% CI 0.11 to 13.15, very low certainty, rank 10/13), dexamethasone (RR 1.16, 95% CI 0.28 to 4.85, very low certainty, rank 9/13), and ondansetron (RR 1.62, 95% CI 0.32 to 8.10, very low certainty, rank 12/13). No studies reporting SAEs were available for fosaprepitant. Frequency of any AE Sixty-one RCTs were included in the NMA for any AE (19,423 participants, 15 single drugs, and 11 drug combinations). The certainty of evidence for any AE when using one of the best and most reliable anti-vomiting drugs (aprepitant, ramosetron, granisetron, dexamethasone, ondansetron, and droperidol compared to placebo) ranged from very low to moderate. Granisetron (RR 0.92, 95% CI 0.80 to 1.05, moderate certainty, rank 7/15) probably has no or little effect on any AE. Dexamethasone (RR 0.77, 95% CI 0.55 to 1.08, low certainty, rank 2/15) and droperidol (RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.81 to 0.98, low certainty, rank 6/15) may reduce any AE. Ondansetron (RR 0.95, 95% CI 0.88 to 1.01, low certainty, rank 9/15) may have little or no effect on any AE. We are uncertain about the effects of aprepitant (RR 0.87, 95% CI 0.78 to 0.97, very low certainty, rank 3/15) and ramosetron (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.65 to 1.54, very low certainty, rank 11/15) on any AE. No studies reporting any AE were available for fosaprepitant. Class-specific side effects For class-specific side effects (headache, constipation, wound infection, extrapyramidal symptoms, sedation, arrhythmia, and QT prolongation) of relevant substances, the certainty of evidence for the best and most reliable anti-vomiting drugs mostly ranged from very low to low. Exceptions were that ondansetron probably increases headache (RR 1.16, 95% CI 1.06 to 1.28, moderate certainty, rank 18/23) and probably reduces sedation (RR 0.87, 95% CI 0.79 to 0.96, moderate certainty, rank 5/24) compared to placebo. The latter effect is limited to recommended and high doses of ondansetron. Droperidol probably reduces headache (RR 0.76, 95% CI 0.67 to 0.86, moderate certainty, rank 5/23) compared to placebo. We have high-certainty evidence that dexamethasone (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.91 to 1.09, high certainty, rank 16/24) has no effect on sedation compared to placebo. No studies assessed substance class-specific side effects for fosaprepitant. Direction and magnitude of network effect estimates together with level of evidence certainty are graphically summarized for all pre-defined GRADE-relevant outcomes and all drugs of direct interest compared to placebo in http://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4066353.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We found high-certainty evidence that five single drugs (aprepitant, ramosetron, granisetron, dexamethasone, and ondansetron) reduce vomiting, and moderate-certainty evidence that two other single drugs (fosaprepitant and droperidol) probably reduce vomiting, compared to placebo. Four of the six substance classes (5-HT₃ receptor antagonists, D₂ receptor antagonists, NK₁ receptor antagonists, and corticosteroids) were thus represented by at least one drug with important benefit for prevention of vomiting. Combinations of drugs were generally more effective than the corresponding single drugs in preventing vomiting. NK₁ receptor antagonists were the most effective drug class and had comparable efficacy to most of the drug combinations. 5-HT₃ receptor antagonists were the best studied substance class. For most of the single drugs of direct interest, we found only very low to low certainty evidence for safety outcomes such as occurrence of SAEs, any AE, and substance class-specific side effects. Recommended and high doses of granisetron, dexamethasone, ondansetron, and droperidol were more effective than low doses for prevention of vomiting. Dose dependency of side effects was rarely found due to the limited number of studies, except for the less sedating effect of recommended and high doses of ondansetron. The results of the review are transferable mainly to patients at higher risk of nausea and vomiting (i.e. healthy women undergoing inhalational anaesthesia and receiving perioperative opioids). Overall study quality was limited, but certainty assessments of effect estimates consider this limitation. No further efficacy studies are needed as there is evidence of moderate to high certainty for seven single drugs with relevant benefit for prevention of vomiting. However, additional studies are needed to investigate potential side effects of these drugs and to examine higher-risk patient populations (e.g. individuals with diabetes and heart disease).

[Prevention and treatment of antineoplastic drug-induced nausea and vomiting in pediatric onco-hematology: An update]

Antineoplastic drug induced nausea and vomiting are common adverse events in cancer care of paediatric patients ; therefore, prevention and management of these adverse events is a major concern for healthcare professionals. There are common features between paediatric and adult patients in terms of the emetogenic level depending on antineoplastic agents or about available medicines. However, there are also specificities for paediatric population including individual risk factors of emesis or nausea assessment for example. Knowledge relative to available medicines is also limited in the paediatric population, especially for recent medicines. This review aims to provide a comprehensive overview about antiemetics in paediatric oncology to clinicians and other healthcare professionals involved in paediatric cancer care. First of all, we describe physiopathological paediatric specificity, risk factors and clinical assessment of antineoplastic drug induced nausea and vomiting. Secondly, we focus on available medicines and also address the issue of complementary and alternative medicines.

