Combined Administration of Quinidine and Propafenone for Atrial Fibrillation: The CAQ‐PAF Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Propafenone and its 5-hydroxy metabolite exhibit different electrophysiological properties. Objectives of the CAQ-PAF study were (1) to develop a strategy favoring propafenone instead of 5-hydroxypropafenone in plasma following oral administration of propafenone and (2) to evaluate the potential of low-dose quinidine to chronically inhibit CYP2D6. Patients (n = 102) with atrial fibrillation received propafenone 150 mg 3 times daily with either quinidine 100 mg twice daily or placebo. Throughout the study (follow-up, 199 ± 155 days), quinidine successfully inhibited CYP2D6: propafenone concentrations were 3 times higher in patients receiving quinidine (1033 ± 611 ng/mL vs 328 ± 229 ng/mL; P < .001). Moreover, 80% (n = 10) of patients with propafenone levels greater than 1500 ng/mL were in sinus rhythm at 1 year. In contrast, recurrence of atrial fibrillation occurred in 22 of 23 patients with propafenone levels less than 1000 ng/mL (P < .0001). Thus, chronic inhibition of CYP2D6 is achievable with low-dose quinidine in humans. Increased plasma levels of propafenone may be highly beneficial to prevent recurrence of atrial fibrillation.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".