贝达喹啉增强型麻风病预防性治疗中移动 QT 间期监测策略的可行性和准确性。

IF 3.1 3区 医学 Q2 MEDICINE, RESEARCH & EXPERIMENTAL
Auke T. Bergeman, Said Nourdine, Alberto Piubello, Zahara Salim, Sofie M. Braet, Abdallah Baco, Silahi H. Grillone, Rian Snijders, Carolien Hoof, Achilleas Tsoumanis, Harry van Loen, Younoussa Assoumani, Aboubacar Mzembaba, Nimer Ortuño-Gutiérrez, Epco Hasker, Christian van der Werf, Bouke C. de Jong
{"title":"贝达喹啉增强型麻风病预防性治疗中移动 QT 间期监测策略的可行性和准确性。","authors":"Auke T. Bergeman,&nbsp;Said Nourdine,&nbsp;Alberto Piubello,&nbsp;Zahara Salim,&nbsp;Sofie M. Braet,&nbsp;Abdallah Baco,&nbsp;Silahi H. Grillone,&nbsp;Rian Snijders,&nbsp;Carolien Hoof,&nbsp;Achilleas Tsoumanis,&nbsp;Harry van Loen,&nbsp;Younoussa Assoumani,&nbsp;Aboubacar Mzembaba,&nbsp;Nimer Ortuño-Gutiérrez,&nbsp;Epco Hasker,&nbsp;Christian van der Werf,&nbsp;Bouke C. de Jong","doi":"10.1111/cts.13861","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Some anti-mycobacterial drugs are known to cause QT interval prolongation, potentially leading to life-threatening ventricular arrhythmia. However, the highest leprosy and tuberculosis burden occurs in settings where electrocardiographic monitoring is challenging. The feasibility and accuracy of alternative strategies, such as the use of automated measurements or a mobile electrocardiogram (mECG) device, have not been evaluated in this context. As part of the phase II randomized controlled BE-PEOPLE trial evaluating the safety of bedaquiline-enhanced post-exposure prophylaxis (bedaquiline and rifampicin, BE-PEP, versus rifampicin, SDR-PEP) for leprosy, all participants had corrected QT intervals (QTc) measured at baseline and on the day after receiving post-exposure prophylaxis. The accuracy of mECG measurements as well as automated 12L-ECG measurements was evaluated. In total, 635 mECGs from 323 participants were recorded, of which 616 (97%) were of sufficient quality for QTc measurement. Mean manually read QTc on 12L-ECG and mECG were 394 ± 19 and 385 ± 18 ms, respectively (<i>p</i> &lt; 0.001), with a strong correlation (<i>r</i> = 0.793). The mean absolute QTc difference between both modalities was 11 ± 10 ms. Mean manual and automated 12L-ECG QTc were 394 ± 19 and 409 ± 19 ms, respectively (<i>n</i> = 636; <i>p</i> &lt; 0.001), corresponding to moderate agreement (<i>r</i> = 0.655). The use of a mECG device for QT interval monitoring was feasible and yielded a median absolute QTc error of 8 ms. Automated QTc measurements were less accurate, yielding longer QTc intervals.</p>","PeriodicalId":50610,"journal":{"name":"Cts-Clinical and Translational Science","volume":"17 8","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11286973/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Feasibility and accuracy of mobile QT interval monitoring strategies in bedaquiline-enhanced prophylactic leprosy treatment\",\"authors\":\"Auke T. Bergeman,&nbsp;Said Nourdine,&nbsp;Alberto Piubello,&nbsp;Zahara Salim,&nbsp;Sofie M. Braet,&nbsp;Abdallah Baco,&nbsp;Silahi H. Grillone,&nbsp;Rian Snijders,&nbsp;Carolien Hoof,&nbsp;Achilleas Tsoumanis,&nbsp;Harry van Loen,&nbsp;Younoussa Assoumani,&nbsp;Aboubacar Mzembaba,&nbsp;Nimer Ortuño-Gutiérrez,&nbsp;Epco Hasker,&nbsp;Christian van der Werf,&nbsp;Bouke C. de Jong\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/cts.13861\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>Some anti-mycobacterial drugs are known to cause QT interval prolongation, potentially leading to life-threatening ventricular arrhythmia. However, the highest leprosy and tuberculosis burden occurs in settings where electrocardiographic monitoring is challenging. The feasibility and accuracy of alternative strategies, such as the use of automated measurements or a mobile electrocardiogram (mECG) device, have not been evaluated in this context. As part of the phase II randomized controlled BE-PEOPLE trial evaluating the safety of bedaquiline-enhanced post-exposure prophylaxis (bedaquiline and rifampicin, BE-PEP, versus rifampicin, SDR-PEP) for leprosy, all participants had corrected QT intervals (QTc) measured at baseline and on the day after receiving post-exposure prophylaxis. The accuracy of mECG measurements as well as automated 12L-ECG measurements was evaluated. In total, 635 mECGs from 323 participants were recorded, of which 616 (97%) were of sufficient quality for QTc measurement. Mean manually read QTc on 12L-ECG and mECG were 394 ± 19 and 385 ± 18 ms, respectively (<i>p</i> &lt; 0.001), with a strong correlation (<i>r</i> = 0.793). The mean absolute QTc difference between both modalities was 11 ± 10 ms. Mean manual and automated 12L-ECG QTc were 394 ± 19 and 409 ± 19 ms, respectively (<i>n</i> = 636; <i>p</i> &lt; 0.001), corresponding to moderate agreement (<i>r</i> = 0.655). The use of a mECG device for QT interval monitoring was feasible and yielded a median absolute QTc error of 8 ms. Automated QTc measurements were less accurate, yielding longer QTc intervals.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":50610,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Cts-Clinical and Translational Science\",\"volume\":\"17 8\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-29\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11286973/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Cts-Clinical and Translational Science\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/cts.13861\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"MEDICINE, RESEARCH & EXPERIMENTAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cts-Clinical and Translational Science","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/cts.13861","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MEDICINE, RESEARCH & EXPERIMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