Drug-induced QT prolongation: Concordance of preclinical anesthetized canine model in relation to published clinical observations for ten CiPA drugs

INTRODUCTION

The Comprehensive In Vitro Proarrhythmia Assay (CiPA) initiative differentiates torsadogenic risk of 28 drugs affecting ventricular repolarization based on multiple in vitro human derived ionic currents. However, a standardized prospective assessment of the electrophysiologic effects of these drugs in an integrated in vivo preclinical cardiovascular model is lacking. This study questioned whether QTc interval prolongation in a preclinical in vivo model could detect clinically reported QTc prolongation and assign torsadogenic risk for ten CiPA drugs.

METHODS

An acute intravenous administered ascending dose anesthetized dog cardiovascular model was used to assess QTc prolongation along with other electrocardiographic (PR, QRS intervals) and hemodynamic (heart rate, blood pressures, left ventricular contractility) parameters at plasma concentrations spanning and exceeding clinical exposures. hERG current block potency was characterized using IC₅₀ values from automated patch clamp.

RESULTS

All eight drugs eliciting clinical QTc prolongation also delayed repolarization in anesthetized dogs at plasma concentrations within four-fold clinical exposures. In vitro QTc safety margins (defined based on clinical C_max values/plasma concentrations eliciting statistically significant QTc prolongation in dogs) were lower for high vs intermediate torsadogenic risk drugs. In comparison, hERG IC₁₀ values represented as total drug concentrations were better predictors of preclinical QTc prolongation than hERG IC₅₀ values.

CONCLUSION

There was good concordance for QTc prolongation in the anesthetized dog model and clinical torsadogenic risk assignment. QTc assessment in the anesthetized dog remains a valuable part of a more comprehensive preclinical integrated risk assessment for delayed repolarization and torsadogenic risk as part of a global cardiovascular evaluation.

Prevalence of QTc Prolongation in Patients With Advanced Cancer Receiving Palliative Care-A Cause for Concern?

CONTEXT

Medications commonly used for symptom control along with other known risk factors have the potential to prolong ventricular repolarization as measured by the QT interval (the time from the start of the Q wave to the end of the T wave) on a standard electrocardiogram (ECG).

OBJECTIVES

To document the prevalence of a prolonged QT interval corrected for heart rate (QTc) interval in the palliative/oncology setting, compare automatic ECG QTc measurements with manual readings and identify any correlation between QTc prolongation and the use of drugs or other risk factors.

METHODS

A convenience sample of consecutive patients with cancer, admitted under or known to the palliative/supportive care teams in two metropolitan hospitals, and willing to provide an ECG recording and basic demographic information including QTc risk factors were included. Both automated and manually calculated QTc intervals were recorded. Multivariable analysis was used to determine risk factors independently associated with prolonged QTc intervals.

RESULTS

Of the 389 participants, there was a significant difference in mean QTc between sites using automated but not manual calculations. Manual readings were therefore used with predetermined cutoffs of 0.44 seconds (males) and 0.46 seconds (females). Seventy-two (18.5%) of the participants had a prolonged QTc with six (1.5%) having a prolongation of >0.50 seconds. At-risk drugs were being taken by 218 participants (56.0% of total cohort). Factors shown to be associated with QTc prolongation included age, gender, performance status, and hypocalcemia. No specific medication was associated with increased risk.

CONCLUSION

Although almost 20% of patients receiving palliative care had prolongation of QTc, the possibility of serious consequences appeared to be low despite the frequent occurrence of risk factors.

The effect of anti-emetic drugs on rat embryonic heart activity

Nausea and vomiting of pregnancy (NVP) is the most common medical complaint during pregnancy affecting up to 70% of pregnant women worldwide. Some antiemetic medications (AEM) (droperidol, domperidone, granisetron, metoclopramide and trifluoperazine) used to treat NVP have the unwanted side effect of hERG blockade. The hERG potassium channel is essential for normal heart rhythm in both the adult human and the human and rat embryo. Animal studies show hERG blockade in the embryo causes bradycardia and arrhythmia leading to cardiovascular malformations and other birth defects. Whole rat embryo in vitro culture was used to determine the effect of the above listed AEM and meclizine on the heart rate of Gestational day 13 rat embryos. These embryos are similar in size and heart development to 5-6-week human embryo. The results showed that all of the AEMs caused a concentration-dependent bradycardia. Droperidol had the lowest margin of safety.

