Frequency-dependent Cardiac Electrophysiologic Effects of Tedisamil: Comparison With Quinidine and Sotalol

Field and action potential recordings in heart slices: correlation with established in vitro and in vivo models

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Action potential (AP) recordings in ex vivo heart preparations constitute an important component of the preclinical cardiac safety assessment according to the ICH S7B guideline. Most AP measurement models are sensitive, predictive and informative but suffer from a low throughput. Here, effects of selected anti-arrhythmics (flecainide, quinidine, atenolol, sotalol, dofetilide, nifedipine, verapamil) on field/action potentials (FP/AP) of guinea pig and rabbit ventricular slices are presented and compared with data from established in vitro and in vivo models.

EXPERIMENTAL APPROACH

Data from measurements of membrane currents (hERG, I(Na) ), AP/FP (guinea pig and rabbit ventricular slices), AP (rabbit Purkinje fibre), haemodynamic/ECG parameters (conscious, telemetered dog) were collected, compared and correlated to complementary published data (focused literature search).

KEY RESULTS

The selected anti-arrhythmics, flecainide, quinidine, atenolol, sotalol, dofetilide, nifedipine and verapamil, influenced the shape of AP/FP of guinea pig and rabbit ventricular slices in a manner similar to that observed for rabbit PF. The findings obtained from slice preparations are in line with measurements of membrane currents in vitro, papillary muscle AP in vitro and haemodynamic/ECG parameters from conscious dogs in vivo, and were also corroborated by published data.

CONCLUSION AND IMPLICATIONS

FP and AP recordings from heart slices correlated well with established in vitro and in vivo models in terms of pharmacology and predictability. Heart slice preparations yield similar results as papillary muscle but offer enhanced throughput for mechanistic investigations and may substantially reduce the use of laboratory animals.

Ionic basis of pharmacological therapy in Brugada syndrome

An implantable cardioverter-defibrillator is considered the only effective therapy to terminate ventricular arrhythmias in symptomatic patients with Brugada syndrome. However, it does not prevent future arrhythmic episodes. Only antiarrhythmic drug therapy can prevent them. There have been several reports of a beneficial effect of oral quinidine in both asymptomatic and symptomatic patients. Other possible beneficial oral agents could be I(to) blockers. Intravenous isoproterenol has been reported to be especially useful in abolishing arrhythmic storms in emergency situations. Also, isolated case reports on the usefulness of cilostazol, sotalol, and mexiletine have been described. The present article reviews the mechanisms by which these drugs may act and their possible role in the pharmacotherapy of this disease.

Tedisamil: a new novel antiarrhythmic

Solvay Pharmaceuticals is currently developing tedisamil (KC-8857), a novel antiarrhythmic with additional anti-ischaemic properties, which acts via potassium channel blockade. This drug can be categorised as a class III antiarrhythmic agent due to its effects of action potential and QT interval prolongation in these patients. This agent was initially developed for its anti-ischaemic properties and Phase I trials have shown tedisamil to be an effective bradycardic agent, as well as causing a reverse rate-dependent QT interval prolongation. Subsequent Phase II results have confirmed that in patients with ischaemic heart disease, tedisamil had beneficial haemodynamic and anti-ischaemic effects. Phase III studies in patients with ischaemic heart disease indicated that tedisamil is an effective agent for the treatment of angina, resulting in a dose-dependent increase in anginal threshold (with a decrease in anginal attacks, increased exercise capacity during treadmill exercise and decreased electrocardiographic signs of exercise induced ischaemia) in comparison to placebo. Although tedisamil has been shown to be an effective anti-ischaemic agent, with Phase III trials for angina pectoris now completed, the company are now pursuing the use of tedisamil for the treatment of atrial fibrillation, for which tedisamil is still in Phase II/III clinical trials. Launch data are not yet known.

Antiarrhythmic drugs: new agents and evolving concepts

Properties of several new antiarrhythmic drugs are summarised in this review article. Recent concepts concerning their safety and efficacy of antiarrhythmics are discussed. A brief perspective on possible future strategies for pharmacotherapy of arrhythmias is provided.

