Related Experiment Videos
Nonclinical proarrhythmia models: predicting Torsades de Pointes.
Chris L Lawrence1, Chris E Pollard, Tim G Hammond
1Department of Safety Pharmacology, Safety Assessment UK, AstraZeneca R and D, Alderley Park, Macclesfield, Cheshire SK10 4TG, UK. chris.lawrence@astrazeneca.com
Journal of Pharmacological and Toxicological Methods
|June 25, 2005
Summary
New proarrhythmia models show promise in predicting fatal Torsades de Pointes (TdP) risk beyond standard QT interval assays. These models utilize novel electrophysiological markers to better assess drug-induced cardiac arrhythmias.
Area of Science:
- Cardiovascular Pharmacology
- Electrophysiology
- Drug Safety Assessment
Background:
- Prolongation of the QT interval and cardiac action potential are linked to Torsades de Pointes (TdP), a rare but fatal arrhythmia.
- Current nonclinical assays (e.g., hERG channel, APD, QT interval) predict QT prolongation but may not accurately assess TdP risk.
- Evidence suggests a dissociation between QT prolongation risk and torsadogenic risk, indicating limitations of existing assays.
Purpose of the Study:
- To review and discuss emerging in vitro and in vivo proarrhythmia models for predicting drug-induced TdP.
- To evaluate novel electrophysiological markers that may offer better prediction of TdP risk than standard assays.
- To examine the merits, shortcomings, and potential impact of these new models on drug safety assessment.
Main Methods:
- Review of three in vitro and three in vivo proarrhythmia models.
- Focus on electrophysiological markers such as transmural dispersion of repolarization, action potential triangulation, instability, reverse use-dependence, and early after-depolarizations.
- Discussion of reported correlations between model variables and clinical outcomes.
Main Results:
- Proarrhythmia models utilize electrophysiological markers that have shown correlation with clinical outcomes in predicting TdP risk.
- While models can discriminate between antiarrhythmic and nonarrhythmic drugs, independent external assessment is lacking.
- No single model has demonstrated clear superiority over others in predictive value.
Conclusions:
- Proarrhythmia models challenge current surrogates for TdP prediction and existing nonclinical strategies.
- Regulatory reluctance exists due to a lack of clear understanding and agreement on key proarrhythmic mechanisms.
- Further validation and mechanistic understanding are needed for wider acceptance and enhanced pharmaceutical decision-making in drug development.