AzTrials
AzTrials

Qt IntervalNCT05243537

QTc Intervals in Former Preterm/Extreme Low Birth Weight Infants: a Pooled Study Proposal

An observational study of Qt Interval and Preterm Birth, run by Universitaire Ziekenhuizen KU Leuven at 2 sites in 2 countries.

Unknown status

Status not confirmed. The sponsor has not verified this record for over two years, so it may be out of date.

Official record
Search all trials

Trial summary

Pooling effort to collect previously reported data on QTc time in former preterm neonates, and compare these data to controls. At present and based on a recently conducted systematic search, there are conflicting data on the potential QT interval prolongation (all Bazett) in former extreme low birth weight (ELBW… Read more about this study

Who is it for?
Ages 8 to 25 yearsHealthy volunteers can take part
Conditions the study is for
Qt Interval, Preterm Birth
What is being tested?
ECG (diagnostic)
How many people
250 participants
Where
2 sitesin 2 countries
Study dates
1 Jan 2023to 1 Nov 2023
Phase
Observational
Are there results?
None posted in the registry

Key requirements

Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.

  • Ages 8 to 25 years
  • All sexes
  • Healthy volunteers accepted
  • Child, Adult

Study population: The Bassareo cohort, Gervais cohort and Salaets cohort have been described in the original papers. we intent to pool the individual data of these cohorts (all these cohorts were constructed based on probability sampling) Bassareo, P. P. et al. Significant QT interval prolongation and long QT in young adult ex-preterm newborns with extremely low birth weight. J. Matern. Fetal Neonatal Med. 24, 1115-1118 (2011). Gervais, A. S. et al. Electrocardiographic features at rest and during exercise in young adults born preterm below 30 weeks of gestation. Pediatr. Res. 88, 305-311 (2020). Salaets, T. QTc intervals are not prolonged in former ELBW infants at pre-adolescent age. Pediatr. Res. 2021, online.

Who may be able to join

  • included as 'case' in one of the cohorts retrieved by a systematic search on QTc values in former preterm neonates compared to healthy controls, or.
  • included a 'control' in one of the cohorts retrieved by a systematic search on QTc values in former preterm neonates compared to healthy controls.

Who cannot join

  • not included as 'case' in any of the cohorts retrieved by systematic search on QTc values in former preterm neonates compared to healthy controls
  • not included as 'control' in any of the cohorts retrieved by systematic search on QTc values in former preterm neonates compared to healthy controls

Trial locations and contacts

2 sites in 2 countries.

2 sites in 2 countries

Belgium1 site
  • University Hospitals Leuven

    Leuven, 3000

Other trials in Belgium

Canada1 site
  • Centre Hospitalier Universitair Sainte-Justine

    Montreal, Quebec

Other trials in Canada

About this study

Pooling effort to collect previously reported data on QTc time in former preterm neonates, and compare these data to controls. At present and based on a recently conducted systematic search, there are conflicting data on the potential QT interval prolongation (all Bazett) in former extreme low birth weight (ELBW, <1000 g) infants or preterms.

Consequently, if investigators truly want to assess the presence or absence of either a difference or a prolongation of QTc intervals in this specific population, pooling of published data is likely the most effective approach (potential number of cases = 24 + 49 + 93 = 166; potential number of controls in the same studies = 24 + 53 + 87 = 164), preferably based on individual data.

Although the sample is to a large extent pragmatic (as available), the investigators hereby aim to target the 5 ms QTc prolongation applied by the authorities (FDA, EMA) in paired healthy adult volunteer studies as 'golden' standard as primary outcome variable [EMA guideline, FDA guidance].

Read the detailed description

Preterm birth and gestational age at birth are associated with an increased risk for cardiovascular morbidity and mortality. In a large population-based cohort study with an incidence of preterm birth of 5.4 %, the adjusted hazard ratio of all-cause mortality in former preterms (23-33 weeks) was 1.44 in young adulthood (<50 years), most pronounced for cardiovascular mortality (1.89), diabetes (1.98) and chronic lung disease (2.28). Interestingly, the increased death risk was found across gestational age up to the ideal term age (39-41 weeks), but most prominent for the most immature group.

Besides better understanding of the underlying mechanisms associated with the 'Barker' and 'Brenner' cardiovascular risk hypotheses, there is an obvious need to further explore biomarkers to detect potential higher risk besides the gestational age or birth weight to translate this knowledge to clinical practice or secondary prevention strategies.

In a recent meta-analysis on changes in the preterm heart from birth to young adulthood, it was concluded that former preterms have morphological and functional cardiac impairments, proportionally to the degree of prematurity. In contrast to the echocardiographic differences in left and right ventricular systolic functions in former preterm when compared to term controls, observations on electrocardiographic (ECG) findings are less conclusive. Whether preterm birth is associated with conduction or repolarization abnormalities later in life is less well explored.

