scispace - formally typeset
Search or ask a question
Author

Dan M. Roden

Bio: Dan M. Roden is an academic researcher from Vanderbilt University Medical Center. The author has contributed to research in topics: QT interval & Population. The author has an hindex of 132, co-authored 859 publications receiving 67578 citations. Previous affiliations of Dan M. Roden include Vanderbilt University & St George's, University of London.


Papers
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
01 Sep 2006-Europace
TL;DR: This guideline is pleased to have this guideline developed in conjunction with the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) and to have been selected from all 3 organizations to examine subject-specific data and write guidelines.
Abstract: It is important that the medical profession plays a significant role in critically evaluating the use of diagnostic procedures and therapies as they are introduced and tested in the detection, management, or prevention of disease states. Rigorous and expert analysis of the available data documenting absolute and relative benefits and risks of those procedures and therapies can produce helpful guidelines that improve the effectiveness of care, optimize patient outcomes, and favorably affect the overall cost of care by focusing resources on the most effective strategies. The American College of Cardiology Foundation (ACCF) and the American Heart Association (AHA) have jointly engaged in the production of such guidelines in the area of cardiovascular disease since 1980. The ACC/AHA Task Force on Practice Guidelines, whose charge is to develop, update, or revise practice guidelines for important cardiovascular diseases and procedures, directs this effort. The Task Force is pleased to have this guideline developed in conjunction with the European Society of Cardiology (ESC). Writing committees are charged with the task of performing an assessment of the evidence and acting as an independent group of authors to develop or update written recommendations for clinical practice. Experts in the subject under consideration have been selected from all 3 organizations to examine subject-specific data and write guidelines. The process includes additional representatives from other medical practitioner and specialty groups when appropriate. Writing committees are specifically charged to perform a formal literature review, weigh the strength of evidence for or against a particular treatment or procedure, and include estimates of expected health outcomes where data exist. Patient-specific modifiers, comorbidities, and issues of patient preference that might influence the choice of particular tests or therapies are considered as well as frequency of follow-up and cost effectiveness. When available, information from studies on cost will be considered; however, review …

