Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2008 Aug;119(2):115-7.
doi: 10.1016/j.pharmthera.2008.05.004. Epub 2008 Jun 10.

Perception of validity of clinical and preclinical methods for assessment of torsades de pointes liability

Affiliations

Perception of validity of clinical and preclinical methods for assessment of torsades de pointes liability

Michael K Pugsley et al. Pharmacol Ther. 2008 Aug.

Abstract

In 2007 a meeting on drug-induced torsades de pointes (TdP) was held in London, UK, under the auspices of the British Society for Cardiovascular Research (BSCR). One of the objectives was to explore the validity of available biomarkers, risk factors and preclinical investigational methods for the detection of drug-induced TdP liability - preclinical methods and clinical 'thorough QT' testing. The first symposium was entitled "How validated are current models and biomarkers for testing drug-induced torsades de pointes liability?" Validation, as far as the symposium was concerned, meant that the endpoints measured in the method predict TdP liability specifically, selectively and quantitatively. Topics (and the publications derived from the presentations) were: human volunteer phase 1 studies [Vik, T., Pollard, C., & Sager, P. (2008-this issue), the anaesthetized rabbit TDP model [Carlsson, L. (2008-this issue), the AV blocked canine preparation [Oros, A., Beekman, J. D. M., & Vos, M. A. (2008-this issue), QT interval and its corrections in the in vivo conscious canine [Fossa, A. A. (2008-this issue), the rabbit heart failure model [Hamlin, R. L., & Kijtawornrat, A. (2008-this issue), the rabbit Langendorff preparation and the Screenit approach [Dumotier, B. M., Deurinck, M., Yang, Y., Traebert, M., & Suter, W. (2008-this issue), the wedge preparation [Yan G.-X. (2008-this issue)] and hERG screens [Hancox, J. C., McPate, M. J., El Harchi, A., & Zhang, Y. h. (2008-this issue). Unbeknownst to the speakers before the start of the sessions, the audience were invited, during the session, to rate each approach on a 0 to 10 scale in terms of the extent to which each approach appeared to be validated. The outcome of this exercise forms the basis of this article. We invite you to evaluate for yourselves the accompanying reviews in this edition of Pharmacology and Therapeutics.

PubMed Disclaimer

Publication types

MeSH terms