ReviewClinical and translational science2026
QT Myopia and Cardiac Safety: Expanding the Aperture of Arrhythmia Assessment in Early Phase Drug Development.
Review in Clinical and translational science, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Regulatory agencies such as the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), European Medicines Agency (EMA), Health Canada, and the Japanese Pharmaceutical and Medical Device Agency (PMDA) provide scientific and public health guidance with cardiac safety being paramount in drug development of new investigational products (IP). Cardiac safety is not a singular undertaking but rather encompasses many elements to be considered beyond measurement of the QT interval before a candidate drug receives regulatory approval. These safety assessments may include evaluation of additional targeted and non-targeted cardiovascular effects such as whether the IP mediates cardiac or pericardial inflammation or affects blood pressure, the coronary or systemic vasculature, heart valves, or cardiac muscle. Historically, the primary cardiac safety concern of regulators was the proarrhythmic risk of new chemical entities and has been centered on the QT interval as a marker of a drug's ability to delay ventricular repolarization and its potential to precipitate lethal ventricular rhythms. Beyond this biomarker, there has only been tangential focus on the PR and QRS intervals, conduction disturbances and supraventricular arrhythmias, and formal regulatory guidance pertaining to these findings has not been published. Hence, this review is designed to expand the myopic view of cardiac safety beyond the QT interval and highlight the importance of clinical nonlethal arrhythmias and conduction abnormalities involving novel non-antiarrhythmic small molecules for which more robust monitoring and surveillance should be contemplated.
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.