Pharmacogenomics of Medications Commonly Used in the Intensive Care Unit

In the intensive care unit (ICU) setting, where highly variable and insufficient drug efficacies, as well as frequent and unpredictable adverse drug reactions (ADRs) occur, pharmacogenomics (PGx) offers an opportunity to improve health outcomes. However, PGx has not been fully evaluated in the ICU, partly due to lack of knowledge of how genetic markers may affect drug therapy. To fill in this gap, we conducted a review to summarize the PGx information for the medications commonly encountered in the ICU.

Results and evaluation of a first-in-human study of RG7342, an mGlu5 positive allosteric modulator, utilizing Bayesian adaptive methods

AIM

The objectives of this first-in-human study were to evaluate the safety and tolerability, pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics, and maximum tolerated dose (MTD) of single ascending oral doses of RG7342, a positive allosteric modulator (PAM) of the metabotropic glutamate receptor 5 (mGlu5) for the treatment of schizophrenia, in healthy male subjects.

METHODS

This was a single-centre, randomized, double-blind, adaptive study of 37 subjects receiving single ascending oral doses of RG7342 (ranging from 0.06-1.2 mg, n = 27) or placebo (n = 10). A modified continual reassessment method, with control for the probability of overdosing based on the occurrence of dose-limiting events (DLEs), was applied to inform the subsequent dose decisions for RG7342.

RESULTS

DLEs consisted of dizziness, nausea and vomiting, and the incidence and severity of these adverse events increased in a concentration-dependent manner. RG7342 doses of 1.2 mg under fasting conditions, which reached a mean maximum plasma concentration (C_max ) of 10.2 ng ml^-1 , were not tolerated (four out of six subjects experienced DLEs). RG7342 showed dose-proportional pharmacokinetics, with rapid absorption and a biphasic decline, and a mean terminal half-life estimated to be >1000 h.

CONCLUSIONS

Single oral doses of RG7342 were generally tolerated up to 0.6 mg under fasting and 0.9 mg under fed conditions in healthy subjects. Bayesian adaptive methods describing the probability of DLEs were applied effectively to support dose escalation. MTDs (fasting, fed) were associated with a C_max of 6.5 ng ml^-1 . The development of RG7342 was discontinued owing to the potential challenges associated with a long half-life in context of the observed adverse events.

Clinical Pharmacogenetics Implementation Consortium (CPIC) guideline for CYP2D6 genotype and use of ondansetron and tropisetron

5-hydroxytryptamine type 3 (5-HT3) receptor antagonists are used in the prevention of chemotherapy- induced, radiation-induced and postoperative nausea and vomiting. CYP2D6 polymorphisms can influence the metabolism of some of these drugs (i.e. ondansetron and tropisetron) thereby affecting drug efficacy. We summarize evidence from the published literature supporting these associations and provide therapeutic recommendations for ondansetron and tropisetron based on CYP2D6 genotype (updates at www.pharmgkb.org ).

Thorough QT (TQT) studies: concordance with torsadogenesis and an evolving cardiac safety testing paradigm

Since 2005, when the International Conference on Harmonisation (ICH) E14 guideline was adopted, no drug has been withdrawn because of QTc prolongation or torsade de pointes arrhythmia. There are, however, costs associated with this success. In addition to the time and money invested, thorough QT (TQT) studies have limited the efficiency of the drug development pipeline. In this paper, we discuss the relevance of TQT trials as a tool for proarrhythmic risk prediction as a part of the debate regarding their usefulness.

Cardiotoxicity of antiemetic drugs in oncology: An overview of the current state of the art

PURPOSE

Cardiac complications in cancer patients have been a significant medical problem in the last few years. Cardiosafety profile of most novel approved drugs, in cancer patients, is required by regulatory authorities. Risk of proarrhythmic effect associated with a new drug, in fact, is usually evaluated with specific studies conducted in agreement with ICHE14 guidelines. In this overview, we detailed the cardio safety profile of antiemetic drugs. In particular, we focused on data of 5HT3-RA drugs used for prevention of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting in the oncology setting.

METHODS

A literature search was conducted using the PubMed database to identify studies reporting arrhythmic complications of antiemetic drug used in oncology.

RESULTS AND CONCLUSION

Most of the antiemetic drugs have been approved by regulatory authorities when ICHE14 guidelines were not issued, so the cardiotoxicity of those drugs has been defined with the post-marketing authorization pharmacovigilance activity. We reviewed the cardiotoxicity data of major antiemetic and adjuvant agents, providing a general overview and recommendations about their use in medical oncology.

Drug safety of macrolide and quinolone antibiotics in a tertiary care hospital: administration of interacting co-medication and QT prolongation

PURPOSE

Some macrolide and quinolone antibiotics (MQABs) are associated with QT prolongation and life-threatening torsade de pointes (TdP) arrhythmia. MQAB may also inhibit cytochrome P450 isoenzymes and thereby cause pharmacokinetic drug interactions (DDIs). There is limited data on the frequency and management of such risks in clinical practice. We aimed to quantify co-administration of MQAB with interacting drugs and associated adverse drug reactions.

