Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22776041›Full record

ArticleBritish journal of pharmacology2012

Ions, equations and electrons: the evolving role of computer simulations in cardiac electrophysiology safety evaluations.

Gary Gintant

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in British journal of pharmacology, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. A web portal for in-silico action potential predictions.Journal of pharmacological and toxicological methods
    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.

Gary GintantAbbott Laboratories, Abbott Park, IL 60064-6119, USA. gary.gintant@abbott.com

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Reliable preclinical cardiac safety evaluations of drug candidates are essential for selecting the best therapeutic agents. Advanced automated patch clamp technologies now allow for characterizing drug effects on multiple cardiac currents, enabling subsequent simulations of integrated electrophysiological responses on cellular, tissue and organ levels. In this issue, Mirams et al. summarize the strengths and limitations of models and simulations predicting drug-induced electrophysiological responses, emphasizing delayed repolarization and Torsades de Pointes pro-arrhythmia. The utility of computational approaches is contingent upon realistic models of ventricular electrophysiology, robust characterization of drug-channel interactions and an understanding of channel-myocyte interactions and pro-arrhythmic mechanisms. Simulations evaluating effects on repolarization (hazard identification) should aid in selecting safer drug candidates early in drug discovery, while simulations evaluating risk of Torsades de Pointes (incorporating known risk factors) should quantify pro-arrhythmic risk and reduce the need for costly clinical QT studies later in development. The wider adoption of realistic models and simulation studies will depend on simulation performance compared with 'gold standard' clinical findings.

Indexed as

Drug-Related Side Effects and Adverse ReactionsModels, CardiovascularAlgorithmsComputer SimulationDrug Evaluation, PreclinicalElectronsElectrophysiologic Techniques, CardiacHeartHumansIonsIons

Identifiers

PMID22776041
PMCPMC3492976

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.