A Benefit-Risk Assessment of Class III Antiarrhythmic Agents

With beta-blockers as the exception, increasing doubt is emerging on the value of antiarrhythmic drug therapy following a series of trials that have either shown no mortality benefit or even an excess mortality. Vaughan Williams class I drugs are generally avoided in patients with structural heart disease, and class IV drugs are avoided in heart failure. Unfortunately, arrhythmias are a growing problem due to an increase in the incidence of atrial fibrillation and sudden death. The population is becoming older and more patients survive for a longer time period with congestive heart failure, which again increases the frequency of both supraventricular as well as ventricular arrhythmias. Class III antiarrhythmic drugs act by blocking repolarising currents and thereby prolong the effective refractory period of the myocardium. This is believed to facilitate termination of re-entry tachyarrhythmias. This class of drugs is developed for treatment of both supraventricular and ventricular arrhythmias. Amiodarone, sotalol, dofetilide, and ibutilide are examples of class III drugs that are currently available. Amiodarone and sotalol have other antiarrhythmic properties in addition to pure class III action, which differentiates them from the others. However, all have potential serious adverse events. Proarrhythmia, especially torsade de pointes, is a common problem making the benefit-risk ratio of these drugs a key question. Class III drugs have been evaluated in different settings: primary and secondary prevention of ventricular arrhythmias and in treatment of atrial fibrillation or flutter. Based on existing evidence there is no routine indication for antiarrhythmic drug therapy other than beta-blockers in patients at high risk of sudden death. Subgroup analyses of trials with amiodarone and dofetilide suggest that patients with atrial fibrillation may have a mortality reduction with these drugs. However, this needs to be tested in a prospective trial. Similarly, subgroups that will benefit from prophylactic treatment with class III antiarrhythmic drugs may be found based on QT-intervals or - in the future - from genetic testing. Class III drugs are effective in converting atrial fibrillation to sinus rhythm and for the maintenance of sinus rhythm after conversion. This is currently by far the most important indication for this class of drugs. As defined by recent guidelines, amiodarone and dofetilide have their place as second-line therapy except for patients with heart failure where they are first line therapy being the only drugs where the safety has been documented for this group of high risk patients.

Tedisamil: master switch of nature?

Decreasing heart rate is potentially useful in ischaemic heart disease. Tedisamil is a bradycardic agent resulting from its ability to inhibit transient outward current (I(to)) in atria. Tedisamil inhibits I(to), potassium current (IK), K(ATP) and the protein kinase A-activated chloride channel in ventricles as well as vascular IK and Ca(2+)-activated IK (IK((Ca))). Tedisamil prolongs cardiac action potentials and the corrected QT (QTc) of the ECG and also increases cardiac refractoriness. Tedisamil is anti-arrhythmic in animal models of ventricular arrhythmias and atrial flutter. The bradycardic effect of tedisamil is associated with a reduction in myocardial oxygen demand. On isolated rat ventricle, tedisamil is a positive inotrope and on isolated rabbit atria, tedisamil reverses the negative inotropic effect of pinacidil. Tedisamil contracts the isolated rat portal vein and aorta, reduces cromakalim-induced relaxations of contracted rat aorta and increases blood pressure in animals and humans. Tedisamil is 96% bound to plasma proteins, has a plasma half-life of about 10 h and is cleared from the kidney unchanged. Clinical trials have shown that the electrophysiology of tedisamil is that of a class III anti-arrhythmic. In coronary artery disease, tedisamil has no effect on inotropism and increases the threshold for angina. Potassium channel blockade with tedisamil may have advantages over calcium channel blockers or K(ATP) channel openers as an anti-ischaemic mechanism in coronary artery disease. In exercise-induced myocardial ischaemia, beta-blockers are probably favourable to tedisamil, as they will limit the increase in heart rate, contractility and blood pressure caused by sympathetic stimulation, whereas tedisamil will not. In heart failure patients, tedisamil reduces heart rate, but increases blood pressure. The usefulness of tedisamil as a bradycardic agent is limited by the increase in blood pressure. A drug that is bradycardic without increasing blood pressure would be an improvement on tedisamil as the master switch of nature for ischaemic heart disease.

