Evidence Hub

Tigecycline does not prolong corrected QT intervals in healthy subjects

Korth-Bradley JM, McGovern PC, Salageanu J, Matschke K, Plotka A, Pawlak S

Antimicrobial agents and chemotherapy, 2013

6 citations

Abstract

We evaluated the effect of tigecycline (50-mg and 200-mg doses) on corrected QT (QTc) intervals and assessed safety and tolerability in a randomized, placebo-controlled, four-period crossover study of 48 (44 male) healthy volunteers aged 22 to 53 years. Fed subjects received tigecycline (50 mg or 200 mg) or placebo in a blinded fashion or an open-label oral dose of moxifloxacin (400 mg) after 1 liter of intravenous fluid. Serial electrocardiograms were recorded before, and for 96 h after, dosing. Blood samples for tigecycline pharmacokinetics were collected after each recording. QTc intervals were corrected using Fridericia's correction (QTcF). Pharmacokinetic parameters were calculated using noncompartmental methods with potential relationships examined using linear mixed-effects modeling. Adverse events were recorded. The upper limits of the 90% confidence interval for the mean difference between both tigecycline doses and placebo for all time-matched QTcF interval changes from baseline were <5 ms. The tigecycline concentrations initially declined rapidly and then more slowly. In the group given 50 mg of tigecycline, the pharmacokinetic parameters and means were as follows: maximum concentration of drug in serum (C(max)), 432 ng/ml; area under the concentration-time curve from time zero extrapolated to infinity (AUC0-∞), 2,366 ng · h/ml; clearance (CL), 21.1 liters/h; volume of distribution at steady state (V(ss)), 610 liters; and terminal half-life (t(1/2)), 22.1 h.…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a randomized trial, done in people. Its evidence level is 2 of 5 (High · randomized trial). Randomized trials of a reasonable size are the strongest single-study design.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free