Search

Drug-induced QT prolongation (DI-QTP) is a clinical entity in which administration of a human ether-à-go-go–related gene/rapid delayed rectifier potassium current blocker such as dofetilide prolongs the cardiac action potential duration (APD) and the QT interval on the electrocardiogram. Inhibition of serum and glucocorticoid regulated kinase-1 (SGK1) reduces the APD at 90% repolarization (APD90) in induced pluripotent stem cell–derived cardiomyocytes (iPSC-CMs) derived from patients with congenital long QT syndrome. Here, we test the efficacy of 2 novel SGK1 inhibitors—SGK1-I1 and SGK1-I2—in iPSC-CM models of dofetilide-induced APD prolongation. Normal iPSC-CMs were treated with dofetilide to produce a DI-QTP iPSC-CM model. SGK1-I1's and SGK1-I2's therapeutic efficacy for shortening the dofetilide-induced APD90 prolongation was compared to mexiletine. The APD90 values were recorded 4 hours after treatment using a voltage-sensing dye. The APD90 was prolonged in normal iPSC-CMs treated with dofetilide (673 ± 8 ms vs 436 ± 4 ms; P <.0001). While 10 mM mexiletine shortened the APD90 of dofetilide-treated iPSC-CMs from 673 ± 4 to 563 ± 8 ms (46% attenuation; P <.0001), 30 nM of SGK1-I1 shortened the APD90 from 673 ± 8 to 502 ± 7 ms (72% attenuation; P <.0001). Additionally, 300 nM SGK1-I2 shortened the APD90 of dofetilide-treated iPSC-CMs from 673 ± 8 to 460 ± 7 ms (90% attenuation; P <.0001). These novel SGK1-Is substantially attenuated the pathological APD prolongation in a human heart cell model of DI-QTP. These preclinical data support the development of this therapeutic strategy to counter and neutralize DI-QTP, thereby increasing the safety profile for patients receiving drugs with torsadogenic potential. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Presently, acute pharmacological termination of paroxysmal supraventricular tachycardia (PSVT) unresponsive to patient-initiated vagal maneuvers requires in-hospital intervention. Etripamil, a fast-acting, nondihydropyridine, L-type calcium channel blocker, is formulated as an intranasal spray to rapidly terminate atrioventricular (AV) nodal-dependent PSVT in a medically unsupervised setting. The NODE-301 study did not meet its prespecified primary end point of PSVT conversion over 5 hours following a single dose of etripamil 70 mg. However, analysis at earlier time points demonstrated etripamil treatment effect during the first 30 minutes, consistent with its expected rapid onset and short duration of action. This led to the design of the RAPID study, which includes a new dosing regimen (up to 2 etripamil 70 mg doses separated by 10 minutes) to increase the exposure and pharmacodynamic effect of etripamil. The primary objective of RAPID (NCT03464019) is to determine if etripamil self-administered by patients is superior to placebo in terminating PSVT in an at-home setting. The secondary objective is to evaluate the safety of etripamil when self-administered by patients without medical supervision. Additional efficacy end points include the proportion of patients requiring additional medical intervention in an emergency department to terminate PSVT and patient-reported outcomes. After successfully completing a test dose to assess the safety of 2 70 mg doses of etripamil during sinus rhythm, approximately 500 patients will be randomized 1:1 to etripamil or placebo to accrue 180 positively adjudicated AV nodal-dependent PSVT events for treatment with the study drug. Etripamil may offer a new alternative to the current in-hospital treatment modality, providing for safe and effective at-home termination of PSVT. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Elevated blood pressure increases the risk of adverse cardiovascular events and death. Accordingly, characterizing the off-target blood pressure effects of drugs is an important component of regulatory benefit-risk assessment and post-marketing clinical decision-making. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) released draft guidance in May 2018 outlining these considerations and seeking discussion regarding opportunities to improve or reassess methods and analytical techniques to measure and interpret the pressor effects of drugs. Toward this effort, the Duke-Margolis Center for Health Policy—under a cooperative agreement with the FDA—convened a public workshop to bring the stakeholder community together to discuss these opportunities. The following are summary statements and recommendations discussed at the workshop to improve blood pressure assessment throughout the product lifecycle, from development and regulatory review to clinical care. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A Cardiac Safety Research Consortium / Health and Environmental Sciences Institute / FDA-sponsored Think Tank Meeting was convened in Washington, DC, on May 21, 2018, to bring together scientists, clinicians, and regulators from multiple geographic regions to evaluate progress to date in the Comprehensive In Vitro Proarrhythmia Assay (CiPA) Initiative, a new paradigm to evaluate proarrhythmic risk. Study reports from the 4 different components of the CiPA paradigm (ionic current studies, in silico modeling to generate a Torsade Metric Score, human induced pluripotent stem cell–derived ventricular cardiomyocytes, and clinical ECG assessments including J-Tpeakc) were presented and discussed. This paper provides a high-level summary of the CiPA data presented at the meeting. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The novel direct oral anticoagulants (NOACs) represent a major advance in oral anticoagulant therapy and are replacing vitamin K antagonists as the preferred options for many indications. Given in fixed doses without routine laboratory monitoring, they have been shown to be at least as effective in reducing thromboembolic stroke as dose-adjusted warfarin in phase 3 randomized trials and less likely to cause hemorrhagic stroke. Pharmacokinetic and/or pharmacodynamic subanalyses of the major NOAC trials in patients with atrial fibrillation have established relationships between clinical characteristics, and drug levels and/or pharmacodynamic responses with both efficacy and safety. Based on these analyses, pharmaceutical manufacturers and regulatory authorities have provided contraindications and dosing recommendations based on clinical characteristics that are associated with drug levels and/or pharmacodynamic responses, stroke reduction, and bleeding risk to optimize the risk-benefit profile of the NOACs in the real world. The current fixed-dosing strategy of NOACs has triggered discussions about the potential value of laboratory monitoring and dose adjustment in customizing drug exposure to further improve the safety and efficacy of the NOACs in patients with atrial fibrillation. As there is neither high-quality evidence nor consensus about the potential role of laboratory monitoring and dose adjustment for the NOACs, a Cardiac Research Safety Consortium "Think Tank" meeting was held at the American College of Cardiology Heart House in December 2015 to discussions these issues. This manuscript reports on the deliberations and the conclusions reached at that meeting. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Pharmacologic termination of paroxysmal supraventricular tachycardia (PSVT) often requires medically supervised intervention. Intranasal etripamil, is an investigational fast-acting, nondihydropyridine, L-type calcium channel blocker, designed for unsupervised self-administration to terminate atrioventricular nodal-dependent PSVT. Phase 2 results showed potential safety and efficacy of etripamil in 104 patients with PSVT.Methods: NODE-301, a phase 3, multicenter, double-blind, placebo-controlled study evaluated the efficacy and safety of etripamil nasal spray administered, unsupervised in patients with symptomatic sustained PSVT. After a medically supervised etripamil test dose while in sinus rhythm, patients were randomized 2:1 to receive etripamil 70 mg or placebo. When PSVT symptoms developed, patients applied a cardiac monitor and attempted a vagal maneuver; if symptoms persisted, they self-administered blinded treatment. An independent Adjudication Committee reviewed continuous electrocardiogram recordings. The primary efficacy endpoint was termination of adjudicated PSVT within 5 hours after study drug administration.Results: NODE-301 accrued 156 positively adjudicated PSVT events treated with etripamil (n=107) or placebo (n=49). The hazard ratio for the primary endpoint, time-to-conversion to sinus rhythm during the 5-hour observation period, was 1.086 (95% CI, 0.726-1.623; P=0.12). In predefined sensitivity analyses, etripamil effects (compared with placebo) occurred at 3, 5, 10, 20, and 30 minutes (P<0.05). For example, at 30 minutes, there was a 53.7% of SVT conversion in the treatment arm compared to 34.7% in the placebo arm (hazard ratio, 1.87 [95% CI, 1.09-3.22]; P=0.02). Etripamil was well tolerated; adverse events were mainly related to transient nasal discomfort and congestion (19.6% and 8.0%, respectively, of randomized treatment-emergent adverse events.Conclusions: Although the primary 5-hour efficacy endpoint was not met, analyses at earlier time points indicated an etripamil treatment effect in terminating PSVT. Etripamil self-administration during PSVT was safe and well tolerated. These results support continued clinical development of etripamil nasal spray for self-administration during PSVT in a medically unsupervised setting.Registration: URL: https://www.Clinicaltrials: gov; Unique identifier: NCT03464019. