Relacorilant, a Selective Glucocorticoid Receptor Modulator in Development for the Treatment of Patients With Cushing Syndrome, Does Not Cause Prolongation of the Cardiac QT Interval.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the effect of relacorilant, a selective glucocorticoid receptor modulator under investigation for the treatment of patients with endogenous hypercortisolism (Cushing syndrome [CS]), on the heart rate-corrected QT interval (QTc). METHODS: Three clinical studies of relacorilant were included: (1) a first-in-human, randomized, placebo-controlled, ascending-dose (up to 500 mg of relacorilant) study in healthy volunteers; (2) a phase 1 placebo- and positive-controlled thorough QTc (TQT) study of 400 and 800 mg of relacorilant in healthy volunteers; and (3) a phase 2, open-label study of up to 400 mg of relacorilant administered daily for up to 16 weeks in patients with CS. Electrocardiogram recordings were taken, and QTc change from baseline (ΔQTc) was calculated. The association of plasma relacorilant concentration with the effect on QTc in healthy volunteers was assessed using linear mixed-effects modeling. RESULTS: Across all studies, no notable changes in the electrocardiogram parameters were observed. At all time points and with all doses of relacorilant, including supratherapeutic doses, ΔQTc was small, generally negative, and, in the placebo-controlled studies, similar to placebo. In the TQT study, placebo-corrected ΔQTc with relacorilant was small and negative, whereas placebo-corrected ΔQTc with moxifloxacin positive control showed rapid QTc prolongation. These results constituted a negative TQT study. The model-estimated slopes of the concentration-QTc relationship were slightly negative, excluding an association of relacorilant with prolonged QTc. CONCLUSION: At all doses studied, relacorilant consistently demonstrated a lack of QTc prolongation in healthy volunteers and patients with CS, including in the TQT study. Ongoing phase 3 studies will help further establish the overall benefit-risk profile of relacorilant.

A Phase 1 Thorough QT/QTc Study of Therapeutic and Supratherapeutic Doses of Belumosudil in Healthy Subjects.

Belumosudil is a selective Rho-associated, coiled-coil-containing protein kinase-2 inhibitor. In this crossover design thorough QT/QTc study, single therapeutic (200 mg) and supratherapeutic (1000 mg) oral doses of belumosudil, moxifloxacin (positive control), and placebo were administered to 34 subjects. Twelve-lead electrocardiograms and serial pharmacokinetic sampling were acquired. The effect of belumosudil on the placebo-corrected, change-from-baseline QTcF was small, and an effect exceeding 10 ms could be excluded across all time points with both doses. Using concentration-QTc analysis, an effect on ΔΔQTcF >10 ms can be excluded up to belumosudil concentrations of ≈12 080 ng/mL, more than 2-fold above mean Cmax after the supratherapeutic dose. There was no clinically relevant effect on heart rate or cardiac conduction (ie, the PR and QRS intervals) for belumosudil. No differences in safety were noted between belumosudil and placebo treatment. Assay sensitivity was demonstrated by moxifloxacin's effect on the QTc interval. In conclusion, belumosudil at therapeutic and supratherapeutic doses did not have a clinically meaningful effect on electrocardiogram parameters.

Omecamtiv mecarbil does not prolong QTc intervals at therapeutic concentrations.

AIMS: Omecamtiv mecarbil (OM) is a novel selective cardiac myosin activator under investigation for the treatment of heart failure. This study aimed to evaluate the effect of therapeutic concentrations of OM on electrocardiogram (ECG) parameters and exclude a clinically concerning effect on the rate-corrected QT (QTc) interval. METHODS: In part A, 70 healthy subjects received a 25 mg oral dose of OM, and pharmacokinetics were assessed. Only subjects with maximum observed plasma concentration ≤ 350 ng/mL (n = 60) were randomized into part B, where they received a single oral dose of placebo, 50 mg OM and 400 mg moxifloxacin in a 3-period, 3-treatment, 6-sequence crossover study with continuous ECG collection. RESULTS: After a 50-mg dose of OM, mean placebo-corrected change from baseline QTcF (∆∆QTcF; Fridericia correction) ranged from -6.7 ms at 1 hour postdose to -0.8 ms at 4 hours postdose. The highest upper bound of the 1-sided 95% confidence interval (CI) was 0.7 ms (4 h postdose). Moxifloxacin resulted in a clear increase in mean ∆∆QTcF, with a peak value of 13.1 ms (90% CI: 11.71-14.57) at 3 hours; lower bound of the 1-sided 95% CI was > 5 ms at all of the 3 prespecified time points. Based on a concentration-QTc analysis, an effect on ∆∆QTcF exceeding 10 ms can be excluded up to OM plasma concentrations of ~800 ng/mL. There were no serious or treatment-emergent adverse events leading to discontinuation from the study. CONCLUSION: OM does not have a clinically relevant effect on the studied ECG parameters.

