Celivarone for maintenance of sinus rhythm and conversion of atrial fibrillation/flutter

How the Deuteration of Dronedarone Can Modify Its Cardiovascular Profile: In Vivo Characterization of Electropharmacological Effects of Poyendarone, a Deuterated Analogue of Dronedarone

Since deuterium replacement has a potential to modulate pharmacodynamics, pharmacokinetics and toxicity, we developed deuterated dronedarone; poyendarone, and assessed its cardiovascular effects. Poyendarone hydrochloride in doses of 0.3 and 3 mg/kg over 30 s was intravenously administered to the halothane-anesthetized dogs (n = 4), which provided peak plasma concentrations of 108 ± 10 and 1120 ± 285 ng/mL, respectively. The 0.3 mg/kg shortened the ventricular repolarization period. The 3 mg/kg transiently increased the heart rate at 5 min but decreased at 45 min, and elevated the total peripheral vascular resistance and left ventricular preload, whereas it reduced the mean blood pressure at 5 min, left ventricular contractility and cardiac output. The transient tachycardic action is considered to be induced by the hypotension-induced, reflex-mediated increase of sympathetic tone. The 3 mg/kg delayed both intra-atrial and intra-ventricular conductions, indicating Na⁺ channel inhibitory action. Moreover, the 3 mg/kg transiently shortened the ventricular repolarization period at 5 min. No significant change was detected in the late repolarization by poyendarone, indicating it might not hardly significantly alter rapidly activating delayed-rectifier K⁺ current (I_Kr). Poyendarone prolonged the atrial effective refractory period greater than the ventricular parameter. When compared with dronedarone, poyendarone showed similar pharmacokinetics of dronedarone, but reduced β-adrenoceptor blocking activity as well as the cardio-suppressive effect. Poyendarone failed to inhibit I_Kr and showed higher atrial selectivity in prolonging the effective refractory period of atrium versus ventricle. Thus, the deuteration may be an effective way to improve the cardiovascular profile of dronedarone. Poyendarone is a promising anti-atrial fibrillatory drug candidate.

Antiarrhythmics for maintaining sinus rhythm after cardioversion of atrial fibrillation

BACKGROUND

Atrial fibrillation is the most frequent sustained arrhythmia. Atrial fibrillation often recurs after restoration of normal sinus rhythm. Antiarrhythmic drugs have been widely used to prevent recurrence. This is an update of a review previously published in 2006, 2012 and 2015.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the effects of long-term treatment with antiarrhythmic drugs on death, stroke, drug adverse effects and recurrence of atrial fibrillation in people who had recovered sinus rhythm after having atrial fibrillation.

SEARCH METHODS

We updated the searches of CENTRAL, MEDLINE and Embase in January 2019, and ClinicalTrials.gov and WHO ICTRP in February 2019. We checked the reference lists of retrieved articles, recent reviews and meta-analyses.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Two authors independently selected randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing any antiarrhythmic drug with a control (no treatment, placebo, drugs for rate control) or with another antiarrhythmic drug in adults who had atrial fibrillation and in whom sinus rhythm was restored, spontaneously or by any intervention. We excluded postoperative atrial fibrillation.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently assessed quality and extracted data. We pooled studies, if appropriate, using Mantel-Haenszel risk ratios (RR), with 95% confidence intervals (CI). All results were calculated at one year of follow-up or the nearest time point.

