The effect of antiarrhythmic medications on the risk of cardiovascular outcomes in patients with atrial fibrillation and coronary artery disease.

BACKGROUND: While current guidelines recommend amiodarone and dronedarone for rhythm control in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) and coronary artery disease (CAD), there was no comparative study of antiarrhythmic drugs (AADs) on the cardiovascular outcomes in general practice. METHODS: This study included patients with AF and CAD who received their first prescription of amiodarone, class Ic AADs (flecainide, propafenone), dronedarone or sotalol between January 2016 and December 2020. The primary outcome was a composite of hospitalization for heart failure (HHF), stroke, acute myocardial infarction (AMI), and cardiovascular death. We used Cox proportional regression models, including with inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW), to estimate the relationship between AADs and cardiovascular outcomes. RESULTS: Among the AF cohort consisting of 8752 patients, 1996 individuals had CAD, including 477 who took dronedarone and 1519 who took other AADs. After a median follow-up of 38 months, 46.3% of patients who took dronedarone and 54.4% of patients who took other AADs experienced cardiovascular events. Compared to dronedarone, the use of other AADs was associated with increased cardiovascular events after adjusting for covariates (hazard ratio [HR] 1.531, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.112-2.141, p = 0.023) and IPTW (HR 1.491, 95% CI 1.174-1.992, p = 0.012). The secondary analysis showed that amiodarone and class Ic drugs were associated with an increased risk of HHF. The low number of subjects in the sotalol group limits data interpretation. CONCLUSION: For patients with AF and CAD, dronedarone was associated with better cardiovascular outcomes than other AADs. Amiodarone and class Ic AADs were associated with a higher risk of cardiovascular events, particularly HHF.

Analysis of a Serious Adverse Reaction of Pulmonary Fibrosis Caused by Dronedarone.

Objective: This study aims to analyze a severe adverse reaction of pulmonary fibrosis induced by dronedarone hydrochloride tablets, and to provide a reference for clinical rational medication through drug precautions. Methods: A case of pulmonary fibrosis induced by dronedarone hydrochloride tablets, along with related literature was retrospectively analyzed. Results: Patients over 65 years old with a history of exposure to amiodarone may increase the incidence of pulmonary toxicity induced by dronedarone, and dronedarone should not be selected as a substitute treatment drug for patients with amiodarone-induced pulmonary toxicity. Conclusions: It is recommended that clinicians monitor the diffusion capacity of carbon monoxide and lung ventilation function of patients before and after using dronedarone for treatment. For patients with a history of amiodarone exposure, intermittent monitoring of chest X-rays and lung function is necessary. If lung function decreases, dronedarone should be immediately discontinued.

Dronedarone Attenuates Ang II-Induced Myocardial Hypertrophy Through Regulating SIRT1/FOXO3/PKIA Axis.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Long-term pathological myocardial hypertrophy (MH) seriously affects the normal function of the heart. Dronedarone was reported to attenuate left ventricular hypertrophy of mice. However, the molecular regulatory mechanism of dronedarone in MH is unclear. METHODS: Angiotensin II (Ang II) was used to induce cell hypertrophy of H9C2 cells. Transverse aortic constriction (TAC) surgery was performed to establish a rat model of MH. Cell size was evaluated using crystal violet staining and rhodamine phalloidin staining. Reverse transcription quantitative polymerase chain reaction and western blot were performed to detect the mRNA and protein expressions of genes. JASPAR and luciferase activity were conducted to predict and validate interaction between forkhead box O3 (FOXO3) and protein kinase inhibitor alpha (PKIA) promoter. RESULTS: Ang II treatment induced cell hypertrophy and inhibited sirtuin 1 (SIRT1) expression, which were reversed by dronedarone. SIRT1 overexpression or PKIA overexpression enhanced dronedarone-mediated suppression of cell hypertrophy in Ang II-induced H9C2 cells. Mechanistically, SIRT1 elevated FOXO3 expression through SIRT1-mediated deacetylation of FOXO3 and FOXO3 upregulated PKIA expression through interacting with PKIA promoter. Moreover, SIRT1 silencing compromised dronedarone-mediated suppression of cell hypertrophy, while PKIA upregulation abolished the influences of SIRT1 silencing. More importantly, dronedarone improved TAC surgery-induced MH and impairment of cardiac function of rats via affecting SIRT1/FOXO3/PKIA axis. CONCLUSIONS: Dronedarone alleviated MH through mediating SIRT1/FOXO3/PKIA axis, which provide more evidences for dronedarone against MH.