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The Cardiac Safety Research Consortium (CSRC), a transparent, public-private partnership established in 2005 as a Critical Path Program and formalized in 2006 under a Memorandum of Understanding between the United States Food and Drug Administration and Duke University, is entering its second decade. Our continuing goal is to advance paradigms for more efficient regulatory science related to the cardiovascular safety of new therapeutics, both in the United States and globally, particularly where such safety questions add burden to innovative research and development. Operationally, CSRC brings together a broad base of stakeholders from academia, industry, and government agencies in a collaborative forum focused on identifying barriers and then creating novel solutions through shared data, expertise, and collaborative research. This white paper provides a brief overview of the Consortium's activities in its first decade and a context for some of our current activities and future directions. The growth and success of the CSRC have been primarily driven by members' active participation and the development of goodwill and trust throughout our membership, which have facilitated novel collaborations across traditionally competitive or contentious stakeholder boundaries. The continued expansion of our base of participating academicians, industry experts, and regulators will define the Consortium's success in our second decade. It is our hope that sharing our endeavors to date will stimulate additional participation in the CSRC and also provide a model for other groups starting to develop similar collaborative forums. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This white paper provides a summary of presentations and discussions that were held at an Anticoagulant-Induced Bleeding and Reversal Agents Think Tank co-sponsored by the Cardiac Safety Research Consortium and the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) at the FDA's White Oak Headquarters on April 22, 2014. Attention focused on a development pathway for reversal agents for the novel oral anticoagulants (NOACs). This is important because anticoagulation is still widely underused for stroke prevention in patients with atrial fibrillation. Undertreatment persists, although NOACs, in general, overcome some of the difficulties associated with anticoagulation provided by vitamin K antagonists. One reason for the lack of a wider uptake is the absence of NOAC reversal agents. As there are neither widely accepted academic and industry standards nor a definitive regulatory policy on the development of such reversal agents, this meeting provided a forum for leaders in the fields of cardiovascular clinical trials and cardiovascular safety to discuss the issues and develop recommendations. Attendees included representatives from pharmaceutical companies; regulatory agencies; end point adjudication specialist groups; contract research organizations; and active, academically based physicians. There was wide and solid consensus that NOACs overall offer improvements in convenience, efficacy, and safety compared with warfarin, even without reversal agents. Still, it was broadly accepted that it would be helpful to have reversal agents available for clinicians to use. Because it is not feasible to do definitive outcomes studies demonstrating a reversal agent's clinical benefits, it was felt that these agents could be approved for use in life-threatening bleeding situations if the molecules were well characterized preclinically, their pharmacodynamic and pharmacokinetic profiles were well understood, and showed no harmful adverse events in early human testing. There was also consensus that after such approval, efforts should be made to augment the available clinical information until such time as there is a body of evidence to demonstrate real-world clinical outcomes with the reversal agents. No recommendations were made for more generalized use of these agents in the setting of non–life-threatening situations. This article reflects the views of the authors and should not be construed to represent FDA's views or policies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This White Paper provides a summary of presentations and discussions at a Cardiovascular Safety Outcome Trials Think Tank cosponsored by the Cardiac Safety Research Consortium, the US Food and Drug Administration, and the American College of Cardiology, held at American College of Cardiology's Heart House, Washington, DC, on February 19, 2014. Studies to assess cardiovascular (CV) risk of a new drug are sometimes requested by regulators to resolve ambiguous safety signals seen during its development or among other members of its class. Think Tank participants thought that important considerations in undertaking such studies were as follows: (1) plausibility —how likely it is that a possible signal indicating risk is real, based on strength of evidence, and/or whether a plausible mechanism of action for potential CV harm has been identified; (2) relevance —what relative and absolute CV risk would need to be excluded to determine that the drug had an acceptable benefit-to-risk balance for its use in the intended patient population; and (3) how