MAIN RESULTS

This update included one new study (100 participants) and excluded one previously included study because of double publication. Finally, we included 59 RCTs comprising 20,981 participants studying quinidine, disopyramide, propafenone, flecainide, metoprolol, amiodarone, dofetilide, dronedarone and sotalol. Overall, mean follow-up was 10.2 months.All-cause mortalityHigh-certainty evidence from five RCTs indicated that treatment with sotalol was associated with a higher all-cause mortality rate compared with placebo or no treatment (RR 2.23, 95% CI 1.03 to 4.81; participants = 1882). The number need to treat for an additional harmful outcome (NNTH) for sotalol was 102 participants treated for one year to have one additional death. Low-certainty evidence from six RCTs suggested that risk of mortality may be higher in people taking quinidine (RR 2.01, 95% CI 0.84 to 4.77; participants = 1646). Moderate-certainty evidence showed increased RR for mortality but with very wide CIs for metoprolol (RR 2.02, 95% CI 0.37 to 11.05, 2 RCTs, participants = 562) and amiodarone (RR 1.66, 95% CI 0.55 to 4.99, 2 RCTs, participants = 444), compared with placebo.We found little or no difference in mortality with dofetilide (RR 0.98, 95% CI 0.76 to 1.27; moderate-certainty evidence) or dronedarone (RR 0.86, 95% CI 0.68 to 1.09; high-certainty evidence) compared to placebo/no treatment. There were few data on mortality for disopyramide, flecainide and propafenone, making impossible a reliable estimation for those drugs.Withdrawals due to adverse eventsAll analysed drugs increased withdrawals due to adverse effects compared to placebo or no treatment (quinidine: RR 1.56, 95% CI 0.87 to 2.78; disopyramide: RR 3.68, 95% CI 0.95 to 14.24; propafenone: RR 1.62, 95% CI 1.07 to 2.46; flecainide: RR 15.41, 95% CI 0.91 to 260.19; metoprolol: RR 3.47, 95% CI 1.48 to 8.15; amiodarone: RR 6.70, 95% CI 1.91 to 23.45; dofetilide: RR 1.77, 95% CI 0.75 to 4.18; dronedarone: RR 1.58, 95% CI 1.34 to 1.85; sotalol: RR 1.95, 95% CI 1.23 to 3.11). Certainty of the evidence for this outcome was low for disopyramide, amiodarone, dofetilide and flecainide; moderate to high for the remaining drugs.ProarrhythmiaVirtually all studied antiarrhythmics showed increased proarrhythmic effects (counting both tachyarrhythmias and bradyarrhythmias attributable to treatment) (quinidine: RR 2.05, 95% CI 0.95 to 4.41; disopyramide: no data; flecainide: RR 4.80, 95% CI 1.30 to 17.77; metoprolol: RR 18.14, 95% CI 2.42 to 135.66; amiodarone: RR 2.22, 95% CI 0.71 to 6.96; dofetilide: RR 5.50, 95% CI 1.33 to 22.76; dronedarone: RR 1.95, 95% CI 0.77 to 4.98; sotalol: RR 3.55, 95% CI 2.16 to 5.83); with the exception of propafenone (RR 1.32, 95% CI 0.39 to 4.47) for which the certainty of evidence was very low and we were uncertain about the effect. Certainty of the evidence for this outcome for the other drugs was moderate to high.StrokeEleven studies reported stroke outcomes with quinidine, disopyramide, flecainide, amiodarone, dronedarone and sotalol. High-certainty evidence from two RCTs suggested that dronedarone may be associated with reduced risk of stroke (RR 0.66, 95% CI 0.47 to 0.95; participants = 5872). This result is attributed to one study dominating the meta-analysis and has yet to be reproduced in other studies. There was no apparent effect on stroke rates with the other antiarrhythmics.Recurrence of atrial fibrillationModerate- to high-certainty evidence, with the exception of disopyramide which was low-certainty evidence, showed that all analysed drugs, including metoprolol, reduced recurrence of atrial fibrillation (quinidine: RR 0.83, 95% CI 0.78 to 0.88; disopyramide: RR 0.77, 95% CI 0.59 to 1.01; propafenone: RR 0.67, 95% CI 0.61 to 0.74; flecainide: RR 0.65, 95% CI 0.55 to 0.77; metoprolol: RR 0.83 95% CI 0.68 to 1.02; amiodarone: RR 0.52, 95% CI 0.46 to 0.58; dofetilide: RR 0.72, 95% CI 0.61 to 0.85; dronedarone: RR 0.85, 95% CI 0.80 to 0.91; sotalol: RR 0.83, 95% CI 0.80 to 0.87). Despite this reduction, atrial fibrillation still recurred in 43% to 67% of people treated with antiarrhythmics.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is high-certainty evidence of increased mortality associated with sotalol treatment, and low-certainty evidence suggesting increased mortality with quinidine, when used for maintaining sinus rhythm in people with atrial fibrillation. We found few data on mortality in people taking disopyramide, flecainide and propafenone, so it was not possible to make a reliable estimation of the mortality risk for these drugs. However, we did find moderate-certainty evidence of marked increases in proarrhythmia and adverse effects with flecainide.Overall, there is evidence showing that antiarrhythmic drugs increase adverse events, increase proarrhythmic events and some antiarrhythmics may increase mortality. Conversely, although they reduce recurrences of atrial fibrillation, there is no evidence of any benefit on other clinical outcomes, compared with placebo or no treatment.

