TY - JOUR
T1 - Evidence for the hERG Liability of Antihistamines, Antipsychotics, and Anti-Infective Agents
T2 - A Systematic Literature Review From the ARITMO Project
AU - Hazell, Lorna
AU - Raschi, Emanuel
AU - De Ponti, Fabrizio
AU - Thomas, Simon H.L.
AU - Salvo, Francesco
AU - Ahlberg Helgee, Ernst
AU - Boyer, Scott
AU - Sturkenboom, Miriam
AU - Shakir, Saad
N1 - Funding Information:
This study is a part of a research project that has received funding from the European Community's Seventh Framework Program under grant agreement number 241679, the ARITMO project. The funding body had no role in the study design, ie, in the collection, analysis, or interpretation of data, in the writing of the report, or in the decision to submit the article for publication. The authors would like to thank the following current or past staff members at the Drug Safety Research Unit for their valued assistance in obtaining articles (Rachel Green), eligibility assessments (Yvonne Buggy), accuracy checking (Vicki Osborne and Anjali Vajramani). We must also thank Rachel Green (DSRU) and the libraries of the University of Portsmouth (UK) and Erasmus University (Netherlands) for their assistance in obtaining copies of publications.
Publisher Copyright:
© 2016, The American College of Clinical Pharmacology
PY - 2017/5/1
Y1 - 2017/5/1
N2 - A systematic review was performed to categorize the hERG (human ether-a-go-go–related gene) liability of antihistamines, antipsychotics, and anti-infectives and to compare it with current clinical risk of torsade de pointes (TdP). Eligible studies were hERG assays reporting half-minimal inhibitory concentrations (IC50). A “hERG safety margin” was calculated from the IC50 divided by the peak human plasma concentration (free Cmax). A margin below 30 defined hERG liability. Each drug was assigned an “uncertainty score” based on volume, consistency, precision, and internal and external validity of evidence. The hERG liability was compared to existing knowledge on TdP risk (www.credibledrugs.org). Of 1828 studies, 82 were eligible, allowing calculation of safety margins for 61 drugs. Thirty-one drugs (51%) had evidence of hERG liability including 6 with no previous mention of TdP risk (eg, desloratadine, lopinavir). Conversely, 16 drugs (26%) had no evidence of hERG liability including 6 with known, or at least conditional or possible, TdP risk (eg, chlorpromazine, sulpiride). The main sources of uncertainty were the validity of the experimental conditions used (antihistamines and antipsychotics) and nonuse of reference compounds (anti-infectives). In summary, hERG liability was categorized for 3 widely used drug classes, incorporating a qualitative assessment of the strength of available evidence. Some concordance with TdP risk was observed, although several drugs had hERG liability without evidence of clinical risk and vice versa. This may be due to gaps in clinical evidence, limitations of hERG/Cmax data, or other patient/drug-specific factors that contribute to real-life TdP risk.
AB - A systematic review was performed to categorize the hERG (human ether-a-go-go–related gene) liability of antihistamines, antipsychotics, and anti-infectives and to compare it with current clinical risk of torsade de pointes (TdP). Eligible studies were hERG assays reporting half-minimal inhibitory concentrations (IC50). A “hERG safety margin” was calculated from the IC50 divided by the peak human plasma concentration (free Cmax). A margin below 30 defined hERG liability. Each drug was assigned an “uncertainty score” based on volume, consistency, precision, and internal and external validity of evidence. The hERG liability was compared to existing knowledge on TdP risk (www.credibledrugs.org). Of 1828 studies, 82 were eligible, allowing calculation of safety margins for 61 drugs. Thirty-one drugs (51%) had evidence of hERG liability including 6 with no previous mention of TdP risk (eg, desloratadine, lopinavir). Conversely, 16 drugs (26%) had no evidence of hERG liability including 6 with known, or at least conditional or possible, TdP risk (eg, chlorpromazine, sulpiride). The main sources of uncertainty were the validity of the experimental conditions used (antihistamines and antipsychotics) and nonuse of reference compounds (anti-infectives). In summary, hERG liability was categorized for 3 widely used drug classes, incorporating a qualitative assessment of the strength of available evidence. Some concordance with TdP risk was observed, although several drugs had hERG liability without evidence of clinical risk and vice versa. This may be due to gaps in clinical evidence, limitations of hERG/Cmax data, or other patient/drug-specific factors that contribute to real-life TdP risk.
KW - anti-infective agents
KW - antipsychotic agents
KW - ether-a-go-go potassium channels
KW - histamine H1 antagonists
KW - review
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85007228663&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1002/jcph.838
DO - 10.1002/jcph.838
M3 - Review article
C2 - 28019033
AN - SCOPUS:85007228663
SN - 0091-2700
VL - 57
SP - 558
EP - 572
JO - Journal of Clinical Pharmacology
JF - Journal of Clinical Pharmacology
IS - 5
ER -