The New S7B/E14 Question and Answer Draft Guidance for Industry: Contents and Commentary.

In August 2020, the International Council on Harmonisation (ICH) released a new draft document, which for the first time combined nonclinical (S7B) and clinical (E14) Questions and Answers (Q&As) into 1 document. FDA describes the revision as a "value proposition": if the human ether-à-go-go assay and the in vivo study are performed in a standardized way, the number of dedicated thorough QT (TQT) studies can be reduced. In this article, we describe and discuss the Q&As that relate to clinical ECG evaluation. If supported by negative standardized nonclinical assays, Q&A 5.1 will obviate the need for a TQT study in the case that a >2-fold exposure margin vs high clinical scenario cannot be obtained. Q&A 6.1 addresses drugs that are poorly tolerated in healthy subjects and cannot be studied at high doses or in placebo-controlled studies; it therefore mainly applies to oncology drugs. It will enable sponsors to claim that a new drug has a "low likelihood of proarrhythmic effects" in the case that the mean corrected QT effect is <10 milliseconds at the time of market application. The E14 2015 revision allowed application of concentration-corrected QT analysis on data from routinely performed clinical pharmacology studies, for example, the first-in-human study and the proportion of dedicated TQT studies has since steadily decreased. It can be foreseen that the proposed new revision will further reduce the number of TQT studies. To achieve harmonization across regulatory regions, it seems important to reach consensus within the International Council on Harmonisation group on the new threshold proposed in 6.1. For this purpose, the Implementation Working Group has asked for public comments.

Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo- and Positive-Controlled Crossover Study of the Effects of Omadacycline on QT/QTc Intervals in Healthy Subjects.

Omadacycline, an aminomethylcycline, is an antibiotic that is approved in the United States for once-daily intravenous (i.v.) and oral use for treatment of adults with acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections and community-acquired bacterial pneumonia. In this thorough QT study, the effects of a therapeutic (100 mg i.v.) dose and a supratherapeutic (300 mg i.v.) dose of omadacycline on the electrocardiogram were studied, with placebo and moxifloxacin as negative and positive controls. Omadacycline at these doses had no effect on the QTc interval. The largest mean placebo-corrected change-from-baseline QTcS (ΔQTcS) were 1.7 ms (90% confidence interval [CI], 0.06 to 3.30) and 2.6 ms (90% CI, 0.55 to 4.67), observed at 20 min and 2 h after the start of the infusion of 100 mg and 300 mg, respectively. Assay sensitivity was demonstrated with moxifloxacin, which caused clear prolongation of QTcS, with the largest mean placebo-corrected ΔQTcS of 9.8 ms at 1.5 and 2 h. With a linear exposure-response model, the estimated slope of the concentration-change-from-baseline QTcF (ΔQTcF) relationship was very shallow: 0.0007 ms per ng/ml (90% CI, 0.0000 to 0.0014). The possibility of an effect on placebo-corrected ΔQTcS exceeding 10 ms can be excluded at omadacycline concentrations in plasma of up to ∼8 µg/ml. Omadacycline had no effect on cardiac conduction (PR and QRS intervals) but caused an increase in heart rate of 16.8 beats per min at 35 min after the 100-mg dose and 21.6 beats per min at 50 min after the 300-mg dose.

CiPA challenges and opportunities from a non-clinical, clinical and regulatory perspectives. An overview of the safety pharmacology scientific discussion.