Mechanisms and Drug Development in Atrial Fibrillation

Atrial fibrillation is a highly prevalent cardiac arrhythmia and the most important cause of embolic stroke. Although genetic studies have identified an increasing assembly of AF-related genes, the impact of these genetic discoveries is yet to be realized. In addition, despite more than a century of research and speculation, the molecular and cellular mechanisms underlying AF have not been established, and therapy for AF, particularly persistent AF, remains suboptimal. Current antiarrhythmic drugs are associated with a significant rate of adverse events, particularly proarrhythmia, which may explain why many highly symptomatic AF patients are not receiving any rhythm control therapy. This review focuses on recent advances in AF research, including its epidemiology, genetics, and pathophysiological mechanisms. We then discuss the status of antiarrhythmic drug therapy for AF today, reviewing molecular mechanisms, and the possible clinical use of some of the new atrial-selective antifibrillatory agents, as well as drugs that target atrial remodeling, inflammation and fibrosis, which are being tested as upstream therapies to prevent AF perpetuation. Altogether, the objective is to highlight the magnitude and endemic dimension of AF, which requires a significant effort to develop new and effective antiarrhythmic drugs, but also improve AF prevention and treatment of risk factors that are associated with AF complications.

Atrial fibrillation

Atrial fibrillation (AF) is the most common sustained cardiac rhythm disorder, and increases in prevalence with increasing age and the number of cardiovascular comorbidities. AF is characterized by a rapid and irregular heartbeat that can be asymptomatic or lead to symptoms such as palpitations, dyspnoea and dizziness. The condition can also be associated with serious complications, including an increased risk of stroke. Important recent developments in the clinical epidemiology and management of AF have informed our approach to this arrhythmia. This Primer provides a comprehensive overview of AF, including its epidemiology, mechanisms and pathophysiology, diagnosis, screening, prevention and management. Management strategies, including stroke prevention, rate control and rhythm control, are considered. We also address quality of life issues and provide an outlook on future developments and ongoing clinical trials in managing this common arrhythmia.

Antiarrhythmics for maintaining sinus rhythm after cardioversion of atrial fibrillation

BACKGROUND

Atrial fibrillation is the most frequent sustained arrhythmia. Atrial fibrillation frequently recurs after restoration of normal sinus rhythm. Antiarrhythmic drugs have been widely used to prevent recurrence, but the effect of these drugs on mortality and other clinical outcomes is unclear. This is an update of a review previously published in 2008 and 2012.

OBJECTIVES

To determine in patients who have recovered sinus rhythm after having atrial fibrillation, the effects of long-term treatment with antiarrhythmic drugs on death, stroke, embolism, drug adverse effects and recurrence of atrial fibrillation.