Dronedarone for the Treatment of Atrial Arrhythmias in Adults With Congenital Heart Disease.

BACKGROUND: Atrial tachyarrhythmias are common and difficult to treat in adults with congenital heart disease. Dronedarone has proven effective in patients without congenital heart disease, but data are limited about its use in adults with congenital heart disease of moderate to great complexity. METHODS: A single-center, retrospective chart review of 21 adults with congenital heart disease of moderate to great complexity who were treated with dronedarone for atrial tachyarrhythmias was performed. RESULTS: The median (IQR) age at dronedarone initiation was 35 (27.5-39) years. Eleven patients (52%) were male. Ten patients (48%) had New York Heart Association class I disease, 10 (48%) had class II disease, and 1 (5%) had class III disease. Ejection fraction at initiation was greater than 55% in 11 patients (52%), 35% to 55% in 9 patients (43%), and less than 35% in 1 patient (5%). Prior treatments included ß-blockers (71%), sotalol (38%), amiodarone (24%), digoxin (24%), and catheter ablation (38%). Rhythm control was complete in 5 patients (24%), partial in 6 (29%), and inadequate in 10 (48%). Two patients (10%) experienced adverse events, including nausea in 1 (5%) and cardiac arrest in 1 (5%), which occurred 48 months after initiation of treatment. There were no deaths during the follow-up period. The median (IQR) follow-up time for patients with complete or partial rhythm control was 20 (1-54) months. CONCLUSION: Dronedarone can be effective for adult patients with congenital heart disease and atrial arrhythmias for whom more established therapies have failed, and with close monitoring it can be safely tolerated.

Amiodarone and Dronedarone Causes Liver Injury with Distinctly Different Clinical Presentations.

OBJECTIVE: To describe hepatotoxicity due to amiodarone and dronedarone from the DILIN and the US FDA's surveillance database. METHODS: Hepatotoxicity due to amiodarone and dronedarone enrolled in the U.S. Drug Induced Liver Injury Network (DILIN) from 2004 to 2020 are described. Dronedarone hepatotoxicity cases associated with liver biopsy results were obtained from the FDA Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS) from 2009 to 2020. RESULTS: Among DILIN's 10 amiodarone and 3 dronedarone DILIN cases, the latency for amiodarone was longer than with dronedarone (388 vs 119 days, p = 0.50) and the median ALT at DILI onset was significantly lower with amiodarone (118 vs 1191 U/L, p = 0.05). Liver biopsies in five amiodarone cases showed fibrosis, steatosis, and numerous Mallory-Denk bodies. Five patients died although only one from liver failure. One patient with dronedarone induced liver injury died of a non-liver related cause. Nine additional cases of DILI due to dronedarone requiring hospitalization were identified in the FAERS database. Three patients developed liver injury within a month of starting the medication. Two developed acute liver failure and underwent urgent liver transplant, one was evaluated for liver transplant but then recovered spontaneously, while one patient with cirrhosis died of liver related causes. CONCLUSION: Amiodarone hepatotoxicity resembles that seen in alcohol related liver injury, with fatty infiltration and inflammation. Dronedarone is less predictable, typically without fat and with a shorter latency of use before presentation. These differences may be explained, in part, by the differing pharmacokinetics of the two drugs leading to different mechanisms of hepatotoxicity.

Dronedarone Enhances the Antibacterial Activity of Polymyxin B and Inhibits the Quorum Sensing System by Interacting with LuxS.