The Safety Pharmacology Society organized a scientific session at its annual conference in 2017 to discuss the challenges and opportunities of the Comprehensive In-Vitro Proarrhythmia Assay (CiPA) paradigm. Our intention was to raise awareness of this initiative with its members and also to gauge the extent to which safety pharmacologists have incorporated the CiPA testing strategy within the pharmaceutical industry. CiPA offers many potential opportunities including 1) a focus on proarrhythmic risk (as opposed to QTc prolongation), 2) providing scientific rationale to support the continued development of compounds that may have a poor selectivity over hERG whilst also blocking other inward currents and 3) reducing the extent of ECG monitoring in clinical trials with a greater influence of the non-clinical studies. Such opportunities may speed drug development and reduce costs. However, there are also challenges for CiPA implementation. For example, the mixed ion channel paradigm does not easily lend itself to a prospective drug discovery strategy although testing for such effects can be achieved with assays with good throughput. However, it should also be recognized that compounds with a mixed ion channel profile might also have properties that are undesirable to treat non-life threatening indications. All components of CiPA (nonclinical and clinical) require validation, particularly as a composite package to impact drug development and evaluation. One of the significant discussion points was that the existing regulatory guidance supports the use of components of CiPA through follow-up studies. A survey of the conference audience showed that the level of awareness of CiPA is quite high and that companies are already conducting some testing against a wider panel of cardiac ion channels beyond hERG. However, the adoption of other technologies (stem cell derived cardiac myocytes and in silico modeling) is less well developed. Taken together, the session demonstrated the potential advantages of CiPA, but also some significant challenges.

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.

Cardiac Safety Research Consortium: can the thorough QT/QTc study be replaced by early QT assessment in routine clinical pharmacology studies? Scientific update and a research proposal for a path forward.

The International Conference on Harmonization E14 guidance for the clinical evaluation of QT/QTc interval prolongation requires almost all new drugs to undergo a dedicated clinical study, primarily in healthy volunteers, the so-called TQT study. Since 2005, when the E14 guidance was implemented in United States and Europe, close to 400 TQT studies have been conducted. In February 2012, the Cardiac Safety Research Consortium held a think tank meeting at Food and Drug Administration's White Oak campus to discuss whether "QT assessment" can be performed as part of routine phase 1 studies. Based on these discussions, a group of experts convened to discuss how to improve the confidence in QT data from early clinical studies, for example, the First-Time-in-Human trial, through collection of serial electrocardiograms and pharmacokinetic samples and the use of exposure response analysis. Recommendations are given on how to design such "early electrocardiogram assessment," and the limitation of not having a pharmacologic-positive control in these studies is discussed. A research path is identified toward collecting evidence to replace or provide an alternative to the dedicated TQT study.

The IQ-CSRC prospective clinical Phase 1 study: "Can early QT assessment using exposure response analysis replace the thorough QT study?".

A collaboration between the Consortium for Innovation and Quality in Pharmaceutical Development and the Cardiac Safety Research Consortium has been formed to design a clinical study in healthy subjects demonstrating that the thorough QT (TQT) study can be replaced by robust ECG monitoring and exposure-response (ER) analysis of data generated from First-in-Man single ascending dose (SAD) studies. Six marketed drugs with well-characterized QTc effects were identified in discussions with FDA; five have caused QT prolongation above the threshold of regulatory concern. Twenty healthy subjects will be enrolled in a randomized, placebo-controlled study designed with the intent to have similar power to exclude small QTc effects as a SAD study. Two doses (low and high) of each drug will be given on separate, consecutive days to 9 subjects. Six subjects will receive placebo. Data will be analyzed using linear mixed-effects ER models. Criteria for QT-positive drugs will be the demonstration of an upper bound (UB) of the 2-sided 90% confidence interval (CI) of the projected QTc effect at the peak plasma level of the lower dose above the threshold of regulatory concern (currently 10 ms) and a positive slope of ER relationship. The criterion for QT-negative drug will be an UB of the CI of the projected QTc effect of the higher dose <10 ms. It is expected that a successful outcome in this study will provide evidence supporting replacement of the TQT study with ECG assessments in standard early clinical development studies for a new chemical entity.

Exenatide at therapeutic and supratherapeutic concentrations does not prolong the QTc interval in healthy subjects.

