The antiarrhythmic actions of bisaramil and penticainide result from mixed cardiac ion channel blockade
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Decades of focus on selective ion channel blockade has been dismissed as an effective approach to antiarrhythmic drug development. In that context many older antiarrhythmic drugs lacking ion channel selectivity may serve as tools to explore mixed ion channel blockade producing antiarrhythmic activity. This study investigated the non-clinical electrophysiological and antiarrhythmic actions of bisaramil and penticainide using in vitro and in vivo methods. In isolated cardiac myocytes both drugs directly block sodium currents with IC50 values of 13μM (bisaramil) and 60μM (penticainide). Both drugs reduced heart rate but prolonged the P–R, QRS and Q–T intervals of the ECG (due to sodium and potassium channel blockade) in intact rats. They reduced cardiac conduction velocity in isolated rat hearts, increased the threshold currents for capture and fibrillation (indices of sodium channel blockade) and reduced the maximum following frequency as well as prolonged the effective refractory period (indices of potassium channel blockade) of electrically stimulated rat hearts. Both drugs reduced ventricular arrhythmias and eliminated mortality due to VF in ischemic rat hearts. The index of cardiac electrophysiological balance (iCEB) did not change significantly over the dose range evaluated; however, different drug effects resulted when changes in BP and HR were considered. While bisaramil is a more potent sodium channel blocker compared to penticainide, both produce a spectrum of activity against ventricular arrhythmias due to mixed cardiac ion channel blockade. Antiarrhythmic drugs exhibiting mixed ion channel blockade may serve as tools for development of safer mixed ion channel blocking antiarrhythmic drugs.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".