ArticleFrontiers in cardiovascular medicine2024
Non-invasive assessment of proarrhythmic risks associated with isoprenaline and the dietary supplement ingredient synephrine using human induced pluripotent stem cell-derived cardiomyocytes.
Article in Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Lusitropic effect of Aurantii Fructus Immaturus extract on isolated mouse ventricular myocardium.Journal of natural medicines · 2026Article
- A machine learning platform for genotype-specific cardiotoxicity risk prediction using patient-derived iPSC-CMs.Journal of advanced research · 2026Article
- p-Synephrine: an overview of physicochemical properties, toxicity, biological and pharmacological activity.EXCLI journal · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: There have been conflicting reports about the proarrhythmic risk of Aim: This study aims to determine whether MEA recordings from hiPSC-CMs could predict the proarrhythmic risk of adrenomimetic drugs and to investigate the cardiovascular effects and mechanisms of SYN. Materials and methods: We employed MEA recordings to assess the electrophysiological properties of hiPSC-CMs and conducted concentration-response analyses to evaluate the effects of SYN and Isoprenaline (ISO) on beating rate and contractility. A risk scoring system for proarrhythmic risks was established based on hiPSC-CMs in this study. ISO, a classic beta-adrenergic drug, was also evaluated. Furthermore, the study evaluated the risk of SYN and recorded the concentration-response of beating rate, contractility and the change in the presence or absence of selective β1, β2 and β3 adrenergic blockers. Results: Our results suggested that ISO carries a high risk of inducing arrhythmias, aligning with existing literature. SYN caused a 30% prolongation of the field potential duration (FPD) at a concentration of 206.326 μM, a change significantly different from baseline measurements and control treatments. The half maximal effective concentration (EC50) of SYN (3.31 μM) to affect hiPSC-CM beating rate is much higher than that of ISO (18.00 nM). The effect of SYN at an EC50 of 3.31 μM is about ten times more potent in hiPSC-CMs compared to neonatal rat cardiomyocytes (34.12 μM). SYN increased the contractility of cardiomyocytes by 29.97 ± 11.65%, compared to ISO's increase of 50.56 ± 24.15%. β1 receptor blockers almost eliminated the beating rate increase induced by both ISO and SYN, while neither β2 nor β3 blockers had a complete inhibitory effect. Conclusion: The MEA and hiPSC-CM system could effectively predict the risk of adrenomimetic drugs. The study concludes that the proarrhythmia risk of SYN at conventional doses is low. SYN is more sensitive in increasing beating rate and contractility in human cardiomyocytes compared to rats, primarily activating β1 receptor.
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.