MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409217280 · doi:10.1080/15563650.2025.2459763

Loperamide-induced severe cardiotoxicity: a toxicokinetic and toxicodynamic analysis derived from a case series and the published literature

2025· article· en· W4409217280 on OpenAlexaff
Úna Nic Ionmhain, Angela L. Chiew, Michael Tierney, Judy Al Ahmad, Stefanie Pidcock, Faye Titania Whan, Lorraine Mackenzie, Michael S. Roberts, Darren M. Roberts

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical Toxicology · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPoisoning and overdose treatments
Canadian institutionsFraser Institute
Fundersnot available
KeywordsToxicodynamicsCardiotoxicityToxicokineticsPharmacologyLoperamideMedicineToxicologyToxicityPharmacokineticsInternal medicineBiologyDiarrhea

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction Chronic loperamide overdose is associated with cardiotoxicity. We describe the toxicokinetics of loperamide and N-desmethyl loperamide, and their concentration–response relationship on cardiotoxicity in newly described and published cases.Materials and methods We obtained serial loperamide and N-desmethyl loperamide concentrations, and corresponding electrocardiographic intervals in three episodes (two patients) of loperamide-related cardiotoxicity. A toxicokinetic and toxicodynamic analysis was undertaken that included data from previous publications to explore the relationship between these variables.Results Patients presented with dizziness, bradycardia, loss of consciousness, and jerking or ventricular tachycardia after taking loperamide 320–400 mg/day for weeks or years. In one patient, ventricular tachycardia occurred on days two and three post-admission. Prolonged electrocardiographic intervals resolved after approximately five days. Admission loperamide concentrations were 5.37–288 μg/L and the terminal elimination half-lives were 21.3–38.7 h. Admission N-desmethyl loperamide concentrations were 87.67–256.34 μg/L and the terminal elimination half-life was 31.9–88.9 h. Overall, there were 42 loperamide and 35 N-desmethyl loperamide concentrations with paired electrocardiographic data, and the concentration–response relationship was derived using a maximum effect (Emax) model. Lower loperamide concentrations were associated with electrocardiographic abnormalities, compared to N-desmethyl loperamide concentrations. The total relative loperamide concentration, which combines both concentrations into a single value using in vitro inhibitory potencies at cardiac ion channels, out-performed either parent or metabolite concentrations alone for predicting cardiotoxicity on receiver operating characteristic curves.Discussion Loperamide and N-desmethyl loperamide have long elimination half-lives causing prolonged cardiotoxicity. Higher loperamide and N-desmethyl loperamide concentrations are associated with prolonged electrocardiographic intervals.Conclusions Patients with chronic loperamide overdose are at risk of cardiotoxicity that persists for days due to persistent loperamide and N-desmethyl loperamide concentrations. We believe patients with loperamide overdose need an admission electrocardiograph and continuous monitoring until electrocardiographic changes resolve.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.067
Threshold uncertainty score0.824

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.018
GPT teacher head0.338
Teacher spread0.321 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations3
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueClinical ToxicologySame topicPoisoning and overdose treatmentsFrench-language works237,207