At present and based on a recently conducted systematic search, there are conflicting data on the potential QT interval prolongation (all Bazett) in former extreme low birth weight (ELBW, <1000 g) infants (data reported chronological).

Bassareo et al. reported that corrected QT (QTc) intervals and QT dispersion (QTd) were significantly prolonged in 24 former ELBW cases compared to 24 term controls (mean, ± SD: 417, 23.6 versus 369, 19.5 ms, and 30.4, 14.1 versus 24.6, 8.2 ms, respectively) (age at assessment = 23.2, SD 3.3 years).

Gervais et al. could subsequently not confirm these findings in 49 preterm cases (<30 weeks) when compared to 53 term born controls. At rest, mean QTc were 408, ± 34 and 409, ±SD 31 ms respectively (age at assessment = 18-33 years). Post-hoc power calculations showed that this study had 80% power to detect a difference of at least 18 ms in QTc between the two groups.

Finally, based on the PREMATCH study (ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02147457, S 56577), data on QTc observations are also available. QTc and QTd were similar between 93 ELBW cases and 87 controls [409 (range 360-465) versus 409 (337-460); 40 (0-100) versus 39 (0-110)] ms. When expressed by mean and SD, 409 (23) ms in the full dataset, 409 (SD 22) in former ELBW cases, 409 (SD 24) in controls [Salaets et al, Pediatr Res 2022]. Age, height, weight or body mass index were not associated with the QTc interval, while female sex (median difference 11.4 ms) and lower potassium (r=-0.26) were associated with longer QTc interval. We could not observe any significant association between QTc interval and perinatal characteristics (age at assessment 8-14 years). Post hoc analysis showed that our study had a power of 90 % to detect a difference of 11,45 ms between both groups.

Consequently, if researchers truly want to assess the presence or absence of either a difference or a prolongation of QTc intervals in this specific population, pooling of published data is likely the most effective approach (potential number of cases = 24 + 49 + 93 = 166; potential number of controls in the same studies = 24 + 53 + 87 = 164), preferably based on individual data. Although the sample is to a large extent pragmatic (as available), the investigators hereby aim to target the 5 ms QTc prolongation applied by the authorities (FDA, EMA) in paired healthy adult volunteer studies as 'golden' standard as primary outcome variable [EMA guideline, FDA guidance]. In all 3 cohorts, perinatal characteristics (like gestational age, weight, or pre- or postnatal steroids) were explored on their potential impact on the QTc interval, but all cohorts were underpowered to draw firm conclusions, so that these analyses will be included as secondary analyses.

Descriptive statistics will be used to report on the pooled dataset, and will be reported by mean and standard deviation, or median and range, pending normal distribution characteristics or incidence (%), (cases and controls, or cases only, respectively).

Statistical analysis will be used (two-tailed or one-tailed) to explore the relation of the data to the underlying population(s), like Rank correlation, Mann Whitney U or t-test (cases to controls, and within cases respectively). Based on the individual cohorts published, it is reasonable to anticipate normal distribution.

Power exploration using Mann-Whitney-U tests at alfa = 0,05 In order to find a significant two-tailed difference of 5ms, with a power of 90 % and extrapolating from the data distribution of the Leuven cohort, it was estimated that 467 subjects are required in both case and control groups. Decreasing the power to 80 % still requires 349 subjects in each group. In order to find a significant one-tailed difference of 5ms, with a power of 90 % and using the data distribution of the Leuven cohort, it was estimated that 381 subjects are required in both case and control groups.

Decreasing the power to 80 % still requires 275 subjects in each group (when using the FDA and EMA criteria to exclude an increase of 5 ms in former preterm cases).

In order to find a significant two-tailed difference of 10ms, with a power of 90 % and extrapolating from the data distribution of the Leuven cohort, it was estimate 118 subjects are required in both case and control groups. Decreasing the power to 80 % requires 88 subjects in each group.

In order to find a significant one-tailed difference of 10ms, with a power of 90 % and using the data distribution of the Leuven cohort, it was estimated that 96 subjects are required in both case and control groups. Decreasing the power to 80 % requires 70 subjects in each group. Inversely, having 166 and 164 subjects in each group and extrapolating the Leuven distribution data, this will have 90 % power to significantly discriminate a difference of 8.43ms (two-tailed) or 7.60ms (one-tailed), or 80 % power to significantly discriminate a difference of 7.28ms (two-tailed) or 6.46ms (one-tailed). Due to differences in data distribution between the cohorts: the actual discriminative power will probably be lower (the Leuven cohort -used for this estimation- has the narrowest standard deviation, and the Italian cohort has a different mean).

