In a preclinical rabbit model, EGIS-7229 demonstrated a favorable electrophysiological profile with minimal hemodynamic effects and reduced proarrhythmic potential compared to a pure Class III antiarrhythmic agent.
Hypothesis-generating for multi-channel antiarrhythmics with favorable hemodynamics; leaves open translation to human efficacy and safety.
Preclinical Research The basic hemodynamic, electrophysiological, and pharmacological effects of EGIS ‐7229 ( E ‐7229) were evaluated and compared with those of a pure “Class III “ antiarrhythmic drug ( GLG ‐ V ‐13) in conscious rabbits. Both compounds decreased heart rate dose‐dependently. Mean arterial blood pressure was not influenced by E ‐7229; however, GLG ‐ V ‐13 produced a significant elevation on this parameter. Left ventricular end‐diastolic pressure was gradually increased by E ‐7229, while GLG ‐ V ‐13 induced more considerable elevation on that at intermediate doses. QT and QT cb were lengthened by both compounds; however, higher doses of E ‐7229 resulted in shortening of the prolonged QT and QT cb . Ventricular effective refractory period ( VERP ) was significantly prolonged by either drug studied. Threshold doses to produce QT 50% , QT max , VERP 50% , and VERP max were significantly higher for E ‐7229 compared with GLG ‐ V ‐13. Significantly higher doses were required for E ‐7229 to induce arrhythmias. The safety ratio was comparable for both of the compounds. E ‐7229 can exert multiple actions on cardiac ion channels with minimal influence on hemodynamic parameters and reduced proarrhytmic profile in our preclinical model.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Drimba et al. (2012) studied Arrhythmia (preclinical model). EGIS-7229 vs. GLG-V-13 was evaluated on Hemodynamic, electrophysiological, and pharmacological effects.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: