Clinical ECG Assessment

Effect of Futibatinib on Cardiac Repolarization: Results of a Randomized, Controlled, Double-Blind, QT/QTc, Phase 1 Study in Healthy Subjects

Futibatinib, a fibroblast growth factor receptor (FGFR) 1-4 inhibitor, is being investigated for FGFR-aberrant tumors. A 4-period, crossover, phase 1 thorough QT/QTc study compared effects on Fridericia heart rate-corrected QT (QTcF) interval of single doses of futibatinib 20 and 80 mg (therapeutic and supratherapeutic doses, respectively), placebo, and moxifloxacin (positive control) in healthy subjects. The study objective was to assess the time-matched difference in change from baseline in QTcF (ddQTcF) between futibatinib and placebo. In addition, changes from baseline in QTcF and other electrocardiogram (ECG) parameters, pharmacokinetics, ECG morphology, and safety were assessed. Forty-eight subjects were randomized. ddQTcF upper limits of 2-sided 90%CIs remained <10 milliseconds (clinical threshold) for both futibatinib doses at all time points (range, 2.0-4.5 milliseconds). Assay sensitivity was demonstrated by lower limits of 2-sided 97.5%CIs of the dQTcF difference between moxifloxacin and placebo of >5 milliseconds. Futibatinib exposure increased in a dose-dependent manner, and no significant relationship was detected between plasma futibatinib concentration and ddQTcF. There were no significant effects on heart rate, other ECG parameters, or ECG morphology. No serious adverse events occurred. Futibatinib did not prolong QTcF or affect other cardiac measures at therapeutic or supratherapeutic doses.

Impaired postural control in diabetes-a predictor of falls?

New evidence points toward that impaired postural control judged by center of pressure measures during quiet stance is a predictor of falls in people with type 1 and type 2 diabetes-even in occurrence of well-known risk factors for falls.

INTRODUCTION/AIM

People with type 1 diabetes (T1D) and type 2 diabetes (T2D) are at risk of falling, but the association with impaired postural control is unclear. Therefore, the aim was to investigate postural control by measuring the center of pressure (CoP) during quiet standing and to estimate the prevalence ratio (PR) of falls and the fear of falling among people with diabetes compared to controls.

METHODS

In a cross-sectional study, participants with T1D (n = 111) and T2D (n = 106) and controls without diabetes (n = 328) were included. Study procedures consisted of handgrip strength (HGS), vibration perception threshold (VPT), orthostatism, visual acuity, and postural control during quiet stance measured by CoPArea (degree of body sway) and CoPVelocity (speed of the body sway) with "eyes open," "eyes closed" in combination with executive function tasks. A history of previous falls and fear of falling was collected by a questionnaire. CoPArea and CoPVelocity measurements were analyzed by using a multiple linear regression model. The PR of falls and the fear of falling were estimated by a Poisson regression model. Age, sex, BMI, previous falls, alcohol use, drug, HGS, VPT, orthostatism, episodes of hypoglycemia, and visual acuity were covariates in multiple adjusted analyses.

RESULTS

Significantly larger mean CoPArea measures were observed for participants with T1D (p = 0.022) and T2D (0.002), whereas mean CoPVelocity measures were only increased in participants with T2D (p = 0.027) vs. controls. Additionally, T1D and T2D participants had higher PRs for falls (p = 0.044, p = 0.014) and fear of falling (p = 0.006, p < 0.001) in the crude analyses, but the PRs reduced significantly when adjusted for mean CoPArea and mean CoPVelocity, respectively. Furthermore, multiple adjusted PRs were significantly higher than crude the analyses.    CONCLUSION: Impaired postural control during quiet stance was seen in T1D and T2D compared with controls even in the occurrence of well-known risk factors. and correlated well with a higher prevalence of falls.