Quorum sensing (QS) is considered an appealing target for interference with bacterial infections. ß-Adrenergic blockers are promising anti-QS agents but do not have antibacterial activity. We assessed the potential ability of adrenergic receptor inhibitors to enhance the antibacterial activity of polymyxin B (PB) against Klebsiella pneumoniae and determined that dronedarone has the most potent activity both in vitro and in vivo. We found that dronedarone increases the thermal stability of LuxS, decreases the production of AI-2, and affects the biofilm formation of K. pneumoniae. We also identified the direct binding of dronedarone to LuxS. However, the mechanism by which dronedarone enhances the antibacterial activity of PB has not been elucidated and is worthy of further exploration. Our study provides a basis for the future development of drug combination regimens.

Comparison of Efficacy and Safety Between Dronedarone and Amiodarone Used During the Blind Period in Patients with Atrial Fibrillation After Catheter Ablation.

Background: Dronedarone is an effective drug for maintaining the sinus rhythm in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). The efficacy and safety of dronedarone versus amiodarone in patients with AF after catheter ablation (CA) needs more evidence. We retrospectively compared the efficacy and safety of dronedarone and amiodarone in our hospital. Methods: Patients who underwent CA from January 2021 to January 2022 and used dronedarone (n=229) or amiodarone (n=202) during the blind period were enrolled. The recurrence of AF in post-and during the blanking period was compared between the groups; the rehospitalization for re-ablation and adverse drug events (ADE) were also calculated. Results: During an average follow-up period of 14.28 months, the long-term recurrence rate of AF did not differ significantly between the amiodarone group and dronedarone group (22.71% vs 21.29%, hazard ratio [HR], 1.033, 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.661-1.614; p=0.888). The recurrence rate in the blanking period also showed no statistically significant differences between the amiodarone group and dronedarone group (9.90% vs 14.41%, HR, 0.851; 95% CI, 0.463-1.564; p=0.604). The re-hospitalization rates for re-ablation between two groups did not differ between the amiodarone group and dronedarone group (4.65% vs 13.46%; p =0.144). The incidence of ADE was higher in the dronedarone groups than that in the amiodarone group (16.59% vs 5.45%, p <0.001). The main adverse drug events in the dronedarone and amiodarone groups were gastrointestinal (6.99%) and bradycardia (2.48%), respectively. Conclusion: Compared to the amiodarone group, the dronedarone group had a similar blank-period and long-term recurrence rate of AF and a higher incidence of ADE.

Utilizing Drug Amorphous Solid Dispersions for the Preparation of Dronedarone per os Formulations.

Dronedarone (DRN), an antiarrhythmic drug, exhibits potent pharmacological effects in the management of cardiac arrhythmias. Despite its therapeutic potential, DRN faces formulation challenges due to its low aqueous solubility. Hence, the present study is dedicated to the examination of amorphous solid dispersions (ASDs) as a strategic approach for enhancing the solubility of DRN. Initially, the glass forming ability (GFA) of API was assessed alongside its thermal degradation profile, and it was revealed that DRN is a stable glass former (GFA III compound) that remains thermally stable up to approximately 200 °C. Subsequently, five commonly used ASD matrix/carriers, i.e., hydroxypropyl methylcellulose (HPMC), povidone (PVP), copovidone (PVP/VA), Soluplus® (SOL), and Eudragit® E PO (EPO), were screened for the formation of a DRN-based ASD using film casting and solvent shift methods, along with miscibility evaluation measurements. SOL proved to be the most promising matrix/carrier among the others, and, hence, was used to prepare DRN ASDs via the melt-quench method. The physicochemical characterization of the prepared systems (via pXRD) revealed the complete amorphization of the API within the matrix/carrier, while the system was physically stable for at least three months after its preparation. In vitro release studies for the ASDs, conducted under non-sink conditions, revealed the sustained supersaturation of the drug for at least 8 h. Finally, the use of attenuated total reflectance (ATR) FTIR spectroscopy showed the formation of a strong molecular interaction between the drug molecules and SOL.

Dronedarone Versus Sotalol in Antiarrhythmic Drug-Naive Veterans With Atrial Fibrillation.

