ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE To analyze the clinical manifestations and characteristics of adverse drug reactions （ADR） induced by dronedarone，and to provide reference for clinically safe drug use. METHODS Retrieved from PubMed database， Wanfang database，CNKI and VIP （up to August 31st， 2022），ADR cases of dronedarone were analyzed retrospectively in respect of patient’s age，gender，nationality，usage and dosage of dronedarone，and occurrence time，clinical manifestations，treatment measures and outcome of ADR，etc. RESULTS A total of 26 case reports were included，with a total of 27 patients. The age of the patients was 41-86 years old，with an average age of 68.8 years. The proportion of patients aged 60-79 was the largest （20 cases，74.1%）. There was no significant difference in the number of males （14 cases） and females （13 cases）. The patients came from 6 countries， of which the United States was the largest （16 cases，59.3%）. The dosage of 14 patients was 400 mg bid；one patient was 200 mg bid；the dosage for 12 patients was not specified. The most ADR cases （16 cases，59.3%） occurred within 1 month，of which 11 cases（40.7%） occurred within 1 week，and there were no ADR reports with medication more than 12 months. Organs/systems involved in ADRs were mainly liver and biliary diseases （7 case times，23.3%），skin and subcutaneous tissue diseases （6 case times， 20.0%），respiratory tract，thoracic and mediastinal diseases （5 case times，16.7%）. In addition，ADR also occurred in heart diseases， kidney and urinary system diseases，vascular diseases，medical examinations and eye diseases. Among 27 patients，there were 3 cases of death，the ADR were bronchiolitis obliterans with organizing pneumonia，toxic epidermal necrolysis and hepatic failure， respectively. One patient underwent liver transplantation. CONCLUSIONS Dronedarone can cause multiple organ system ADR. Before use，it is necessary to improve the examination including ECG，liver function，lung function，etc. and strengthen drug use monitoring within one month after the start of use，especially the ADR of hepatobiliary，skin and respiratory system. The occurrence of severe ADR has no obvious relationship with the duration of medication； even if it is taken safely for a long time，it still needs continuous pharmaceutical monitoring and follow-up to ensure the clinical medication safety of patients.
ABSTRACT
Dronedarone, a class Ⅲ antiarrhythmic drug, is a deiodinated benzofuran derivative of amiodarone. It has similar antiarrhythmic effects with amiodarone, but much lesser adverse effects than amiodarone, particularly in those outside the heart. It is suggested to use dronedarone for the rhythm control of atrial fibrillation/flutter, for it has been shown to prevent the recurrence of atrial fibrillation/flutter and reduce rehospitalization in patients with paroxysmal or persistent atrial fibrillation/flutter. Dronedarone is not recommended for the rhythm control in patients with long-term persistent atrial fibrillation or permanent atrial fibrillation, and atrial flutter or atrial fibrillation patients with reduced ejection fraction. Liver function, electrolyte tests and an electrocardiogram should be performed before and after the drug initiation. Potential interactions with other kinds of drugs have to be taken into consideration as well.
ABSTRACT
Resumen Introducción y objetivos: Dronedarona y flecainida son antiarrítmicos de primera elección para reducir recurrencias de fibrilación auricular (FA), sin existir estudios que los comparen entre sí. Nuestro objetivo es comparar la eficacia en cuanto a prevención de recurrencias y seguridad de ambos fármacos. Métodos: Estudio retrospectivo en el que se incluyeron 123 pacientes de forma consecutiva en tratamiento con flecainida o dronedarona desde octubre de 2010 hasta febrero de 2013 por FA paroxística (76.4%) y FA persistente (23.6%). Se realizó cardioversión eléctrica en un 7.3% de los pacientes y farmacológica en un 16.3%. La mediana (rango intercuartílico) de seguimiento fue de 301 días (92-474), con una media de 2.8 revisiones por paciente. Se realizó análisis de tiempo hasta el primer evento mediante Kaplan-Meier y regresión de Cox ajustada por un índice de propensión. Resultados: De entre los 123 sujetos incluidos con FA, 71 fueron tratados con flecainida y 52 con dronedarona. Durante el seguimiento se registraron 36 recurrencias y 20 efectos adversos. Se documentaron un 36.6% de recurrencias en los pacientes tratados con flecainida en comparación con un 21% en los tratados con dronedarona (p = 0.073). En el análisis multivariante, dronedarona se mostró al menos tan eficaz como flecainida para prevenir recurrencias de FA (HR: 0.53, IC 95%: 0.20-1.44, p = 0.221) y demostró un perfil de seguridad comparable al de flecainida (HR: 0.68, IC 95%: 0.18-2.53, p = 0.566). Conclusiones: Según nuestra experiencia, dronedarona resulta al menos tan eficaz como flecainida para el mantenimiento de ritmo sinusal, con un buen perfil de tolerabilidad, a pesar de pautarse en pacientes con un perfil clínico más desfavorable.
