Channelpedia

PubMed 21194571


Referenced in Channelpedia wiki pages of: none

Automatically associated channels: Nav1.5 , Slo1



Title: Translation of flecainide- and mexiletine-induced cardiac sodium channel inhibition and ventricular conduction slowing from nonclinical models to clinical.

Authors: B M Heath, Y Cui, S Worton, B Lawton, G Ward, E Ballini, C P A Doe, C Ellis, B A Patel, N C McMahon

Journal, date & volume: J Pharmacol Toxicol Methods, 2011 May-Jun , 63, 258-68

PubMed link: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21194571


Abstract
Nonclinical in vivo models used for cardiovascular safety testing have not previously been studied for their sensitivity for detection of conduction slowing resulting from cardiac sodium channel block. The goal of this study was to examine the sensitivity of in vivo models to cardiac sodium channel block, and translation of the effect from in vitro to in vivo models using sodium channel inhibitors flecainide and mexiletine; flecainide, but not mexiletine is commonly associated with QRS complex prolongation in humans.Inhibition of cloned cardiac sodium channels (hNav1.5) was studied using the IonWorks platform. Conduction slowing was measured in vitro in the rabbit isolated ventricular wedge (RVW) and in vivo in the conscious telemetered rat and dog, and anaesthetised dog.Flecainide and mexiletine inhibited hNav1.5 channels with IC50 values of 10.7 and 67.2 μM respectively. In the RVW, QRS was increased by flecainide at 60 bpm, and at 120bpm, there was an increased effect of both drugs. In conscious rats, flecainide significantly increased QRS complex duration; mexiletine had no significant effect, but there was an increase at the highest dose in 4/6 animals. QRS complex was increased by flecainide and mexiletine in anaesthetised dogs but this was not statistically significant; in conscious dog, only flecainide produced a significant increase in QRS complex.When compared to clinical data, effects of flecainide and mexiletine in RVW and conscious dog compared well with effects in patients and healthy volunteers in terms of sensitivity. The anaesthetised dog was least sensitive for detection of changes in QRS. All assays showed some differentiation between the expected conduction slowing activity of flecainide and mexiletine. Based on these data, RVW and conscious dog were most predictive for effects of compounds on QRS complex and cardiac conduction.