Evidence map›Paper›PMID 16353940›Full record

ReviewThe AAPS journal2005

Pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic modeling in the data analysis and interpretation of drug-induced QT/QTc prolongation.

Vladimir Piotrovsky

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in The AAPS journal, 2005. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 54 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
54citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

54 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Trial
  12. Trial
  13. Trial
  14. Moxifloxacin versus placebo modeling of the QT interval.Journal of pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics · 2012
    Trial
  15. Article
  16. Beyond the linear model in concentration-QT analysis.Journal of pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics · 2025
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Concentration-QTc analysis for single arm studies.Journal of pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics · 2021
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author.

Vladimir PiotrovskyAdvanced Modeling & Simulation, J&J Pharmaceutical Research & Development, Beerse, Belgium. vpiotrov@prdbe.jnj.com

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In this review, factors affecting the QT interval and the methods that are currently in use in the analysis of drug effects on the QT interval duration are overviewed with the emphasis on (population) pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic (PK-PD) modeling. Among which the heart rate (HR) and the circadian rhythm are most important since they may interfere with the drug effect and need to be taken into account in the data analysis. The HR effect or the RR interval (the distance between 2 consecutive R peaks) effect is commonly eliminated before any further analysis, and many formulae have been suggested to correct QT intervals for changes in RR intervals. The most often used are Bazett and Fridericia formulae introduced in 1920. They are both based on the power function and differ in the exponent parameter. However, both assume the same exponent for different individuals. More recent findings do not confirm this assumption, and individualized correction is necessary to avoid under- or overcorrection that may lead to artificial observations of drug-induced QT interval prolongation. Despite the fact that circadian rhythm in QT and QTc intervals is a well-documented phenomenon, it is usually overlooked when drug effects are evaluated. This may result in a false-positive outcome of the analysis as the QTc peak due to the circadian rhythm may coincide with the peak of the drug plasma concentration. In view of these effects interfering with a potential drug effect on the QTc interval and having in mind low precision of QT interval measurements, a preferable way to evaluate the drug effect is to apply a population PK-PD modeling. In the literature, however, there are only a few publications in which population PK-PD modeling is applied to QT interval prolongation data, and they all refer to antiarrhythmic agents. In this review, after the most important sources of variability are outlined, a comprehensive population PK-PD model is presented that incorporates an individualized QT interval correction, a circadian rhythm in the individually corrected QT intervals, and a drug effect. The model application is illustrated using real data obtained with 2 compounds differing in their QT interval prolongation potential. The usefulness of combining data of several studies is stressed. Finally, the standard approach based on the raw observations and formal statistics, as described in the Preliminary Concept paper of the International Conference on Harmonization, is briefly compared with the method based on population PK-PD modeling, and the advantages of the latter are outlined.

Indexed as

Drug-Related Side Effects and Adverse ReactionsModels, BiologicalAnimalsHumansLong QT SyndromePharmaceutical PreparationsStatistics as TopicPharmaceutical Preparations

Identifiers

PMID16353940
PMCPMC2751265

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.