METHODS

We conducted an observational study within our pharmacoepidemiological database derived from electronic medical records of a tertiary care hospital. Among all users of MQAB associated with TdP, we determined the prevalence of additional QT-prolonging drugs and risk factors and identified contraindicated co-administrations of simvastatin, atorvastatin, or tizanidine. Electrocardiographic (ECG) monitoring and associated adverse events were validated in medical records.

RESULTS

Among 3444 administered courses of clarithromycin, erythromycin, azithromycin, ciprofloxacin, levofloxacin, or moxifloxacin, there were 1332 (38.7 %) with concomitant use of additional QT-prolonging drugs. Among those, we identified seven cases of drug-related QT prolongation, but 49.1 % had no ECG monitoring. Of all MQAB users, 547 (15.9 %) had hypokalemia. Forty-four MQAB users had contraindicated co-administrations of simvastatin, atorvastatin, or tizanidine and three of those related adverse drug reactions.

CONCLUSION

In the studied real-life setting, we found a considerable number of MQAB users with additional risk factors for TdP but no ECG monitoring. However, adverse drug reactions were rarely found, and costs vs. benefits of ECG monitoring have to be weighted. In contrast, avoidable risk factors and selected contraindicated pharmacokinetic interactions are clear targets for implementation as automated alerts in electronic prescribing systems.

Can an early phase clinical pharmacology study replace a thorough QT study? Experience with a novel H3-receptor antagonist/inverse agonist

OBJECTIVE

The objective of the present study was to compare the effects of pitolisant on QTcF interval in a single ascending dose (SAD) study and a thorough QT (TQT) study.

METHODS

The SAD study at three dose levels of pitolisant enrolled 24 males and the TQT study at two dose levels 25 males. Both studies intensively monitored ECGs and pitolisant exposure. Effect on QTcF interval was analysed by Intersection Union Test (IUT) and by exposure-response (ER) analysis. Results from the two studies were compared.

RESULTS

In both studies, moxifloxacin effect established assay sensitivity. IUT analysis revealed comparable pitolisant-induced maximum mean (90 % confidence interval (CI)) placebo-corrected increase from baseline (ΔΔQTcF) in both the studies, being 13.3 (8.1; 18.5) ms at 200-mg and 9.9 (4.7; 15.1) ms at 240-mg doses in SAD study and 5.27 (2.35; 8.20) ms at 120-mg dose in TQT study. ER analysis revealed that ER slopes in SAD and TQT studies were comparable and significantly positive (0.031 vs 0.027 ms/ng/mL, respectively). At geometric mean concentrations, bootstrap predicted ΔΔQTcF (90 % CI) were 9.23 (4.68; 14.4) ms at 279 ng/mL (240-mg dose) in the SAD study and 4.97 (3.42; 8.19) ms at 156 ng/mL (120-mg dose) in the TQT study.

CONCLUSION

Pitolisant lacked an effect of regulatory concern on QTc interval in both the studies, however analysed, suggesting that the results from the SAD study could have mitigated the need for a TQT study. Our findings add to the growing evidence that intensive ECG monitoring in early phase clinical studies can replace a TQT study.

Effect of ramosetron on the QT interval during sevoflurane anaesthesia in children: a prospective observational study

BACKGROUND

We investigated the effects of concomitant administration of sevoflurane and ramosetron on the QT interval, the interval between the peak and end of the T wave (Tpe) and Tpe/QT ratio in children.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the effects of concomitant administration of ramosetron and sevoflurane on heart rate corrected interval with Bazett's formula (QTc), Tpe interval and Tpe/QT ratio.

DESIGN

A prospective observational study.

SETTING

Elective orthopaedic surgery with patient-controlled analgesia.

PATIENTS

Forty children aged between 3 and 12 years.

INTERVENTION

ECG recordings were collected before induction (BASE), before sevoflurane administration (SEVO) and after the administration of ramosetron (SEVO and R).

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The heart rate corrected interval with Bazett's formula (QTc), Tpe interval and Tpe/QT ratio were calculated and the changes were analysed using repeated-measures analysis of variance (ANOVA).

RESULTS

The QTc interval at BASE was 388.5 ± 29.3 ms. It increased with sevoflurane anaesthesia to 414.9 ± 21.4 ms and did not change with the administration of ramosetron (418.2 ± 23.0 ms). The Tpe interval and Tpe/QT ratio did not differ between measurements. No ventricular arrhythmias occurred during the study.

CONCLUSION

Ramosetron was not associated with prolongation of the QTc interval when it was given concomitantly with sevoflurane in children. No ventricular arrhythmias or other adverse effects occurred during the study.