Abstract Introduction and objectives: Dronedarone and flecainide are the first pharmacological choice to reduce recurrence of atrial fibrillation (AF); however, there are no studies comparing them. A study was performed to compare the efficacy in terms of recurrence of AF and safety of both drugs. Methods: A retrospective cohort study was conducted that included 123 consecutive patients treated with flecainide or dronedarone due to paroxysmal AF (76.4%) or persistent AF (23.6%), from October 2010 to February 2013. Electrical cardioversion was performed in 7.3% of patients and pharmacological cardioversion in 16.3%. The median (interquartile range) follow-up was 301 days (92-474) with a mean of 2.8 reviews per patient. Time to first event analysis was performed using Kaplan-Meier and Cox regression, adjusted for propensity score. Results: Of the 123 consecutive patients with AF included, 71 were on dronedarone and 52 on flecainide. During the follow-up, there were 36 AF recurrences and 20 safety events. There were recurrences in 36.6% of patients treated with flecainide, compared with 21% of those receiving dronedarone (P = .073). Dronedarone showed to be at least as effective as flecainide in preven- ting recurrence of atrial fibrillation (HR: 0.53, 95% CI: 0.20-1.44, P = .221), and demonstrated an acceptable safety profile when compared with flecainide (HR: 0.68, 95% CI: 0.18-2.53, P = .566). Conclusions: In our experience, dronedarone has been at least as effective and safe as flecainide, despite it was most frequently prescribed in patients with worse baseline risk profile.
Subject(s)
Humans , Male , Female , Middle Aged , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Atrial Fibrillation/drug therapy , Flecainide/therapeutic use , Dronedarone/therapeutic use , Anti-Arrhythmia Agents/therapeutic use , Recurrence , Atrial Fibrillation/physiopathology , Proportional Hazards Models , Retrospective Studies , Cohort Studies , Follow-Up Studies , Treatment Outcome , Kaplan-Meier Estimate , Anti-Arrhythmia Agents/adverse effectsABSTRACT
Objective To explore the effect of dronedaronel on hyperpolarization-activated cyclic-nucleotide-gated(HCN) channel expression by detecting the change of HCN channel mRNA and protein level before and after giving dronedarone in neonatal rat ventricular myocytes.Methods Neonatal rat ventricular myocytes were separated and digested by type Ⅱ collagenase,and then single ventricular myocytes were collected through differential sticking wall separation method.According to the concentrations (0.1,0.5,1.0,5.0,10.0,20.0 μmol/L of dronedaronel for treating myocytes for 48 h) and time(10 μmol/L of dronedaronel for treating myocytes for 1,6,12,24,48 h)the gradient grouping was conducted.The levels of HCN2 and HCN4 channel mRNA and protein level were determined by real-time PCR and Western blot.Results The HCN2 mRNA and HCN4 mRNA expression levels in concentration gradient group and time gradient group were lower than those in the control group(P＜0.05);compared with the control group,the protein level in the 10 umol/L dronedaronel treatment for 12 h group was significantly down-regulated(P＜ 0.01).Conclusion Dronedaronel could inhibit the expression of HCN2/HCN4 channel mRNA and protein,moreover its action shows the concentration dependency and reaches the maximum at 12 h after medication.
ABSTRACT
Dronedarone is a new antiarrhythmic drug for the treatment of nonpermanent atrial fibrillation. Compared with amiodarone, it is regarded as a safe medication due to its structural differences. In this report, we describe a 56-year-old man who developed photosensitivity due to dronedarone. He presented with itchy skin rashes for 1 week. Maculopapular exanthema was localized on the neck, both arms, and both hands, with sparing of the other parts of the body. Dronedarone was prescribed 4 weeks ago when atrial fibrillation occurred. After development of skin rashes, dronedarone was discontinued, and systemic steroid, antihistamine, and topical corticosteroid were administered for 1 week, with improvement in skin rashes. The photopatch test was performed with antiarrhythmic drugs, including dronedarone, amiodarone, and flecainide, 4 weeks after withdrawal of dronedarone. Positive reactions were recorded only to dronedarone at the site exposed to ultraviolet A. He was diagnosed with dronedarone-induced photosensitivity and advised to change the antiarrhythmic medication to others. There have been a few case reports on photosensitivity reactions due to dronedarone, which were diagnosed only by clinical suspicion. However, we suspected photosensitivity and proved it by the photopatch test. Photosensitivity should be considered in patients having skin rashes on the exposed area and taking antiarrhythmic medication, including dronedarone.
