No abstract

Background: Careful assessment of QT interval prolongation is required before novel drugs are approved by regulatory authorities. The choice of the most appropriate method of electrocardiogram (ECG) acquisition and QT/RR interval measurement in clinical trials requires better understanding of the differences among currently available approaches. This study compared standard and Holterderived 12-lead ECGs for utility in detecting sotalol-induced QT/QTc and RR changes. Manual methods (digitizing pad and digital on-screen calipers) were compared for precision of QT and RR interval measurement.Methods and Results: Sixteen hundred pairs of serial 12-lead digital ECGs were recorded simultaneously by standard resting ECG device and by continuous 12-lead digital Holter over 3 days in 39 healthy male and female volunteers. No therapy was given on the 1st day followed by 160 mg and 320 mg of sotalol on the 2nd and 3rd day, respectively. Holter-derived and standard ECGs produced nearly identical sotalol-induced QT/QTc and RR changes from baseline, as did the manual digipad and on-screen caliper measurements. The variability of on-screen QT measurement in this study was greater than that of digipad.Conclusions: Digital 12-lead Holter and standard 12-lead ECG recorders, as well as the manual digitizing pad and digital on-screen calipers, are of equal utility for the assessment of drug-induced change from baseline in QT and RR interval, although the variability of the on-screen method in this study was greater than of the digipad.

Eleven healthy subjects received single oral doses of placebo, 2 mg diazepam, 5 mg diazepam, and 10 mg diazepam in a randomized four-way crossover study. Plasma diazepam levels, the Digit Symbol Substitution Test (DSST), and fraction of total electroencephalographic (EEG) amplitude falling in the sigma plus beta (13 to 31 Hz) frequency range were determined during the 12 hours after drug administration. Peak plasma diazepam concentration and area under the 12-hour curve were proportional to dose; time of peak was independent of dose. Baseline percentage of EEG amplitude falling in the 13 to 31 Hz range averaged 15.7% and did not differ among the four trials. The percentage of EEG amplitude falling in the 13 to 31 Hz range did not change over baseline with placebo or 2 mg diazepam but was increased 1/4 to 2 1/2 hours after 5 mg diazepam, (maximum, +7.3%) and 3/4 to 12 hours after 10 mg diazepam (maximum, +15.2%). The increase in the percentage of EEG amplitude falling in the 13 to 31 Hz range was highly correlated with plasma diazepam concentration. DSST scores for placebo and 2 mg diazepam were nearly identical. DSST decrements with 5 and 10 mg diazepam paralleled and were correlated with the changes in the percentage of EEG amplitude falling in the 13 to 31 Hz range and with plasma diazepam levels. Thus the EEG analysis provides objective quantitation of benzodiazepine central nervous system effects, in turn reflecting plasma levels and other clinical measures.