The investigators intend to conduct a post hoc power analysis with a difference (hypothesis: the mean QTc is not >5 ms higher in former preterm neonates compared to controls).

Being tested
ECG (diagnostic)
Keywords
QTc, ELBW neonates, preterms, pharmacovigilance
Medical subject headings
Premature Birth

What participants receive

What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.

  • ECG (diagnostic)Other

    ECG collection (once, at rest), in both cases and controls

Study groups in NCT05243537
Study groupRoleWhat they receive
QTc time interval in former preterm neonates, or term born healthy controlsformer preterms and healthy term controls are defined as described in the cohort as previously published (Salaets et al, Pediatr Res 2021; Gervais et al, Pediatr Res 2020; Bassareo et al, J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med 2011). This includes both the perinatal characteristics as well as the characteristics collected at assessment (pediatric age or young adulthood) In all cases, an ECG was collected at rest, and these individual values (preterm or healthy term controls will be pooled.
Receives: Other: ECG (diagnostic)

What is being measured

The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.

  1. QTc time interval

    QTc time interval (in msec) in former preterms or healthy term controls

    Measured: 1 year

Timeline

From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.

  1. First posted17 Feb 2022
  2. Study start1 Jan 2023
  3. Primary completion1 Apr 2023
  4. Study completion1 Nov 2023 (estimated)

Resources

More details

For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.

Study design
Study type
Observational
Observational model
Case-control
Time perspective
Retrospective
Enrolment
250 participants (estimated)
IDs, dates and publications
ClinicalTrials.gov ID
NCT05243537
Sponsor's protocol ID
S66020
Status last verified
May 2023
First submitted
12 Jan 2022
Last updated
18 May 2023
Results posted
No
Data monitoring committee
No
FDA-regulated drug
No
FDA-regulated device
No
Individual data sharing
Undecided: as part of the agreement, the individual data remain the ownership of the individual contributing centers, so that both centers should be contacted. This will be facilitated by the coordinating investigator (karel allegaert, karel.allegaert@uzleuven.be) upon request.

Publications

  • Gervais AS, Flahault A, Chan T, Bastien-Tardif C, Al-Simaani A, Cloutier A, Luu TM, Abadir S, Nuyt AM. Electrocardiographic features at rest and during exercise in young adults born preterm below 30 weeks of gestation. Pediatr Res. 2020 Aug;88(2):305-311. doi: 10.1038/s41390-020-0814-9. Epub 2020 Mar 2.

    PubMed 32120379
  • Bassareo PP, Fanos V, Puddu M, Cadeddu C, Balzarini M, Mercuro G. Significant QT interval prolongation and long QT in young adult ex-preterm newborns with extremely low birth weight. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med. 2011 Sep;24(9):1115-8. doi: 10.3109/14767058.2010.543600. Epub 2011 Jan 10.

    PubMed 21219107
  • Salaets T, Raaijmakers A, Zhang ZY, Yu YL, Wei DM, Staessen JA, Allegaert K. QTc intervals are not prolonged in former ELBW infants at pre-adolescent age. Pediatr Res. 2022 Sep;92(3):848-852. doi: 10.1038/s41390-021-01877-w. Epub 2021 Dec 2.

    PubMed 34857877
  • Vanthienen J, Petrov MV, Luu TM, Cloutier A, Raaijmakers A, Staessen JA, Zhang Z, Salaets T, Laenen A, Smits A, Nuyt AM, Flahault A, Allegaert K. The QTc-Bazett Interval in Former Very Preterm Infants in Adolescence and Young Adulthood is Not Different from Term-Born Controls. Drug Saf. 2023 Sep;46(9):897-904. doi: 10.1007/s40264-023-01335-y. Epub 2023 Jul 28.

    PubMed 37505401

Questions about this trial

What is this clinical trial studying?

An observational study of Qt Interval and Preterm Birth, run by Universitaire Ziekenhuizen KU Leuven at 2 sites in 2 countries.

The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.

Who may be eligible to take part?

The sponsor lists 2 inclusion and 2 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.

Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?

The record says: status not confirmed, as of the sponsor's last update on 18 May 2023. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.

Where is the study taking place?

The record lists 2 sites in Belgium, Canada. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.

What are the possible benefits and risks?

They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.

Are results available for this study?

Results are not available in the source record.

How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?

The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.

What does the primary outcome measure?

QTc time interval (time frame: 1 year). It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.

Where can I read the original study information?

On the ClinicalTrials.gov record for NCT05243537, which also lists 4 linked publications.

Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?

No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.

How often is this information updated?

AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 18 May 2023.

Free account

Log in to keep searching

You’ve used your 3 free searches. AzTrials is free: log in or create a free account to keep searching clinical trials and save the ones you want to follow.

Create a free accountLog in