AIMS: Exenatide has been demonstrated to improve glycaemic control in patients with type 2 diabetes, with no effect on heart rate corrected QT (QTc ) at therapeutic concentrations. This randomized, placebo- and positive-controlled, crossover, thorough QT study evaluated the effects of therapeutic and supratherapeutic exenatide concentrations on QTc . METHODS: Intravenous infusion was employed to achieve steady-state supratherapeutic concentrations in healthy subjects within a reasonable duration (i.e. days). Subjects received exenatide, placebo and moxifloxacin, with ECGs recorded pre-therapy and during treatment. Intravenous exenatide was expected to increase heart rate to a greater extent than subcutaneous twice daily or once weekly formulations. To assure proper heart rate correction, a wide range of baseline heart rates was assessed and prospectively defined methodology was applied to determine the optimal QT correction. RESULTS: Targeted steady-state plasma exenatide concentrations were exceeded (geometric mean ± SEM 253 ± 8.5 pg ml(-1) , 399 ± 11.9 pg ml(-1) and 627 ± 21.2 pg ml(-1) ). QTc P, a population-based method, was identified as the most appropriate heart rate correction and was prespecified for primary analysis. The upper bound of the two-sided 90% confidence interval for placebo-corrected, baseline-adjusted QTc P (ΔΔQTc P) was <10 ms at all time points and exenatide concentrations. The mean of three measures assessed at the highest steady-state plasma exenatide concentration of ∼500 pg ml(-1) (ΔΔQTc P(avg) ) was -1.13 [-2.11, -0.15). No correlation was observed between ΔΔQTc P and exenatide concentration. Assay sensitivity was confirmed with moxifloxacin. CONCLUSIONS: These results demonstrated that exenatide, at supratherapeutic concentrations, does not prolong QTc and provide an example of methodology for QT assessment of drugs with an inherent heart rate effect.

Clinical evaluation of QT/QTc prolongation and proarrhythmic potential for nonantiarrhythmic drugs: the International Conference on Harmonization of Technical Requirements for Registration of Pharmaceuticals for Human Use E14 guideline.

Proarrhythmias due to drug-induced QT prolongation are the second most common cause for drug withdrawal and have caused increasing concern. Two new International Conference on Harmonization of Technical Requirements for Registration of Pharmaceuticals for Human Use (ICH) guidelines were recently endorsed in which nonclinical (S7B) and clinical (E14) methodologies are discussed and guidance is given to the industry. This commentary describes the key components of the E14 document, the impact of nonclinical testing on the clinical program, the thorough QT study, and the impact of its result on late-stage development. The studies described in S7B and E14 will contribute to a better understanding of the link between nonclinical assays and QT prolongation in humans. Differences in interpretation among individual regulators in the major regions with respect to measures proposed in the E14 guideline might impact regional regulatory decisions. These differences include the value of nonclinical assays for the subsequent clinical testing and how predictive a negative thorough QT study result is for proarrhythmic risk in patients.

Rapid atrial pacing does not decrease the atrial defibrillation threshold.

The aim of the study was to evaluate the effect of preshock atrial pacing on the atrial defibrillation threshold (DFT) during internal cardioversion of AF. The implantable atrial defibrillator has been added to the therapeutic options for patients with recurrent episodes of persistent AF. Although the device is efficient in restoring sinus rhythm, patient discomfort is a limitation. Methods that lower the ADFT are needed. Eleven patients with AF underwent internal cardioversion. In a randomized, crossover design, ADFT testing was performed, applying a step-up protocol starting at 100 V. Rapid atrial pacing was performed with a right atrial catheter for 20 seconds at 90% of the average cycle length of the fibrillatory waves and was immediately followed by a biphasic defibrillation shock. At each energy level, pacing + shock was compared to shock only, until the level at which sinus rhythm was restored by both modes. The step-up protocol was thereafter repeated using the inverse sequence of the two modes. A total of 19 ADFTs were obtained. For 10 the ADFT was lower with pacing + shock, in 4 equal and in 5 higher, than with shock only. The ADFT (mean +/- SD) with pacing + shock was 260 +/- 84 V(3.4 +/- 2.9 J) and did not differ from shock only: 268 +/- 85 V(3.8 +/- 3.0 J) (P > 0.05). The coefficient of variation and the coefficient of reproducibility for pacing + shock was 16% and 60 V, respectively, and for shock only 17% and 61 V. Rapid atrial pacing did not influence the internal ADFT in AF. The randomized, crossover protocol used was reproducible between different modes, and seems useful when testing the impact of different interventions on the ADFT.