SEARCH METHODS

We updated the searches of CENTRAL in The Cochrane Library (2013, Issue 12 of 12), MEDLINE (to January 2014) and EMBASE (to January 2014). The reference lists of retrieved articles, recent reviews and meta-analyses were checked.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Two independent authors selected randomised controlled trials comparing any antiarrhythmic drug with a control (no treatment, placebo, drugs for rate control) or with another antiarrhythmic drug in adults who had atrial fibrillation and in whom sinus rhythm was restored. Post-operative atrial fibrillation was excluded.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently assessed quality and extracted data. Studies were pooled, if appropriate, using Peto odds ratio (OR). All results were calculated at one year of follow-up.

MAIN RESULTS

In this update three new studies, with 534 patients, were included making a total of 59 included studies comprising 21,305 patients. All included studies were randomised controlled trials. Allocation concealment was adequate in 17 trials, it was unclear in the remaining 42 trials. Risk of bias was assessed in all domains only in the trials included in this update.Compared with controls, class IA drugs quinidine and disopyramide (OR 2.39, 95% confidence interval (95% CI) 1.03 to 5.59, number needed to treat to harm (NNTH) 109, 95% CI 34 to 4985) and sotalol (OR 2.23, 95% CI 1.1 to 4.50, NNTH 169, 95% CI 60 to 2068) were associated with increased all-cause mortality. Other antiarrhythmics did not seem to modify mortality, but our data could be underpowered to detect mild increases in mortality for several of the drugs studied.Several class IA (disopyramide, quinidine), IC (flecainide, propafenone) and III (amiodarone, dofetilide, dronedarone, sotalol) drugs significantly reduced recurrence of atrial fibrillation (OR 0.19 to 0.70, number needed to treat to beneft (NNTB) 3 to 16). Beta-blockers (metoprolol) also significantly reduced atrial fibrillation recurrences (OR 0.62, 95% CI 0.44 to 0.88, NNTB 9).All analysed drugs increased withdrawals due to adverse affects and all but amiodarone, dronedarone and propafenone increased pro-arrhythmia. Only 11 trials reported data on stroke. None of them found any significant difference with the exception of a single trial than found less strokes in the group treated with dronedarone compared to placebo. This finding was not confirmed in others studies on dronedarone.We could not analyse heart failure and use of anticoagulation because few original studies reported on these measures.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Several class IA, IC and III drugs, as well as class II drugs (beta-blockers), are moderately effective in maintaining sinus rhythm after conversion of atrial fibrillation. However, they increase adverse events, including pro-arrhythmia, and some of them (disopyramide, quinidine and sotalol) may increase mortality. Possible benefits on clinically relevant outcomes (stroke, embolism, heart failure) remain to be established.

Antiarrhythmic drugs 2013: state of the art

Antiarrhythmic drugs are widely used, but are of modest efficacy and have important side effects. However, even with the advance of catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation and ventricular tachycardia, antiarrhythmic drugs remain an important tool for treating arrhythmias. Antiarrhythmic drug development has remained slow despite much effort given our limited understanding of what role various ionic currents play in arrhythmogenesis and how they are modified by arrhythmias. This review will focus on promising new antiarrhythmic drugs undergoing clinical investigation or currently approved for clinical use, including amiodarone analogues, agents with novel ionic targets, and new drug combinations.

Advances in the management of atrial fibrillation

Atrial fibrillation (AF) is the most common arrhythmia worldwide, increasing in incidence with the aging population. Substantial morbidity and mortality accompany its diagnosis. Management should focus on rate and rhythm management, on reducing thromboembolic risk, and also potentially on targeting the mechanisms responsible for its perpetuation. Current antiarrhythmic therapy has only modest efficacy and substantial side effects, and anticoagulation regimes are cumbersome and require regular monitoring. Novel anticoagulants and antiarrhythmics hold the promise of improved efficacy and safety. This review covers current therapy for AF, major advances in pharmacological management and future directions for therapy.