已知一些抗霉菌药物会导致 QT 间期延长,从而可能导致危及生命的室性心律失常。然而,麻风病和结核病发病率最高的地区很难进行心电图监测。在这种情况下,使用自动测量或移动心电图(mECG)设备等替代策略的可行性和准确性尚未得到评估。作为评估贝达喹啉增强型麻风病暴露后预防疗法(贝达喹啉和利福平,BE-PEP,与利福平,SDR-PEP)安全性的 BE-PEOPLE II 期随机对照试验的一部分,所有参与者都在基线和接受暴露后预防疗法的次日测量了校正 QT 间期 (QTc)。对 mECG 测量和自动 12L-ECG 测量的准确性进行了评估。共记录了 323 名参与者的 635 张 mECG,其中 616 张(97%)的质量足以进行 QTc 测量。12L-ECG 和 mECG 人工读取的平均 QTc 分别为 394 ± 19 和 385 ± 18 ms(p
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Feasibility and accuracy of mobile QT interval monitoring strategies in bedaquiline-enhanced prophylactic leprosy treatment

Feasibility and accuracy of mobile QT interval monitoring strategies in bedaquiline-enhanced prophylactic leprosy treatment

Some anti-mycobacterial drugs are known to cause QT interval prolongation, potentially leading to life-threatening ventricular arrhythmia. However, the highest leprosy and tuberculosis burden occurs in settings where electrocardiographic monitoring is challenging. The feasibility and accuracy of alternative strategies, such as the use of automated measurements or a mobile electrocardiogram (mECG) device, have not been evaluated in this context. As part of the phase II randomized controlled BE-PEOPLE trial evaluating the safety of bedaquiline-enhanced post-exposure prophylaxis (bedaquiline and rifampicin, BE-PEP, versus rifampicin, SDR-PEP) for leprosy, all participants had corrected QT intervals (QTc) measured at baseline and on the day after receiving post-exposure prophylaxis. The accuracy of mECG measurements as well as automated 12L-ECG measurements was evaluated. In total, 635 mECGs from 323 participants were recorded, of which 616 (97%) were of sufficient quality for QTc measurement. Mean manually read QTc on 12L-ECG and mECG were 394 ± 19 and 385 ± 18 ms, respectively (p < 0.001), with a strong correlation (r = 0.793). The mean absolute QTc difference between both modalities was 11 ± 10 ms. Mean manual and automated 12L-ECG QTc were 394 ± 19 and 409 ± 19 ms, respectively (n = 636; p < 0.001), corresponding to moderate agreement (r = 0.655). The use of a mECG device for QT interval monitoring was feasible and yielded a median absolute QTc error of 8 ms. Automated QTc measurements were less accurate, yielding longer QTc intervals.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Cts-Clinical and Translational Science
Cts-Clinical and Translational Science 医学-医学:研究与实验
CiteScore
6.70
自引率
2.60%
发文量
234
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Clinical and Translational Science (CTS), an official journal of the American Society for Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics, highlights original translational medicine research that helps bridge laboratory discoveries with the diagnosis and treatment of human disease. Translational medicine is a multi-faceted discipline with a focus on translational therapeutics. In a broad sense, translational medicine bridges across the discovery, development, regulation, and utilization spectrum. Research may appear as Full Articles, Brief Reports, Commentaries, Phase Forwards (clinical trials), Reviews, or Tutorials. CTS also includes invited didactic content that covers the connections between clinical pharmacology and translational medicine. Best-in-class methodologies and best practices are also welcomed as Tutorials. These additional features provide context for research articles and facilitate understanding for a wide array of individuals interested in clinical and translational science. CTS welcomes high quality, scientifically sound, original manuscripts focused on clinical pharmacology and translational science, including animal, in vitro, in silico, and clinical studies supporting the breadth of drug discovery, development, regulation and clinical use of both traditional drugs and innovative modalities.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信