ICH E14-Compatible Holter Bin Method and its Equivalence to Individual Heart Rate Correction in the Assessment of Drug-Induced QT Changes.

E14-Compatible Holter Bin and QTcI Introduction The Holter bin method evaluates QT interval changes in the presence of heart rate changes without correcting the QT interval. However, the method does not allow time-matched comparisons, thus contradicting available guidance and good practice. We report a modification of the methods that allows time-matched comparisons without any heart rate correction. Methods and Results The modified Holter bin method (a) finds matching baseline heart rates for each QT reading on treatment and (b) calculates ΔQT values from the QT intervals on baseline and on treatment that match in heart rates. The difference between ΔQT values on active treatment and placebo provides the ΔΔQT value. The method was compared with the individual correction method in the data of the mirabegron thorough QT study in which supratherapeutic doses of this β3-adrenoceptor agonist led to substantial heart rate changes. The modified Holter bin method reproduced closely the results obtained with the individual heart rate correction. At all time points of the mirabegron study, the differences between the mean ΔΔQT values by the Holter bin method and the individual correction method were below 1 millisecond. Compared to the individual correction, the Holter bin method led to slight increases in the standard deviations of ΔΔQT values, but these were on average below 0.25 millisecond. Conclusions The Holter bin methodology can be modified to make it compatible with the available guidance and with good practice of clinical investigations. The results obtained with the modified Holter bin method are practically the same as with individualized heart rate corrected QT intervals. The close correspondence between the 2 methods demonstrates that the present possibilities of comparing QT interval duration in the presence of experiment-induced heart rate differences are not influenced by methodological artifacts. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]