BACKGROUND: Sotalol and dronedarone are both used for maintenance of sinus rhythm for patients with atrial fibrillation. However, while sotalol requires initial monitoring for QT prolongation and proarrhythmia, dronedarone does not. These treatments can be used in comparable patients, but their safety and effectiveness have not been compared head to head. Therefore, we retrospectively evaluated the effectiveness and safety using data from a large health care system. METHODS: Using Veterans Health Administration data, we identified 11 296 antiarrhythmic drug-naive patients with atrial fibrillation prescribed dronedarone or sotalol in 2012 or later. We excluded patients with prior conduction disease, pacemakers or implantable cardioverter-defibrillators, ventricular arrhythmia, cancer, renal failure, liver disease, or heart failure. We used natural language processing to identify and compare baseline left ventricular ejection fraction between treatment arms. We used 1:1 propensity score matching, based on patient demographics, comorbidities, and medications, and Cox regression to compare strategies. To evaluate residual confounding, we performed falsification analysis with nonplausible outcomes. RESULTS: The matched cohort comprised 6212 patients (3106 dronedarone and 3106 sotalol; mean [±SD] age, 71±10 years; 2.5% female; mean [±SD] CHA2DS2-VASC, 2±1.3). The mean (±SD) left ventricular ejection fraction was 55±11 and 58±10 for dronedarone and sotalol users, correspondingly. Dronedarone, compared with sotalol, did not demonstrate a significant association with risk of cardiovascular hospitalization (hazard ratio, 1.03 [95% CI, 0.88-1.21]) or all-cause mortality (hazard ratio, 0.89 [95% CI, 0.68-1.16]). However, dronedarone was associated with significantly lower risk of ventricular proarrhythmic events (hazard ratio, 0.53 [95% CI, 0.38-0.74]) and symptomatic bradycardia (hazard ratio, 0.56 [95% CI, 0.37-0.87]). The primary findings were stable across sensitivity analyses. Falsification analyses were not significant. CONCLUSIONS: Dronedarone, compared with sotalol, was associated with a lower risk of ventricular proarrhythmic events and conduction disorders while having no difference in risk of incident cardiovascular hospitalization and mortality. These observational data provide the basis for prospective efficacy and safety trials.

Effect of Prolonged Use of Dronedarone on Recurrence in Patients with Non-Paroxysmal Atrial Fibrillation After Radiofrequency Ablation (DORIS): Rationale and Design of a Randomized Multicenter, Double-Blinded Placebo-Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: Prolonged use of anti-arrhythmic drugs (AAD) beyond the post-ablation blanking period to maintain sinus rhythm has been adopted in clinical practice but without sufficient evidence. Dronedarone is an AAD valid for maintaining sinus rhythm with fewer side effects than other AAD for long-term use. OBJECTIVE: We sought to investigate the effect of prolonged use of dronedarone on the recurrence of non-paroxysmal AF patients beyond 3 months within the first year after ablation. METHODS: Non-paroxysmal AF patients will receive dronedarone for 3 months after radiofrequency ablation. Patients without drug side effects and atrial tachyarrhythmia (AT) recurrence will then be randomly divided into dronedarone and placebo groups and followed up until 1 year after ablation. The primary endpoint is the cumulative nonrecurrence rate post 3 months to 1 year after ablation. Patients will receive 7-day Holter monitoring (ECG patch) at 6, 9, and 12 months after ablation to evaluate AT recurrence. Secondary endpoints include dronedarone withdrawal due to side effects or intolerance of AT recurrence, time to the first recurrence, repeat ablation, electrical cardioversion, unscheduled emergency room visit, or re-hospitalization. CONCLUSION: This trial will evaluate whether prolonged use of dronedarone effectively reduces the recurrence rate after ablation in non-paroxysmal AF patients. The result of this trial will provide evidence for optimizing post-ablation anti-arrhythmic therapy. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov ; NCT05655468, 19-December-2022.

