Evidence Hub

Establishing the Exposure-QT Relationship During Bedaquiline Treatment Using a Time-Varying Tuberculosis-Specific Correction Factor (QTcTBT)

Vongjarudech T, Dosne AG, Remmerie B, Karlsson MO, Svensson EM

CPT: pharmacometrics & systems pharmacology, 2025

429 participants · 2 citations

Abstract

Evaluating QT prolongation induced by anti-tuberculosis (TB) drugs in patients with active TB, who often experience tachycardia, is challenging due to the limitations of Fridericia's correction factor (QTcF) in decorrelating QTc from heart rate (HR). Previous exposure-QTcF analyses in patients with active TB were able to alleviate the limitation of QTcF but required advanced model-based methodologies, incorporating a non-drug-related, "secular" trend in the model to dissociate drug and non-drug-related effects on QT. Recently, we developed and validated a time-varying QT correction method (QTcTBT) that more accurately accounts for the HR changes during TB treatment. In the present work, using data from 429 patients with multidrug-resistant TB across two Phase IIb trials, we re-evaluated the exposure-QTc relationship for bedaquiline by applying QTcTBT instead of QTcF. Our analysis showed that when HR changes were accounted for using QTcTBT, a typical maximum M2 (bedaquiline metabolite) concentration (326 ng/mL, mean maximal concentration (Cmax) at the end of 2-week loading phase) was associated with a 7 ms QTc interval prolongation (90% CI: 5.9-8.2). This estimate closely aligns with the previously reported M2 effect of 7.9 ms (90% CI: 6.8-9.3), derived from the exposure-QTcF model. The consistency between the two methodologies further supports the use of QTcTBT for estimating the QTc prolongation effects of anti-TB drugs.

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a clinical trial, done in people. Its evidence level is 3 of 5 (Moderate · trial / cohort / secondary analysis). Trials without a large randomized design, cohorts and secondary analyses give moderate evidence. Reported size: 429 participants or records.

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