An overview of drug‐induced sodium channel blockade and changes in cardiac conduction: Implications for drug safety
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The human voltage‐gated sodium channel Na v 1.5 (hNa v 1.5/SCN5A) plays a critical role in the initiation and propagation of action potentials in cardiac myocytes, and its modulation by various drugs has significant implications for cardiac safety. Drug‐dependent block of Na v 1.5 current (I Na ) can lead to significant alterations in cardiac electrophysiology, potentially resulting in conduction slowing and an increased risk of proarrhythmic events. This review aims to provide a comprehensive overview of the mechanisms by which various pharmacological agents interact with Na v 1.5, focusing on the molecular determinants of drug binding and the resultant electrophysiological effects. We discuss the structural features of Na v 1.5 that influence drug affinity and specificity. Special attention is given to the concept of state‐dependent block, where drug binding is influenced by the conformational state of the channel, and its relevance to therapeutic efficacy and safety. The review also examines the clinical implications of I Na block, highlighting case studies of drugs that have been associated with adverse cardiac events, and how the Vaughan‐Williams Classification system has been employed to qualify “unsafe” sodium channel block. Furthermore, we explore the methodologies currently used to assess I Na block in nonclinical and clinical settings, with the hope of providing a weight of evidence approach including in silico modeling, in vitro electrophysiological assays and in vivo cardiac safety studies for mitigating proarrhythmic risk early in drug discovery. This review underscores the importance of understanding Na v 1.5 pharmacology in the context of drug development and cardiac risk assessment.
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.
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 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 it