Dronedarone versus sotalol in patients with atrial fibrillation: A systematic literature review and network meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: There are limited comparative data on safety and efficacy within commonly used Vaughan-Williams (VW) class III antiarrhythmic drugs (AADs) for maintenance of sinus rhythm in adults with atrial fibrillation (AF). HYPOTHESIS: We hypothesized that dronedarone and sotalol, two commonly prescribed VW class III AADs with class II properties, have different safety and efficacy effects in patients with nonpermanent AF. METHODS: A systematic literature review was conducted searching MEDLINE®, Embase, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) up to June 15, 2021 (NCT05279833). Clinical trials and observational studies that evaluated safety and efficacy of dronedarone or sotalol in adults with AF were included. Bayesian random-effects network meta-analysis (NMA) was used to quantify comparative safety and efficacy. Where feasible, we performed sensitivity analyses by including only randomized controlled trials (RCTs). RESULTS: Of 3581 records identified through database searches, 37 unique studies (23 RCTs, 13 observational studies, and 1 nonrandomized trial) were included in the NMA. Dronedarone was associated with a statistically significantly lower risk of all-cause death versus sotalol (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.38 [95% credible interval, CrI: 0.19, 0.74]). The association was numerically similar in the sensitivity analysis (HR = 0.46 [95% CrI: 0.21, 1.02]). AF recurrence and cardiovascular death results were not significantly different between dronedarone and sotalol in all-studies and sensitivity analyses. CONCLUSION: The NMA findings indicate that, across all clinical trials and observational studies included, dronedarone compared with sotalol was associated with a lower risk of all-cause death, but with no difference in AF recurrence.

Discovering Synergistic Compounds with BYL-719 in PI3K Overactivated Basal-like PDXs.

Basal-like triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) tumor cells are difficult to eliminate due to resistance mechanisms that promote survival. While this breast cancer subtype has low PIK3CA mutation rates when compared to estrogen receptor-positive (ER+) breast cancers, most basal-like TNBCs have an overactive PI3K pathway due to gene amplification or high gene expression. BYL-719 is a PIK3CA inhibitor that has been found to have low drug-drug interactions, which increases the likelihood that it could be useful for combinatorial therapy. Alpelisib (BYL-719) with fulvestrant was recently approved for treating ER+ breast cancer patients whose cancer had developed resistance to ER-targeting therapy. In these studies, a set of basal-like patient-derived xenograft (PDX) models was transcriptionally defined with bulk and single-cell RNA-sequencing and clinically actionable mutation profiles defined with Oncomine mutational profiling. This information was overlaid onto therapeutic drug screening results. BYL-719-based, synergistic two-drug combinations were identified with 20 different compounds, including everolimus, afatinib, and dronedarone, which were also found to be effective at minimizing tumor growth. These data support the use of these drug combinations towards cancers with activating PIK3CA mutations/gene amplifications or PTEN deficient/PI3K overactive pathways.

Cardiovascular outcomes in patients with atrial fibrillation concomitantly treated with antiarrhythmic drugs and non-vitamin k antagonist oral anticoagulants.

AIMS: Limited data compared antiarrhythmic drugs (AADs) with concomitant non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants in atrial fibrillation patients, hence the aim of the study. METHODS AND RESULTS: National health insurance database were retrieved during 2012-17 for study. We excluded patients not taking AADs, bradycardia, heart block, heart failure admission, mitral stenosis, prosthetic valve, incomplete demographic data, and follow-up <3 months. Outcomes were compared in Protocol 1, dronedarone vs. non-dronedarone; Protocol 2, dronedarone vs. amiodarone; and Protocol 3, dronedarone vs. propafenone. Outcomes were acute myocardial infarction (AMI), ischaemic stroke/systemic embolism, intracranial haemorrhage (ICH), major bleeding, cardiovascular death, all-cause mortality, and major adverse cardiovascular event (MACE) (including AMI, ischaemic stroke, and cardiovascular death). In Protocol 1, 2298 dronedarone users and 6984 non-dronedarone users (amiodarone = 4844; propafenone = 1914; flecainide = 75; sotalol = 61) were analysed. Dronedarone was associated with lower ICH (HR = 0.61, 95% CI = 0.38-0.99, P = 0.0436), cardiovascular death (HR = 0.24, 95% CI = 0.16-0.37, P < 0.0001), all-cause mortality (HR = 0.33, 95% CI = 0.27-0.42, P < 0.0001), and MACE (HR = 0.56, 95% CI = 0.45-0.70, P < 0.0001). In Protocol 2, 2231 dronedarone users and 6693 amiodarone users were analysed. Dronedarone was associated with significantly lower ICH (HR = 0.53, 95%=CI 0.33-0.84, P = 0.0078), cardiovascular death (HR = 0.20, 95% CI = 0.13-0.31, P < 0.0001), all-cause mortality (HR 0.27, 95% CI 0.22-0.34, P < 0.0001), and MACE (HR = 0.53, 95% CI = 0.43-0.66, P < 0.0001), compared with amiodarone. In Protocol 3, 812 dronedarone users and 2436 propafenone users were analysed. There were no differences between two drugs for primary and secondary outcomes. CONCLUSION: The use of dronedarone with NOACs was associated with cardiovascular benefits in an Asian population, compared with non-dronedarone AADs and amiodarone.

