4.5 Review

Cardionomics: a new integrative approach for screening cardiotoxicity of drug candidates

期刊

出版社

TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.1517/17425250902932915

关键词

action potential; adverse cardiac events; antiarrhythmic drugs; arrhythmia; assays; calcium transients; electrophysiology excitation-contraction coupling; hERG; idiopathic dilated cardiomyopathy; ion channels

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: Despite the FDA guidelines for studies to be performed to rule out potential cardiac toxicity, many drugs have nevertheless entered the market only to be later withdrawn from the market owing to cardiac toxicity. Cardiac toxicity may result from drugs causing impaired function or death of cardiomyocytes, valvular damage, myocardial ischemia and/or ventricular arrhythmias. Negative cardiovascular events have been implicated in 28% of drug withdrawals in the USA. The significance for patients, regulators and the pharmaceutical industry is immense. Objective: We address whether a more rigorous and integrative approach is needed for cardiovascular safety screening of all new drug candidates. Furthermore, we will present a cardionomics approach that looks at several in vitro and in vivo models that can be applied to all drugs independent of category, therapeutic area or class. Methods: We present examples of drugs demonstrating cardiac toxicity and provide an in-depth review of how calcium homeostasis may be a unifying theme in clinically observed cardiotoxic events. We introduce a cardionomics approach that detects clinical cardiac toxicity early in the drug discovery process, thus, preventing costly late attrition. Conclusion: The consequences of a failure to detect potential cardiovascular safety issues before clinical launch can have an enormous cost for the pharmaceutical industry, when major drugs are withdrawn due to lawsuits as well as loss of time and resources. An integrated cardionomics approach may reduce the risk of drug withdrawals as a result of unexpected clinical cardiac safety issues.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据