Podcast on Self-administered Intranasal Etripamil for Symptomatic Paroxysmal Supraventricular Tachycardia: The RAPID Trial

Pharmacokinetics and Pharmacodynamics of Etripamil, an Intranasally Administered, Fast‐Acting, Nondihydropyridine Calcium Channel Blocker

“…The studies were conducted at sites where institutional review board or ethics committee approval was acquired, and written informed consent was obtained from all participants prior to study participation. Because the safety of etripamil has been reported in later-phase studies, [8][9][10] this report focuses primarily on the pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic results from these 2 Phase 1 studies, which notably were used to guide etripamil dose selection in subsequent Phase 2 and 3 studies.…”

“…4,5 Etripamil, a fast-acting nondihydropyridine L-type calcium channel blocker, is a close structural analog of verapamil, modified by the addition of an ester group (Figure 1A). [6][7][8][9][10] According to an unpublished in vitro study of the incubation of etripamil in human whole blood, etripamil is rapidly and completely transformed to the stable and pharmacologically inactive metabolite MSP-2030 by blood esterases, indicating that hepatic metabolism is not a significant factor in the biotransformation of etripamil (Figure 1B, Figure S1). Similar to verapamil, etripamil slows AV nodal conduction and prolongs the AV nodal refractory period by blocking the slow inward calcium influx through L-type calcium channels.…”

Uma Análise Clínica E Terapêutica Da Taquicardia Supraventricular Paroxística E Da Síndrome De Wolff-Parkinson-White

“…Os bloqueadores dos canais de cálcio devem ser evitados em pacientes com IC com fração de ejeção reduzida. O etripamil é um bloqueador dos canais de cálcio intranasal de ação curta que pode ser eficaz na interrupção da TSVP [26][27][28] . Em um ECR de fase 3 envolvendo 692 pacientes, Stambler et al 28 verificaram que o etripamil aumentou significativamente a probabilidade de cardioversão, correspondente a 30 minutos após sua administração em comparação com placebo (64% vs. 31%).…”