ReviewDrug safety2010
Thorough QT Studies: Questions and Quandaries.
Review in Drug safety, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
18 citing papers in PubMed, 54 citations in OpenAlex.
- Evaluation of cardiac parameters and other safety outcomes of brolucizumab treatment in patients with neovascular age-related macular degeneration.Pharmacology research & perspectives · 2022Trial
- The effects of moxifloxacin on QTc interval in healthy Korean male subjects.Drugs in R&D · 2014Trial
- Exenatide at therapeutic and supratherapeutic concentrations does not prolong the QTc interval in healthy subjects.British journal of clinical pharmacology · 2013Trial
- Effect of nalmefene 20 and 80 mg on the corrected QT interval and T-wave morphology: a randomized, double-blind, parallel-group, placebo- and moxifloxacin-controlled, single-centre study.Clinical drug investigation · 2011Trial
- From Empirical to More Precise Correction: Multidimensional Performance Evaluation of QTc Formulas in a Cohort of Healthy Asian Youth.Journal of the American Heart Association · 2026Article
- Conundrum of Clinical QTc Monitoring.Drug safety · 2022Article
- Importance of QT/RR hysteresis correction in studies of drug-induced QTc interval changes.Journal of pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics · 2018Article
- Model-Based Evaluation of Exenatide Effects on the QT Interval in Healthy Subjects Following Continuous IV Infusion.Journal of clinical pharmacology · 2017Article
- Influence of Meals and Glycemic Changes on QT Interval Dynamics.Journal of clinical pharmacology · 2017Article
- Drug-Induced QT/QTc Interval Shortening: Lessons from Drug-Induced QT/QTc Prolongation.Drug safety · 2016Review
- Impact of electrocardiographic data quality on moxifloxacin response in thorough QT/QTc studies.Drug safety · 2014Article
- Baseline correction in parallel thorough QT studies.Drug safety · 2013Article
- Early investigation of QTc liability: the role of multiple ascending dose (MAD) study.Drug safety · 2012Review
- Update on the cardiac safety of moxifloxacin.Current drug safety · 2012Article
- Conventional QT variability measurement vs. template matching techniques: comparison of performance using simulated and real ECG.PloS one · 2012Article
- Evaluation of the effect of dapagliflozin on cardiac repolarization: a thorough QT/QTc study.Diabetes therapy : research, treatment and education of diabetes and related disorders · 2011Article
- Review
- Does the prulifloxacin ECG study prove cardiac safety of the drug?Clinical drug investigation · 2010Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The International Conference on Harmonisation E14 Guidance was successful in largely standardizing the conduct of the so-called thorough QT/QTc studies (TQTS). Nevertheless, there is still a spectrum of frequently encountered problems with details of design, conduct and interpretation of TQTS. Several of these challenges are reviewed here, starting with explaining that the TQTS goal is only to identify drugs for which the proarrhythmic risk might be considered excluded for the purposes of regulatory benefit-risk assessment. Suggestions are made on how to categorize and quantify or exclude proarrhythmic risk if the TQTS is positive. There is a conceptual need for TQTS, and this is discussed, together with reasons why restricted clinical registries cannot prove the absence of proarrhythmic liability of any drug. Appropriate drug doses investigated in TQTS should be derived from the maximum clinically tolerable dose rather than from the known or expected therapeutic dose. With the help of concentration-QTc modelling, the standard therapeutic dose can be omitted from TQTS, especially if the study is expected to be negative. Conditions for single-dose TQTS acceptability are reviewed. The role of the so-called positive control is assessed, contrasting the role of a same-class comparator for the investigated drug. A single 400 mg dose of moxifloxacin is advocated as the present 'gold standard' assay sensitivity test. The necessity of careful placebo control is explained and the frequency of ECG assessments is considered. The central tendency and outlier analyses are discussed, together with the correct approaches to baseline adjustment. The review concludes that the design and interpretation of TQTS must not be approached with mechanistic stereotypes, and highlights the importance of relating the QTc changes to drug plasma levels.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.