Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 178

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

The Utility of hERG and Repolarization Assays in Evaluating Delayed Cardiac Repolarization: Influence of Multi-Channel Block

Martin, Ruth L., McDermott, Jeff S., Salmen, Heinz J., Palmatier, Jason, Cox, Bryan F., Gintant, Gary A.·2004·Journal of Cardiovascular Pharmacology

Abstract

Drug-induced delayed cardiac repolarization is a recognized risk factor for proarrhythmia and is associated with block of IKr (the potassium current encoded by the human ether-a- go-go-related gene [hERG]). To evaluate the utility of 2 in vitro assays widely used to assess delayed repolarization, we compared the effects of haloperidol and 9 structurally diverse drugs in a hERG and repolarization (canine Purkinje fiber action potential duration [APD]) assay over wide concentrations. Despite potent hERG current block (IC50 = 0.174 microM), haloperidol elicited a bell-shaped concentration-response relationship for APD prolongation, with lesser prolongation (and reduced plateau height) observed with concentrations eliciting maximal hERG block, consistent with multi-channel block at higher concentrations. Consistent with this hypothesis, APD prolongation with the specific IKr blocker dofetilide was a) reduced by concomitant administration of nifedipine (calcium current block) and b) reversed by lidocaine (late sodium current block). Additional studies demonstrated prominent (>50%) hERG inhibition with most (9/10) drugs despite wide APD changes (158% prolongation - 16% shortening), consistent with multi-channel block. The poor correlation between hERG and repolarization assays suggests that the hERG assay oversimplifies drug effects on the complex repolarization process for drugs demonstrating multi-channel block and that neither assay alone adequately predicts proarrhythmic risk.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1097/00005344-200403000-00007

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

See all 178

Metadata

Authors
Martin, R. L., McDermott, J. S., Salmen, H. J., Palmatier, J., Cox, B. F., & Gintant, G. A.
Venue
Journal of Cardiovascular Pharmacology
Published
2004-03
Volume
43
Issue
3
Pages
369-379
ISSN
0160-2446 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2014912931
Cited by
178
References
1
FWCI
7.02
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: The Utility of hERG and Repolarization Assays in Evaluating Delayed Cardiac Repolarization: Influence of Multi-Channel Block. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1097/00005344-200403000-00007
The paper
Martin, R. L., McDermott, J. S., Salmen, H. J., Palmatier, J., Cox, B. F., & Gintant, G. A. (2004). The Utility of hERG and Repolarization Assays in Evaluating Delayed Cardiac Repolarization: Influence of Multi-Channel Block. Journal of Cardiovascular Pharmacology. https://doi.org/10.1097/00005344-200403000-00007

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.