Clinical significance of the rivaroxaban-dronedarone interaction: insights from physiologically based pharmacokinetic modelling.

Patients with atrial fibrillation may require rhythm control therapy in addition to anticoagulation therapy for the prevention of stroke. Since 2012, the European Society of Cardiology and European Heart Rhythm Association guidelines have recommended non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants, including rivaroxaban, for the prevention of stroke in patients with atrial fibrillation. During the same period, these guidelines have also recommended dronedarone or amiodarone as second-line rhythm control agents in certain patients with atrial fibrillation and no contraindications. Amiodarone and dronedarone both strongly inhibit P-glycoprotein, while dronedarone is a moderate and amiodarone a weak inhibitor of cytochrome P450 3A4 (CYP3A4). Based on these data and evidence from physiologically based pharmacokinetic modelling, amiodarone and dronedarone are expected to have similar effects on rivaroxaban exposure resulting from P-glycoprotein and CYP3A4 inhibition. However, the rivaroxaban label recommends against the concomitant use of dronedarone, but not amiodarone, citing a lack of evidence on the concomitant use of rivaroxaban and dronedarone as the reason for the different recommendations. In this report, we discuss evidence from clinical studies and physiologically based pharmacokinetic modelling on the potential for increased rivaroxaban exposure resulting from drug-drug interaction between rivaroxaban and dronedarone or amiodarone. The current evidence supports the same clinical status and concomitant use of either amiodarone or dronedarone with rivaroxaban, which could be considered in future recommendations.

Effect of dronedarone vs. placebo on atrial fibrillation progression: a post hoc analysis from ATHENA trial.

AIMS: This post hoc analysis of the ATHENA trial (NCT00174785) assessed the effect of dronedarone on the estimated burden of atrial fibrillation (AF)/atrial flutter (AFL) progression to presumed permanent AF/AFL, and regression to sinus rhythm (SR), compared with placebo. METHODS AND RESULTS: The burden of AF/AFL was estimated by a modified Rosendaal method using available electrocardiograms (ECG). Cumulative incidence of permanent AF/AFL (defined as ≥6 months of AF/AFL until end of study) or permanent SR (defined as ≥6 months of SR until end of study) were calculated using Kaplan-Meier estimates. A log-rank test was used to assess statistical significance. Hazard ratios (HRs) with corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were estimated using a Cox model, adjusted for treatment group. Of the 4439 patients included in this analysis, 2208 received dronedarone, and 2231 placebo. Baseline and clinical characteristics were well balanced between groups. Overall, 304 (13.8%) dronedarone-treated patients progressed to permanent AF/AFL compared with 455 (20.4%) treated with placebo (P < 0.0001). Compared with those receiving placebo, patients receiving dronedarone had a lower cumulative incidence of permanent AF/AFL (log-rank P < 0.001; HR: 0.65; 95% CI: 0.56-0.75), a higher cumulative incidence of permanent SR (log-rank P < 0.001; HR: 1.19; 95% CI: 1.09-1.29), and a lower estimated AF/AFL burden over time (P < 0.01 from Day 14 to Month 21). CONCLUSION: These results suggest that dronedarone could be a useful antiarrhythmic drug for early rhythm control due to less AF/AFL progression and more regression to SR vs. placebo, potentially reflecting reverse remodeling. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT00174785.