Subject(s)
Humans , Middle Aged , Amiodarone , Anti-Arrhythmia Agents , Arm , Atrial Fibrillation , Exanthema , Flecainide , Hand , NeckABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE:To establish a method for the dissolution determination of Dronedarone hydrochloride tablet,and eval-uate the quality consistency of its generic and original preparations. METHODS:UV spectrometry was performed on the column of 288 nm,dissolution media of Phosphate buffer solution (pH4.5),0.1 mol/L Hydrochloric acid solution [adding into 0.5% sodium dodecyl sulfate(SDS)],Phosphate buffer solution [pH6.8,adding into 0.5%SDS] and water,volume of dissolution medium was 1 000 ml,rotation speed was 75 r/min,the dissolution of generic and original preparations of Dronedarone hydrochloride tablet was detected,and the similarity of dissolution curve was evaluated by calculating the similarity factor (f2). RESULTS:The linear range of dronedarone hydrochloride was 2.147-25.764 μg/ml;RSDs of precision,stability and reproducibility tests were lower than 2.0%;recoveries 4 dissolution media were 99.53%-101.05%(RSD=0.48%,n=9),98.95%-100.05%(RSD=0.39%,n=9), 99.54%-100.20%(RSD=0.24%,n=9)and 98.54%-100.06%(RSD=0.44%,n=9). In the 4 dissolution media,f2 of the dissolu-tion curve of 3 batches of generic and original preparations of Dronedarone hydrochloride tablet was 56,60,63,68,68,52,59, 67,65,68,76,62,respectively. CONCLUSIONS:The method is suitable for the dissolution determination of Dronedarone hydro-chloride tablet;meanwhile,the in vitro dissolution curves of generic and original preparations of Dronedarone hydrochloride tablet show similarity,so the quality consistency is good.
ABSTRACT
A sensitive and precise high performance liquid chromatographic method has been developed and validated for determination of Dronedarone Hydrochloride. The proposed method was carried out on Analytical HPLC system consisting of Hyperchrome ODS C18 column (250 mm × 4.6 mm, 5μ). The chromatographic separation was achieved using a mobile phase containing acetonitrile: triethylamine buffer (pH-2.3) in the ratio of 70:30 v/v at flow rate of 1.0 mL/min using UV detection at 290 nm. The linear regression analysis data showed good linearity over the concentration range of 10-60μg/mL of dronedarone hydrochloride. The percent assay of dronedarone hydrochloride from tablet was found to be 99.75. The determination of intrinsic stability of the drug was assessed under acidic, alkaline, peroxide, thermal and photolytic stressed conditions. The drug was estimated in presence of its degradation products without interference. The method was validated for accuracy, precision, robustness and recovery studies as per ICH guidelines. The method can be adopted for routine analysis of drug in its tablet formulation.
ABSTRACT
La fibrilación auricular (FA) es la arritmia crónica sostenida más frecuente en la población general. A pesar de los últimos avances tecnológicos y en el entendimiento de sus mecanismos, derivados de modelos experimentales, así como de los procedimientos de ablación en pacientes con FA, los fármacos antiarrítmicos siguen siendo la principal estrategia para la cardioversión y mantenimiento del ritmo sinusal. Nuevas generaciones de fármacos antiarrítmicos han llegado a la práctica clínica, y otros se encuentran en fase de experimentación. Los nuevos fármacos actúan de forma más específica sobre corrientes iónicas auriculares, y al mismo tiempo involucradas en el mantenimiento de la arritmia. Paralelamente, cada vez se da más importancia a la necesidad de actuar sobre el sustrato arritmogénico auricular y los factores que lo promueven, implicados en el mantenimiento a largo plazo de la arritmia (terapias upstream). La presente revisión tiene como objetivo exponer las actuales líneas de desarrollo en fármacos antiarrítmicos y terapias para prevención o retraso del remodelado auricular, con base a los conocimientos mecanísticos que hoy en día se involucran en el mantenimiento de la FA.
Atrial fibrillation (AF) is the most common sustained arrhythmia seen in clinical practice. Despite of new technological breakthroughs and the understanding of the mechanisms underlying AF, based on animal models and ablation procedures in patients, the antiarrhythmic drugs remain the main therapeutic strategy to restore and maintain the sinus rhythm. New antiarrhythmic drugs are already available in the clinical practice and many others are under development. The new antiarrhythmic drugs have the capability to block atrial-specific ionic currents, which are involved in the maintenance of the arrhythmia. Parallel, increasing evidence supports the use of compounds to regulate the arrhythmogenic atrial substrate involved in the long-term maintenance of the arrhythmia (upstream therapies). This article reviews the new antiarrhythmic drugs and upstream therapies, based on the current knowledge of the mechanisms involved in the maintenance of AF.
Subject(s)
Humans , Anti-Arrhythmia Agents/therapeutic use , Atrial Fibrillation/drug therapy , Anti-Arrhythmia Agents/pharmacology , Electrophysiological Phenomena/drug effects , Heart/drug effects , Heart/physiologyABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE:To evaluate the efficacy and safety of dronedarone for atrial fibrillation or atrial flutter.METHODS:The publicly published literatures about the clinical trials on dronedarone for atrial fibrillation or atrial flutter were retrieved from PubMed.The quality analysis of included studies and extraction and cross-check of data were conducted by two reviewers independently using Meta-analysis.Response indexes were tested in tests for heterogeneity and summarized and analyzed using RevMan 5.0.The safety of dronedarone was evaluated.RESULTS:Five RCTs were included.As compared with placebo,dronedarone reduced the hospitalization rate due to cardiovascular events and all-cause mortality(RR=0.76,95%CI=0.72～0.79,P