Antiarrhythmic agents for atrial fibrillation: focus on prolonging atrial repolarization

Atrial fibrillation (AF) has been the subject of considerable attention and intensive clinical research in recent years. Current opinion among physicians on the management of AF favors the restoration and maintenance of normal sinus rhythm. This has several potential benefits, including the alleviation of arrhythmia-associated symptoms, hemodynamic improvements, and possibly a reduced risk of thromboembolic events. After normal sinus rhythm has been restored, antiarrhythmic therapy is necessary to reduce the frequency of AF recurrence. In the selection of an antiarrhythmic agent, both efficacy and safety should be taken into consideration. Many antiarrhythmic agents have the capacity to provoke proarrhythmia, which may result in an increase in mortality. This is of particular concern with sodium-channel blockers in the context of patients with structural heart disease. Flecainide and propafenone are well tolerated and effective in maintaining sinus rhythm in patients without significant cardiac disease but with AF. Recent interest has focused on the use of class III antiarrhythmic agents, such as amiodarone, sotalol, dofetilide (recently approved), ibutilide (approved for chemical conversion of AF and atrial flutter), and azimilide (still to be approved) in patients with AF and structural heart disease. To date, amiodarone and sotalol still hold the greatest interest, and although controlled clinical trials with these agents have been few, a number are in progress and some have been recently completed. These agents are effective in maintaining normal sinus rhythm in patients with paroxysmal and persistent AF and are associated with a low incidence of proarrhythmia when used appropriately. Because of the relative paucity of placebo-controlled trials of antiarrhythmic agents in patients with AF, experience until recently has tended to dictate treatment decisions. Increasingly, selection of drug therapy is being based on a careful and individualized benefit-risk evaluation by means of controlled clinical trials, an approach that is likely to dominate the overall approach to the control of atrial fibrillation in the largest numbers of cases of the arrhythmia. Pharmacologic therapy is likely to be dominated by compounds that exert their predominant effect by prolonging atrial repolarization.

Tedisamil in a chronic canine model of atrial flutter

Tedisamil inhibits several cardiac potassium channels including Ito, Ikr, and the adenosine triphosphate (ATP)-sensitive potassium channel (I(KATP)), which may be important in the initiation and maintenance of atrial arrhythmias. We herein report the efficacy of tedisamil in terminating and protecting against the reinduction of atrial flutter (AFL) in a conscious canine model. Sustained AFL (> 15 min) was induced in eight of 10 mongrel dogs by programmed atrial stimulation (PAS) 2-41 days after producing a surgical barrier to conduction in the right atrium. At the time of surgery, an epicardial electrode was attached to the right atrial appendage for pacing and recording. Normal saline, 1 ml/kg, was infused after 15 min of AFL as placebo. Tedisamil (1.0 mg/kg) was given intravenously after 30 min of sustained AFL while recording surface ECGs and atrial electrograms. Conversion to sinus rhythm was achieved in 10 of 10 trials (eight dogs) in a mean time of 20.5 s (SD, +/- 11.8 s). Tedisamil had a negative chronotropic effect lasting > or =2 h and was protective against the reinduction of AFL. In five dogs, PAS was able to induce AFL in only two of seven trials 2 h after drug infusion. The corrected QT interval (QTc) was lengthened for the first 15 min after tedisamil administration (mean, +/- 39.3 ms; p < 0.05), but thereafter returned to baseline. The QRS interval was not altered by tedisamil. Saline alone, given after 15 min of sustained AFL, converted AFL in one of 11 trials (eight dogs) but did not alter the RR interval, QTc, or QRS interval compared with values measured during AFL. No significant adverse effects of tedisamil were observed. The results indicate that tedisamil is effective in interrupting and/or preventing reinduction of canine AFL, possibly by prolonging atrial refractoriness through inhibition of one or more potassium ion repolarizing currents in atrial muscle. Further studies are required to address the exact mechanism by which tedisamil exerts its antiarrhythmic effect.

