Comparison of semiautomated and fully automated methods for QT measurement during a thorough QT/QTc study: variability and sample size considerations
- PMID: 19542314
- DOI: 10.1177/0091270009337944
Comparison of semiautomated and fully automated methods for QT measurement during a thorough QT/QTc study: variability and sample size considerations
Abstract
This study compares the ability of 2 semiautomated methods with a fully automated method for QT measurement to minimize the sample size required to detect a moxifloxacin effect and exclude a placebo effect in a thorough QT/QTc study. The fully automated and 1 of 2 semiautomated methods used a global QT measurement in 12 leads, whereas the other semiautomated method used a tangent method on single lead raw complexes. Mean QTcF intervals were greater when measured on a global QT electrocardiogram than on raw complexes, but the mean magnitudes of DeltaQTcF were similar for all methods. The 3 methods detected a statistically significant increase in QTcF for moxifloxacin compared to placebo and were able to exclude a placebo effect on QTcF in all 62 participants. However, due to a smaller variability, the semiautomated methods allowed these detections with fewer than 20 participants, whereas the fully automated required at least 27 participants.
Similar articles
-
Comparison of QTinno, a fully automated electrocardiographic analysis program, to semiautomated electrocardiographic analysis methods in a drug safety study in healthy subjects.J Electrocardiol. 2009 Jul-Aug;42(4):358-66. doi: 10.1016/j.jelectrocard.2009.02.001. Epub 2009 Apr 10. J Electrocardiol. 2009. PMID: 19362316
-
Improving the precision of QT measurements.Cardiol J. 2011;18(4):401-10. Cardiol J. 2011. PMID: 21769821 Clinical Trial.
-
Comparison of manual and automated measurements of the QT interval in healthy volunteers: an analysis of five thorough QT studies.Clin Pharmacol Ther. 2009 Nov;86(5):503-6. doi: 10.1038/clpt.2009.34. Epub 2009 Apr 1. Clin Pharmacol Ther. 2009. PMID: 19339965
-
Implications of methodological differences in digital electrocardiogram interval measurement.J Electrocardiol. 2006 Oct;39(4 Suppl):S152-6. doi: 10.1016/j.jelectrocard.2006.05.030. Epub 2006 Aug 21. J Electrocardiol. 2006. PMID: 16920141 Review.
-
Asymptomatic atrial fibrillation on device interrogation.J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. 2008 Aug;19(8):891-3. doi: 10.1111/j.1540-8167.2008.01194.x. Epub 2008 May 9. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. 2008. PMID: 18479327 Review. No abstract available.
Cited by
-
Early investigation of QTc liability: the role of multiple ascending dose (MAD) study.Drug Saf. 2012 Sep 1;35(9):695-709. doi: 10.1007/BF03261967. Drug Saf. 2012. PMID: 22845313 Review.
-
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.Ann Noninvasive Electrocardiol. 2017 Jan;22(1):e12416. doi: 10.1111/anec.12416. Epub 2016 Dec 19. Ann Noninvasive Electrocardiol. 2017. PMID: 27995684 Free PMC article.
-
Man versus Machine: Comparison of Automated and Manual Methodologies for Measuring the QTc Interval: A Prospective Study.Ann Noninvasive Electrocardiol. 2016 Jan;21(1):82-90. doi: 10.1111/anec.12277. Epub 2015 May 4. Ann Noninvasive Electrocardiol. 2016. PMID: 25944685 Free PMC article. Clinical Trial.
-
Establishing assay sensitivity in QT studies: experience with the use of moxifloxacin in an early phase clinical pharmacology study and comparison with its effect in a thorough QT study.Eur J Clin Pharmacol. 2015 Dec;71(12):1451-9. doi: 10.1007/s00228-015-1959-z. Epub 2015 Oct 1. Eur J Clin Pharmacol. 2015. PMID: 26423621 Clinical Trial.
Publication types
MeSH terms
Substances
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources