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.
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
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).
- Conditions
- Qt Interval, Preterm Birth
- 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 group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| QTc time interval in former preterm neonates, or term born healthy controls | former 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.
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.
- First posted17 Feb 2022
- Study start1 Jan 2023
- Primary completion1 Apr 2023
- Study completion1 Nov 2023 (estimated)
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Publications (4)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for Qt IntervalStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- More trials run by Universitaire Ziekenhuizen KU LeuvenThe sponsor's other registered studies.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
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)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Universitaire Ziekenhuizen KU Leuven
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- St. Justine's Hospital
- Responsible party
- Sponsor
- Investigators
- karel allegaert, MD, PhD, Principal investigator, UZ Leuven
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 32120379Bassareo 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 21219107Salaets 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 34857877Vanthienen 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
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 18 May 2023. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- QTc Intervals in Former Preterm/Extreme Low Birth Weight Infants: a Pooled Study Proposal
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT05243537
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- S66020
- Conditions
- Qt Interval, Preterm Birth
- Keywords
- QTc, ELBW neonates, preterms, pharmacovigilance
- Study type
- Observational
- Recruitment status
- Unknown status
- Enrolment
- 250 participants (estimated)
- Lead sponsor
- Universitaire Ziekenhuizen KU LeuvenUniversity, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- St. Justine's Hospital
- Study start
- 1 Jan 2023 (actual)
- Primary completion
- 1 Apr 2023 (actual)
- Study completion
- 1 Nov 2023 (estimated)
- First posted
- 17 Feb 2022 (actual)
- Results
- Not posted in the source record
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
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].
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).
Study design
- Observational model
- Case-control
- Time perspective
- Retrospective
- Number of arms
- 1
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| QTc time interval in former preterm neonates, or term born healthy controls | – | Other: ECG (diagnostic)former 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. |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 8 to 25 years
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Accepted
- Age groups
- 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.
Key inclusion criteria (2 listed)
- 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.
Key exclusion criteria (2 listed)
- 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
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| ECG (diagnostic)ECG collection (once, at rest), in both cases and controls | Other | QTc time interval in former preterm neonates, or term born healthy controls |
Primary outcome
QTc time interval
Time frame: 1 year
QTc time interval (in msec) in former preterms or healthy term controls
Results and safety
Results are not available in the source record.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 18 May 2023.
- Background: PubMed 32120379Gervais 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.
- Background: PubMed 21219107Bassareo 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.
- Results publication: PubMed 34857877Salaets 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.
- Derived from this study: PubMed 37505401Vanthienen 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.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: 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.
Related trials for Qt Interval
RecruitingPhase 1
A Study to Evaluate the Effects of Therapeutic and Supratherapeutic Doses of KRP-S124 Compared to Placebo With Moxifloxacin on QTc Interval in Healthy Participants
Healthy Participants
RecruitingPhase 1
Phase 1 Study to Assess the Effects of HSK31858 on the QT/QTc Interval in Healthy Chinese Participants
Non-cystic Fibrosis Bronchiectasis (NCFBE)
RecruitingPhase 1
QT Interval Effects Study of Oral FXS5626 Tablets
Evaluation of QTc Interval
Not yet recruitingObservational study
Time-Domain Heart Rate Variability and QT Interval in Children With Epilepsy
Epilepsy, Pediatric Epilepsy
Recruiting
4-electrode ECG (DigitalCardio®) vs Standard 10-electrode ECG: Evaluating Ease of Use and Recording Quality
4-electrode Tablet-based Electrocardiogram (ECG) System, Electrical Activity of the Heart
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
karel allegaert, MD, PhD principal investigator
UZ Leuven
2 sites in 2 countries: see every site and its status.
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.