Current antiarrhythmic drugs: an overview of mechanisms of action and potential clinical utility

Reorientation in drug therapy to control cardiac arrhythmias continues to evolve in the wake of ongoing refinements in techniques and indications for radiofrequency ablation and the use of implantable devices for atrial and ventricular arrhythmias. The role of sodium channel blockers continues to be questioned, and data from clinical trials indicate that the use of this class of drugs should be limited to control symptoms in patients who have arrhythmias and either no or minimal heart disease. The decline in the use of sodium channel blockers has led to greater use of beta blockers and complex Class III agents, such as sotalol and amiodarone, as both primary therapy and adjunctive therapy with implantable defibrillators in patients with cardiac disease of varying degrees of ventricular dysfunction. Success with these Class III agents in the context of their side effects has led to the synthesis and characterization of compounds with simpler ion channel-blocking properties. The need for such compounds stemmed from the observation that atrial fibrillation (AF) as an arrhythmia is, for the most part, still not amenable to curative therapy by interventional procedures. The isolated block of the rapid component of the delayed rectifier current (IKr) has been found to have either a neutral (e.g., dofetilide) or deleterious (e.g., d-sotalol) effect on mortality in survivors of myocardial infarction. Thus, the objective of drug development should be the appropriate match between the substrate and an antiarrhythmic drug. The so-called pure Class III agents have been shown to have beneficial antifibrillatory effects in patients with AF. They are effective in inducing acute chemical conversion, preventing paroxysmal AF, and maintaining sinus rhythm in patients with persistent AF restored to sinus rhythm with DC cardioversion. AF is a complex arrhythmia, undoubtedly a result of multifaceted derangement of atrial ionic currents. Attention has therefore focused on newer compounds that have the propensity to block more than one ion channel. Examples of such agents are tedisamil and azimilide, the latter having been studied extensively in humans. It is the first of the Class III agents that block both components (IKr and IKs) of the delayed rectifier current, which results in a spectrum of electrophysiologic properties that includes lack of rate or use dependency in terms of effect on repolarization and refractoriness of atrial and ventricular myocardium. Available but unpublished clinical data indicate that azimilide may be effective over a wide range of tachycardia cycle lengths with a low incidence of torsades de pointes. In these respects, its properties, at least in terms of its use in AF, resemble those of amiodarone. However, the drug has little or no effect on AV conduction, which precludes the modulation of ventricular response in patients relapsing to AF.

Antiarrhythmic drugs: a reorientation in light of recent developments in the control of disorders of rhythm

Numerous developments in our knowledge of arrhythmias during the past decade or so have had a major influence on antiarrhythmic drug therapy. It has become increasingly evident that arrhythmias merit treatment not only for the relief of symptoms, with improvement in quality of life, but also for the prolongation of survival by decreasing arrhythmic deaths. No longer can mere suppression of arrhythmias, symptomatic or asymptomatic, be equated with prolonged survival. We now know that antiarrhythmic drugs that act by blocking sodium channels can increase mortality and that the most important determinants of arrhythmia mortality are the degree and nature of ventricular dysfunction. To these considerations must be added the advances in nonpharmacologic approaches to controlling cardiac arrhythmias. There has been a shift to the use of implantable devices and of drugs with alternative modes of action, such as beta blockers and class III drugs (e.g., sotalol, amiodarone). However, the side-effect profiles of these 2 classes of compounds have led to the synthesis and characterization of agents that act simply by blocking > or = 1 membrane ion channels. The isolated block of the rapid component of the delayed rectifier potassium current (IKr) has been associated with potent antifibrillatory activity in the atria, with a neutral (e.g., with dofetilide) or deleterious (with d-sotalol) effect on mortality in postinfarct survivors. Therefore, the focus now is on compounds that can block > 1 ion channel (e.g., tedisamil and azimilide). Azimilide is the first of the class III agents that blocks both components of the delayed rectifier potassium current. The drug's overall action is associated with a spectrum of electrophysiologic properties that hold promise in the control of atrial and ventricular arrhythmias, with potential for improving survival in patients at risk for cardiac arrest.