Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33977390›Full record

ArticleJournal of pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics2021

Concentration-QTc analysis with two or more correlated baselines.

Yasushi Orihashi, Yuji Kumagai

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

2 authors.

Yasushi OrihashiDepartment of Clinical Pharmacology, Tokai University School of Medicine, Isehara, Kanagawa, 259-1193, Japan. y.orih@kitasato-u.ac.jp.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5605-947X
Yuji KumagaiClinical Trial Center, Kitasato University Hospital, Sagamihara, Kanagawa, 252-0375, Japan.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The relationship between drug concentration and QTc interval is typically evaluated by applying the standard analysis model proposed in a scientific whitepaper by Garnett et al. ( https://doi.org/10.1007/s10928-017-9558-5 ). The model is a mixed effects model in which a baseline QTc interval is included as a covariate. Two or more baseline QTc intervals are sometimes observed for a study participant, such as time-matched baselines on a baseline day in parallel studies, or pre-dose baselines in each period in crossover studies. In such situations, the baseline adjustments are not straightforward because these baselines correlate with not only the corresponding QTc intervals after drug administration, but also other QTc intervals at different timepoints for parallel studies, or those in different periods for crossover studies. In this study, we compared three analysis models through simulations and clinical study examples in settings in which two or more baselines were observed for a subject. We compared a model without baseline adjustment, a model with baseline adjustment, and a model in which baseline and baseline mean were included as covariates. In the simulations and clinical study examples, the model with baseline and baseline mean as covariates demonstrated higher accuracy and power than the other models. This model assumed a specific covariance structure in QTc intervals, which well approximated the correlations between QTc intervals within and between days. When there are two or more baselines in concentration-QTc analyses, the baseline mean should be included as a covariate in addition to the corresponding baseline.

Indexed as

Cross-Over StudiesElectrocardiographyHeart RateHumansLong QT SyndromePharmaceutical PreparationsPharmaceutical PreparationsBaselineConcentration-QTc modelICH E14Mixed effects modelQTc interval

Identifiers

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.