Trial reportClinical pharmacology in drug development2018
Evaluation of Eluxadoline Effect on Cardiac Repolarization.
Trial report in Clinical pharmacology in drug development, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Single-dose Pharmacokinetics of Eluxadoline in Healthy Participants With Normal Renal Function and Participants With Renal Impairment.Clinical pharmacology in drug development · 2023Article
- An Open-Label Study to Evaluate the Effect of Eluxadoline on the Single-Dose Pharmacokinetics of Midazolam in Healthy Participants.Clinical pharmacology in drug development · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study evaluated the effects of eluxadoline, a mixed μ-opioid receptor (OR) and κ-OR agonist and δ-OR antagonist, on cardiac repolarization. This evaluator-blinded, placebo- and positive-controlled, 4-period crossover study randomized healthy men and women to single oral doses of eluxadoline (therapeutic dose 100 mg or supratherapeutic dose 1000 mg), moxifloxacin 400 mg, or placebo. QT data were corrected using individual custom correction (QTcI). The primary endpoint was the change from baseline in QTcI intervals (ΔQTcI) between eluxadoline and placebo (ΔΔQTcI). An upper bound of the 95% confidence interval around ΔΔQTcI of 10 milliseconds was considered clinically significant. Concentration-QTc data were analyzed using a repeated-measures, mixed-effects linear model. Sixty-four volunteers were treated, and 58 completed the study. Assay sensitivity was demonstrated with moxifloxacin (noted by ΔΔQTcI of 11.94 milliseconds). The maximum ΔΔQTcI for eluxadoline 1000 mg was 4.10 milliseconds 1 hour postdose (1-sided 95% upper confidence bound, 5.81 milliseconds), and for eluxadoline 100 mg was 1.20 milliseconds at 0.5 hours postdose (1-sided 95% upper confidence bound, 2.91 milliseconds). Primary ΔΔQTcI results were confirmed using Fridericia's formula for QTc. Categorical, morphological, and concentration-QTc analyses were consistent with the primary and secondary findings. There were no significant gender effects on ΔΔQTcI values. The most common adverse events were contact dermatitis and nausea (12.5% each) and dizziness (10.9%); adverse events were more frequent in the eluxadoline 1000 mg group. In conclusion, eluxadoline, at therapeutic or supratherapeutic doses, did not significantly prolong QT intervals, and was safe and generally well tolerated in this study population.
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.