Human induced pluripotent stem cell (iPSC)-derived cardiomyocytes as an in vitro model in toxicology: strengths and weaknesses for hazard identification and risk characterization

INTRODUCTION

Human induced pluripotent stem cell (iPSC)-derived cardiomyocytes is one of the most widely used cell-based models that resulted from the discovery of how non-embryonic stem cells can be differentiated into multiple cell types. In just one decade, iPSC-derived cardiomyocytes went from a research lab to widespread use in biomedical research and preclinical safety evaluation for drugs and other chemicals.

AREAS COVERED

This manuscript reviews data on toxicology applications of human iPSC-derived cardiomyocytes. We detail the outcome of a systematic literature search on their use (i) in hazard assessment for cardiotoxicity liabilities, (ii) for risk characterization, (iii) as models for population variability, and (iv) in studies of personalized medicine and disease.

EXPERT OPINION

iPSC-derived cardiomyocytes are useful to increase the accuracy, precision, and efficiency of cardiotoxicity hazard identification for both drugs and non-pharmaceuticals, with recent efforts beginning to demonstrate their utility for risk characterization. Notable limitations include the needs to improve the maturation of cells in culture, to better understand their potential use identifying structural cardiotoxicity, and for additional case studies involving population-wide and disease-specific risk characterization. Ultimately, the greatest future benefits are likely for non-pharmaceutical chemicals, filling a critical gap where no routine testing for cardiotoxicity is currently performed.

Combination of olanzapine and samidorphan has no clinically relevant effects on ECG parameters, including the QTc interval: Results from a phase 1 QT/QTc study

BACKGROUND

OLZ/SAM is a combination of olanzapine, an atypical antipsychotic, and samidorphan, an opioid antagonist, and is in development for the treatment of schizophrenia and bipolar I disorder. OLZ/SAM is under development with the intent to provide the established antipsychotic efficacy of olanzapine while mitigating olanzapine-associated weight gain. This thorough QT study assessed the effects of therapeutic and supratherapeutic doses of OLZ/SAM on cardiac repolarization in patients with schizophrenia.

METHODS

In this randomized, double-blind, placebo- and positive (moxifloxacin)-controlled, parallel-group study, 100 patients aged 18 to 60 years with stable schizophrenia were randomized 3:2 to the active arm and control arm. Subjects in the active arm received a therapeutic dose of 10/10 mg (10 mg olanzapine/10 mg samidorphan) on days 2-4, 20/20 mg on days 5-8, and a supratherapeutic dose of 30/30 mg (1.5 times and 3 times the maximum recommended daily dose of olanzapine and samidorphan, respectively) on days 9-13, and moxifloxacin-matched placebo on days 1 and 14. Subjects in the control arm received a single oral dose of moxifloxacin 400 mg and moxifloxacin-matched placebo on days 1 and 14 in a nested crossover fashion, along with OLZ/SAM-matched placebo on days 2-13. Serial electrocardiograms (ECGs) and simultaneous plasma drug concentrations were determined pre- and post-dose. The effects of OLZ/SAM on heart rate and ECG parameters (QT interval with Fridericia's correction [QTcF], PR and QRS interval, and T-wave morphology) were evaluated, and the primary endpoint was change from baseline in QTcF (ΔQTcF). The relationship between drug concentration and ΔQTcF (C-QTc) was evaluated using a linear mixed-effects model. Safety monitoring included adverse events reporting and clinical laboratory assessments.

RESULTS

Based on primary analysis using C-QTc modeling, no clinically concerning QTc effect (ie, placebo-corrected ΔQTcF [ΔΔQTcF] ≥10 msec) was observed across the OLZ/SAM dose range tested (10/10 to 30/30 mg), up to olanzapine and samidorphan concentrations of approximately 110 and 160 ng/mL, respectively. The slope (90% confidence interval [CI]) of the C-QTc relationship was shallow and not significant for either olanzapine or samidorphan (0.03 [-0.01, 0.08] and 0.01 [-0.01, 0.04] msec per ng/mL, respectively). The predicted ΔΔQTcF (90% CI) was 2.33 (-2.72, 7.38) and 1.38 (-3.37, 6.12) msec at the observed geometric mean maximal concentration (C_max) of olanzapine (62.6 ng/mL) and samidorphan (75.1 ng/mL) on day 13, respectively. The study's assay sensitivity was confirmed by the C-QTc relationship of moxifloxacin. OLZ/SAM was well tolerated at all doses; adverse events occurring in >5% of subjects treated with OLZ/SAM were somnolence, weight increased, nausea, and dizziness.

