Evidence Hub

Comparison of the effects of levofloxacin on QT/QTc interval assessed in both healthy Japanese and Caucasian subjects (pages

Sugiyama A, Nakamura Y, Nishimura S, Adachi-Akahane S, Kumagai Y, Gayed J, Naseem A, Ferber G et al.

British journal of clinical pharmacology, 2012

Abstract

AIMS: There is no consensus as to what extent the results of thorough QT interval/corrected QT interval (QT/QTc) studies need to be bridged.

METHODS: The results of two studies using levofloxacin in Japanese and Caucasian subjects were compared in a post hoc analysis to investigate the similarity of dose–effect responses.

RESULTS: Concentration–response analysis based on the change of QT interval corrected using Fridericia's formula (QTcF) from time-matched placebo was planned and performed in the combined data sets. At the geometric maximum mean concentration for the two doses in the Caucasian study, a predicted effect on QTcF comparable to the effects observed was found. For the Japanese study, the predicted effect was lower, but the difference was not statistically significant.

CONCLUSIONS: No statistically significant differences in QTc-prolonging effect between Japanese and Caucasian subjects were observed following levofloxacin dosing. However, a trend suggests that Caucasian subjects may be more sensitive. Age and sex did not have an impact.

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a cohort study, 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.

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