Development and verification of a physiologically based pharmacokinetic model of dronedarone and its active metabolite N-desbutyldronedarone: Application to prospective simulation of complex drug-drug interaction with rivaroxaban.

AIMS: Despite potential enzyme- and transporter-mediated drug-drug interactions (DDIs) between dronedarone and rivaroxaban in atrial fibrillation (AF) patients, pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic data remain limited to guide clinical practice. We aimed to develop, verify and validate a physiologically based pharmacokinetic (PBPK) model of dronedarone and its major metabolite, N-desbutyldronedarone (NDBD), to prospectively interrogate this clinically relevant DDI in healthy and mild renal impairment populations. METHODS: The middle-out development of our PBPK model combined literature-derived or in-house in vitro data, predicted in silico data and in vivo clinical data. Model verification was performed for intravenous and oral (single and multiple) dosing regimens. Model validation for the accurate prediction of cytochrome P450 (CYP)3A4- and P-glycoprotein-mediated DDI utilized simvastatin and digoxin as respective victim drugs. Rivaroxaban-specific inhibitory parameters of dronedarone and/or NDBD against CYP3A4, CYP2J2, OAT3 and P-glycoprotein were incorporated into the PBPK-DDI model for prospective dronedarone-rivaroxaban DDI simulation. RESULTS: Dronedarone and NDBD PK following clinically relevant doses of 400 mg dronedarone across single and multiple oral dosing were accurately simulated by incorporating effect of auto-inactivation on dose nonlinearities. Following successful model validation, nondose-adjusted rivaroxaban-dronedarone DDI in healthy and mild renal impairment populations revealed simulated rivaroxaban area under the plasma concentration-time curve up to 24 h fold change greater than dose exposure equivalence (0.70-1.43) at 1.65 and 1.84, respectively. Correspondingly, respective major bleeding risk was 4.24 and 4.70% compared with threshold of 4.5% representing contraindicated rivaroxaban-ketoconazole DDI. CONCLUSION: Our PBPK-DDI model predicted clinically significant dronedarone-rivaroxaban DDI in both healthy and mild renal impairment subjects. Greater benefit vs. risk could be achieved with rivaroxaban dose reductions to at least 15 mg in mild renal impairment subjects on concomitant dronedarone and rivaroxaban.

Novel methodology for the evaluation of symptoms reported by patients with newly diagnosed atrial fibrillation: Application of natural language processing to electronic medical records data.

INTRODUCTION: Understanding symptom patterns in atrial fibrillation (AF) can help in disease management. We report on the application of natural language processing (NLP) to electronic medical records (EMRs) to capture symptom reports in patients with newly diagnosed (incident) AF. METHODS AND RESULTS: This observational retrospective study included adult patients with an index diagnosis of incident AF during January 1, 2016 through June 30, 2018, in the Optum datasets. The baseline and follow-up periods were 1 year before/after the index date, respectively. The primary objective was identification of the following predefined symptom reports: dyspnea or shortness of breath; syncope, presyncope, lightheadedness, or dizziness; chest pain; fatigue; and palpitations. In an exploratory analysis, the incidence rates of symptom reports and cardiovascular hospitalization were assessed in propensity-matched patient cohorts with incident AF receiving first-line dronedarone or sotalol. Among 30 447 patients with an index AF diagnosis, the NLP algorithm identified at least 1 predefined symptom in 9734 (31.9%) patients. The incidence rate of symptom reports was highest at 0-3 months post-diagnosis and lower at >3-6 and >6-12 months (pre-defined timepoints). Across all time periods, the most common symptoms were dyspnea or shortness of breath, followed by syncope, presyncope, lightheadedness, or dizziness. Similar temporal patterns of symptom reports were observed among patients with prescriptions for dronedarone or sotalol as first-line treatment. CONCLUSION: This study illustrates that NLP can be applied to EMR data to characterize symptom reports in patients with incident AF, and the potential for these methods to inform comparative effectiveness.

Literature analysis of adverse drug reactions induced by dronedarone / 中国药房

OBJECTIVE To analyze the clinical manifestations and characteristics of adverse drug reactions （ADR） induced by dronedarone，and to provide reference for clinically safe drug use. METHODS Retrieved from PubMed database， Wanfang database，CNKI and VIP （up to August 31st， 2022），ADR cases of dronedarone were analyzed retrospectively in respect of patient’s age，gender，nationality，usage and dosage of dronedarone，and occurrence time，clinical manifestations，treatment measures and outcome of ADR，etc. RESULTS A total of 26 case reports were included，with a total of 27 patients. The age of the patients was 41-86 years old，with an average age of 68.8 years. The proportion of patients aged 60-79 was the largest （20 cases，74.1%）. There was no significant difference in the number of males （14 cases） and females （13 cases）. The patients came from 6 countries， of which the United States was the largest （16 cases，59.3%）. The dosage of 14 patients was 400 mg bid；one patient was 200 mg bid；the dosage for 12 patients was not specified. The most ADR cases （16 cases，59.3%） occurred within 1 month，of which 11 cases（40.7%） occurred within 1 week，and there were no ADR reports with medication more than 12 months. Organs/systems involved in ADRs were mainly liver and biliary diseases （7 case times，23.3%），skin and subcutaneous tissue diseases （6 case times， 20.0%），respiratory tract，thoracic and mediastinal diseases （5 case times，16.7%）. In addition，ADR also occurred in heart diseases， kidney and urinary system diseases，vascular diseases，medical examinations and eye diseases. Among 27 patients，there were 3 cases of death，the ADR were bronchiolitis obliterans with organizing pneumonia，toxic epidermal necrolysis and hepatic failure， respectively. One patient underwent liver transplantation. CONCLUSIONS Dronedarone can cause multiple organ system ADR. Before use，it is necessary to improve the examination including ECG，liver function，lung function，etc. and strengthen drug use monitoring within one month after the start of use，especially the ADR of hepatobiliary，skin and respiratory system. The occurrence of severe ADR has no obvious relationship with the duration of medication； even if it is taken safely for a long time，it still needs continuous pharmaceutical monitoring and follow-up to ensure the clinical medication safety of patients.

Ion-Triggered In Situ Gelling Intranasal Spray of Dronedarone Hydrochloride Nanocarriers: In Vitro Optimization and In Vivo Pharmacokinetic Appraisal.

The current study aims to develop niosomal nanocarriers for intranasal delivery of dronedarone hydrochloride to ameliorate its limited bioavailability. Niosomes were prepared by ethanol injection method and optimized using 3² full factorial experimental design. Both Span® type (X1) and Span®: cholesterol ratio (X2) were set as independent variables. Vesicle size (Y1), polydispersity index (Y2), zeta potential (Y3), and entrapment efficiency (Y4) were set as responses. The optimal formula was further incorporated into an ion-sensitive in situ gelling polymer for intranasal delivery. Optimal formula (N7), which is composed of Span® 80: cholesterol (1:1), was of the least vesicle size (121.27 ± 13.31 nm), least polydispersity index (0.43 ± 0.073), highest zeta potential (-22.23 ± 2.84 mV) and highest entrapment efficiency (73.44 ± 2.8%). About 75.86% and 60.29% of dronedarone hydrochloride were released from N7 dispersion and in situ gel, respectively, within 12 h, compared to only 13.3% released from a drug-free suspension. In vivo pharmacokinetic study on male New Zealand rabbits resulted in significantly higher Cmax, AUC0-72, and AUC0-∞ of intranasal niosomal in situ gel compared to oral suspension. Almost twofold amplification of relative bioavailability was obtained after intranasal administration of niosomal in situ gel (195.7%) compared to oral suspension.