In vivo electrophysiological effects of a selective slow delayed-rectifier potassium channel blocker in anesthetized dogs: potential insights into class III actions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: This study evaluated the in vivo electrophysiological effects of a highly selective slow delayed-rectifier K+-current blocker, HMR 1556, to gain insights into the consequences of selectively inhibiting the slow delayed-rectifier current in vivo. METHODS: Atrial and ventricular effective refractory periods, sinus node recovery time, Wenckebach cycle-length, atrial fibrillation duration and electrocardiographic intervals were measured before and after intravenous HMR 1556. RESULTS: HMR 1556 increased atrial and ventricular refractory periods (e.g. by 6 +/- 4% and 27 +/- 6% at cycle lengths of 360 and 400 ms, respectively), QT intervals and sinus-node recovery times. Beta-adrenoceptor blockade with nadolol abolished all effects except those on ventricular refractoriness and changed positive use-dependent effects on refractoriness to reverse use-dependent ones. In the presence of dofetilide to block rapid delayed-rectifier current, HMR 1556 effects were potentiated (e.g. atrial and ventricular refractory periods increased by 26 +/- 3% and 34 +/- 3% at cycle lengths of 360 and 400 ms, respectively). HMR 1556 reduced vagal atrial fibrillation duration from 1077 +/- 81 to 471 +/- 38 s, an effect abolished by nadolol and greatly potentiated by dofetilide (duration 77 +/- 30 s). HMR 1556 increased Wenckebach cycle length only in the presence of dofetilide. CONCLUSIONS: Slowed delayed-rectifier current inhibition affects atrial repolarization, sinus node function and atrial fibrillation in vivo, but only in the presence of intact beta-adrenergic tone, and delays ventricular repolarization even when beta-adrenoceptors are blocked. The slow delayed-rectifier current is particularly important when rapid delayed-rectifier current is suppressed, illustrating the importance of repolarization reserve.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".