CONCLUSIONS

This thorough QT study in patients with stable schizophrenia demonstrated that OLZ/SAM, in doses and plasma concentrations up to supratherapeutic levels, does not have a clinically relevant effect on ECG parameters, including QT/QTc prolongation.

Can non-clinical repolarization assays predict the results of clinical thorough QT studies? Results from a research consortium

Background and Purpose

Translation of non‐clinical markers of delayed ventricular repolarization to clinical prolongation of the QT interval corrected for heart rate (QTc) (a biomarker for torsades de pointes proarrhythmia) remains an issue in drug discovery and regulatory evaluations. We retrospectively analysed 150 drug applications in a US Food and Drug Administration database to determine the utility of established non‐clinical in vitro IKr current human ether‐à‐go‐go‐related gene (hERG), action potential duration (APD) and in vivo (QTc) repolarization assays to detect and predict clinical QTc prolongation.

Experimental Approach

The predictive performance of three non‐clinical assays was compared with clinical thorough QT study outcomes based on free clinical plasma drug concentrations using sensitivity and specificity, receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves, positive (PPVs) and negative predictive values (NPVs) and likelihood ratios (LRs).

Key Results

Non‐clinical assays demonstrated robust specificity (high true negative rate) but poor sensitivity (low true positive rate) for clinical QTc prolongation at low‐intermediate (1×–30×) clinical exposure multiples. The QTc assay provided the most robust PPVs and NPVs (ability to predict clinical QTc prolongation). ROC curves (overall test accuracy) and LRs (ability to influence post‐test probabilities) demonstrated overall marginal performance for hERG and QTc assays (best at 30× exposures), while the APD assay demonstrated minimal value.

Conclusions and Implications

The predictive value of hERG, APD and QTc assays varies, with drug concentrations strongly affecting translational performance. While useful in guiding preclinical candidates without clinical QT prolongation, hERG and QTc repolarization assays provide greater value compared with the APD assay.

Comparing QT interval variability of semiautomated and high-precision ECG methodologies in seven thorough QT studies-implications for the power of studies intended for definitive evaluation of a drug's QT effect

BACKGROUND

In studies of drug effects on electrocardiographic parameters, the level of precision in measuring QTc interval changes will influence a study's ability to detect small effects.

METHODS

Variability data from investigational, placebo and moxifloxacin treatments from seven thorough QT studies performed by the same sponsor were analyzed with the objective to compare the performance of two commonly used approaches for ECG interval measurements: semiautomated (SA) and the high-precision QT (HPQT) analysis. Five studies were crossover and two parallel. Harmonized procedures were implemented to ensure similar experimental conditions across studies. ECG replicates were extracted serially from continuous 12-lead recordings at predefined time points from subjects supinely resting. The variability estimates were based on the time-point analysis of change-from-baseline QTcF as the dependent variable for the standard primary analysis of previous thorough QT studies. The residual variances were extracted for each study and ECG technique.

RESULTS

High-precision QT resulted in a substantial reduction in ∆QTc variability as compared to SA. A reduction in residual variability or approximately 50% was achieved in both crossover and parallel studies, both for the active comparison (drug vs. placebo) and for assay sensitivity (moxifloxacin vs. placebo) data.

CONCLUSIONS

High-precision QT technique significantly reduces QT interval variability and thereby the number of subjects needed to exclude small effects in QT studies. Based on this assessment, the sample size required to exclude a QTc effect >10 ms with 90% power is reduced from 35 with SA to 18 with HPQT, if a 3 ms underlying drug effect is assumed.