plausibility and relevance influence the timing and approach to further safety assessment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This white paper provides a summary of presentations and discussions at a cardiovascular (CV) end point adjudication think tank cosponsored by the Cardiac Safety Research Committee and the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) that was convened at the FDA's White Oak headquarters on November 6, 2013. Attention was focused on the lack of clarity concerning the need for end point adjudication in both CV and non-CV trials: there is currently an absence of widely accepted academic or industry standards and a definitive regulatory policy on how best to structure and use clinical end point committees (CECs). This meeting therefore provided a forum for leaders in the fields of CV clinical trials and CV safety to develop a foundation of initial best practice recommendations for use in future CEC charters. Attendees included representatives from pharmaceutical companies, regulatory agencies, end point adjudication specialist groups, clinical research organizations, and active, academically based adjudicators. The manuscript presents recommendations from the think tank regarding when CV end point adjudication should be considered in trials conducted by cardiologists and by noncardiologists as well as detailing key issues in the composition of a CEC and its charter. In addition, it presents several recommended best practices for the establishment and operation of CECs. The science underlying CV event adjudication is evolving, and suggestions for additional areas of research will be needed to continue to advance this science. This manuscript does not constitute regulatory guidance. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article discusses statistical methodologies and clinical development approaches to prospectively evaluate the cardiovascular (CV) risk of new antidiabetic treatments for Type 2 diabetes. It mentions the guidance from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and European MedicinesAgency (EMA) for assessing safety of antidiabetic therapies. It states that the sponsors of drug trial should compare the incidence of major CV events before submission of a new drug application.

Glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists, used to treat type 2 diabetes mellitus, are associated with small reductions in systolic blood pressure (SBP) and increases in heart rate. However, findings based on clinic measurements do not adequately assess a drug's 24-hour pharmacodynamic profile. The effects of dulaglutide, a once-weekly glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist, on BP and heart rate were investigated using ambulatory BP monitoring. Patients (n=755; 56±10 years; 81% white; 48% women), with type 2 diabetes mellitus, taking ≥1 oral antihyperglycemic medication, with a clinic BP between 90/60 and 140/90 mmHg were randomized to dulaglutide (1.5 or 0.75 mg) or placebo subcutaneously for 26 weeks. Ambulatory BP monitoring was performed at baseline and at 4, 16, and 26 weeks. The primary end point was change from baseline to week 16 in mean 24-hour SBP, a tree gatekeeping strategy compared the effects of dulaglutide to placebo. Both doses of dulaglutide were noninferior to placebo for changes in 24-hour SBP and diastolic blood pressure, and dulaglutide 1.5 mg significantly reduced SBP (least squares mean difference [95% confidence interval]), -2.8 mmHg [-4.6, -1.0]; P≥0.001). Dulaglutide 0.75 mg was noninferior to placebo (1.6 bpm; [0.3, 2.9]; P≥0.02) for 24-hour heart rate (least squares mean difference [95% confidence interval]), but dulaglutide 1.5 mg was not (2.8 bpm [1.5, 4.2]). Dulaglutide 1.5 mg was associated with a reduction in 24-hour SBP and an increase in 24-hour heart rate. The mechanisms responsible for the observed effects remain to be clarified. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This white paper provides a summary of a scientific proposal presented at a Cardiac Safety Research Consortium/Health and Environmental Sciences Institute/Food and Drug Administration–sponsored Think Tank, held at Food and Drug Administration's White Oak facilities, Silver Spring, MD, on July 23, 2013, with the intention of moving toward consensus on defining a new paradigm in the field of cardiac safety in which proarrhythmic risk would be primarily assessed using nonclinical in vitro human models based on solid mechanistic considerations of torsades de pointes proarrhythmia. This new paradigm would shift the emphasis from the present approach that strongly relies on QTc prolongation (a surrogate marker of proarrhythmia) and could obviate the clinical Thorough QT study during later drug development. These discussions represent current thinking and suggestions for furthering our knowledge and understanding of the public health case for adopting a new, integrated nonclinical in vitro/in silico paradigm, the Comprehensive In Vitro Proarrhythmia Assay, for the assessment of a candidate drug's proarrhythmic liability, and for developing a public-private collaborative program to characterize the data content, quality, and approaches required to assess proarrhythmic risk in the absence of a Thorough QT study. This paper seeks to encourage multistakeholder input regarding this initiative and does not represent regulatory guidance. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Recent advances in electrocardiographic monitoring and waveform analysis have significantly improved the ability to detect drug-induced changes in cardiac repolarization manifested as changes in the QT/corrected QT interval. These advances have also improved the ability to detect drug-induced changes in cardiac conduction. This White Paper summarizes current opinion, reached by consensus among experts at the Cardiac Safety Research Consortium, on the assessment of electrocardiogram-based safety measurements of the PR and QRS intervals, representing atrioventricular and ventricular conduction, respectively, during drug development. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The ability to make informed benefit-risk assessments for potentially cardiotoxic new compounds is of considerable interest and importance at the public health, drug development, and individual patient levels. Cardiac imaging approaches in the evaluation of drug-induced myocardial dysfunction will likely play an increasing role. However, the optimal choice of myocardial imaging modality and the recommended frequency of monitoring are undefined. These decisions are complicated by the array of imaging techniques, which have varying sensitivities, specificities, availabilities, local expertise, safety, and costs, and by the variable time-course of tissue damage, functional myocardial depression, or recovery of function. This White Paper summarizes scientific discussions of members of the Cardiac Safety Research Consortium on the main factors to consider when selecting nonclinical and clinical cardiac function imaging techniques in drug development. We focus on 3 commonly used imaging modalities in the evaluation of cardiac function: echocardiography, magnetic resonance imaging, and radionuclide (nuclear) imaging and highlight areas for future research. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Electrocardiographic monitoring is an integral component of the clinical assessment of cardiac safety of all compounds in development. The International Conference on Harmonization of Technical Requirements for Registration of Pharmaceuticals for Human Use E14 guideline recommends a dedicated study to evaluate drug-induced effects on cardiac repolarization (“thorough QT/QTc study”). There has been limited published information on QT interval changes secondary to therapeutic proteins; however, in theory, biologic therapies may affect cardiac electrical activity either directly or indirectly. This article summarizes scientific discussions of members of the Cardiac Safety Research Consortium and includes possible approaches to consider for the clinical evaluation of drug-induced QT prolongation in development programs of therapeutic proteins. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Lipid lowering through statin therapy significantly reduces the risk of cardiovascular events. The ENHANCE study is an international 2-year, randomized, double-blind, controlled trial designed to test the hypothesis that treatment of hypercholesterolemia by use of 2 complementary agents, ezetimibe (a specific cholesterol absorption inhibitor) and simvastatin (a 3-hydroxy-3-methylglutaryl coenzyme A reductase inhibitor), will result in larger beneficial effects on carotid artery intima-media thickness (CA IMT) than simvastatin monotherapy. Methods: The study will recruit 725 men and women with heterozygous familial hypercholesterolemia. After a placebo washout period, participants are randomized to receive daily administration of either simvastatin 80 mg and ezetimibe 10 mg or simvastatin 80 mg and placebo. The ENHANCE trial uses novel state-of-the-art single-frame digital image acquisition and rigorous quality assurance and control. Results: The primary end point is mean change from baseline to 2 years in CA IMT, using composite measures from the right and left far wall common carotid artery, carotid bulb, and internal carotid artery. Secondary end points include (1) the proportion of participants who exhibit reductions in CA IMT, (2) the change in maximum far wall IMT, (3) the proportion of participants who develop new carotid artery plaques, and (4) the changes in carotid plus common femoral artery IMT. Conclusions: This study addresses the question of whether a regimen that uses drugs with different mechanisms of action will be of further benefit in terms of atherosclerosis reduction compared to statin monotherapy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]