2,476 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
Bruce L. Wilkoff1, James R. Cook, Andrew E. Epstein2, Leon Greene, Alfred P. Hallstrom, Henry H. Hsia, Steven P. Kutalek, Arjun Sharma, Brian Blatt, Barry Karas, James Kirchhoffer, Deborah Warwick, Mary Duquette, Jean Provencher, Maureen Redmond, John M. Herre, Robert S. Bernstein, Linette R. Klevan, Kathleen D. Barackman, Jennine Zumbuhl, Mina K. Chung1, Fredrick J. Jaeger1, David O. Martin1, Andrea Natale1, Walid Saliba1, Robert A. Schweikert1, Mark Niebauer1, Patrick J. Tchou1, Raquel Rozich1, Marc Roelke, Constantinos A. Costeas, Donald G. Rubenstein, Scott Ruffo, Kelly Kumar, Elizabeth McCarthy, Valerie Pastore, Mark S. Wathen3, Jeffrey N. Rottman3, Mark Anderson3, John T. Lee3, Katherine T. Murray3, Dan M. Roden3, Nancy Conners3, Sandy Saunders3, Gearoid P. O'Neill4, Anne Skadsen4, Shelley Allen4, Ellie Vierra4, Stephen Greer, Jeffrey Neuhauser, Pam Myers, Celeste Lee, Terri Moore, Richard C. Klein5, Roger A. Freedman5, Geri Wadsworth5, Sharon M. Dailey2, G. Neal Kay2, Vance J. Plumb2, Rosemary S. Bubien2, Linda W. Kay2, Candace M. Nasser2, Jane E. Slabaugh2, Robert B. Leman6, Jenifer L. Lake6, Julie Clark6, Elizabeth Clarke6, Laura Finklea6, John C. Love7, Charles M. Carpenter7, Andrew Corsello7, Joel E. Cutler7, Susan BosworthFarrell7, Gregory Michaud8, Alfred E. Buxton8, Kristin E. Ellison8, Frederic Christian8, Malcolm Kirk8, Pamela L. Corcoran8, Stephen T. Rothbart9, Roy B. Sauberman9, Jennifer McCarthy9, Mary Ellen Page9, Jonathan S. Steinberg, Frederick Ehlert, Bengt Herweg, Margot Vloka, Ammy Malinay, Edith Menchavez, Michael Rome, Kathy Marks, Alison Swarens, Maribel Hernandez, Roger A. Marinchak, Douglas Esberg, John Finkle, Glenn Harper, Peter R. Kowey, Colin Movsowitz 
25 Dec 2002-JAMA
TL;DR: For patients with standard indications for ICD therapy, no indication for cardiac pacing, and an LVEF of 40% or less, dual-chamber pacing offers no clinical advantage over ventricular backup pacing and may be detrimental by increasing the combined end point of death or hospitalization for heart failure.
Abstract: CONTEXT: Implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) therapy with backup ventricular pacing increases survival in patients with life-threatening ventricular arrhythmias. Most currently implanted ICD devices provide dual-chamber pacing therapy. The most common comorbid cause for mortality in this population is congestive heart failure. OBJECTIVE: To determine the efficacy of dual-chamber pacing compared with backup ventricular pacing in patients with standard indications for ICD implantation but without indications for antibradycardia pacing. DESIGN: The Dual Chamber and VVI Implantable Defibrillator (DAVID) Trial, a single-blind, parallel-group, randomized clinical trial. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: A total of 506 patients with indications for ICD therapy were enrolled between October 2000 and September 2002 at 37 US centers. All patients had a left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) of 40% or less, no indication for antibradycardia pacemaker therapy, and no persistent atrial arrhythmias. INTERVENTIONS: All patients had an ICD with dual-chamber, rate-responsive pacing capability implanted. Patients were randomly assigned to have the ICDs programmed to ventricular backup pacing at 40/min (VVI-40; n = 256) or dual-chamber rate-responsive pacing at 70/min (DDDR-70; n = 250). Maximal tolerated medical therapy for left ventricular dysfunction, including angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors and beta-blockers, was prescribed to all patients. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Composite end point of time to death or first hospitalization for congestive heart failure. RESULTS: One-year survival free of the composite end point was 83.9% for patients treated with VVI-40 compared with 73.3% for patients treated with DDDR-70 (relative hazard, 1.61; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.06-2.44). The components of the composite end point, mortality of 6.5% for VVI-40 vs 10.1% for DDDR-70 (relative hazard, 1.61; 95% CI, 0.84-3.09) and hospitalization for congestive heart failure of 13.3% for VVI-40 vs 22.6% for DDDR-70 (relative hazard, 1.54; 95% CI, 0.97-2.46), also trended in favor of VVI-40 programming. CONCLUSION: For patients with standard indications for ICD therapy, no indication for cardiac pacing, and an LVEF of 40% or less, dual-chamber pacing offers no clinical advantage over ventricular backup pacing and may be detrimental by increasing the combined end point of death or hospitalization for heart failure.

1,922 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: The single most common cause of the withdrawal or restriction of the use of marketed drugs has been QT-interval prolongation associated with polymorphic ventricular tachycardia, or torsade de pointes, a condition that can be fatal.
Abstract: The single most common cause of the withdrawal or restriction of the use of marketed drugs has been QT-interval prolongation associated with polymorphic ventricular tachycardia, or torsade de pointes, a condition that can be fatal. This review summarizes the current knowledge about molecular and clinical predictors of drug-induced QT-interval prolongation and torsade de pointes and discusses how new molecular predictors of drug action might be incorporated into drug-development programs and clinical practice. A general approach to drugs suspected of causing this problem is presented.

1,696 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: The use of a pharmacogenetic algorithm for estimating the appropriate initial dose of warfarin produces recommendations that are significantly closer to the required stable therapeutic dose than those derived from a clinical algorithm or a fixed-dose approach.
Abstract: Warfarin is one of the most widely used anticoagulants in the world. Treatment is complicated by a large inter-individual variation in the dose needed to reach adequate levels of anticoagulation i.e. INR 2.0 – 3.0. The objective of this thesis was to evaluate which factors, mainly genetic but also non-genetic, that affect the response to warfarin in terms of required maintenance dose, efficacy and safety with special focus on warfarin dose prediction.Through candidate gene and genome-wide studies, we have shown that the genes CYP2C9 and VKORC1 are the major determinants of warfarin maintenance dose. By combining the SNPs CYP2C9 *2, CYP2C9 *3 and VKORC1 rs9923231 with the clinical factors age, height, weight, ethnicity, amiodarone and use of inducers (carbamazepine, phenytoin or rifampicin) into a prediction model (the IWPC model) we can explain 43 % to 51 % of the variation in warfarin maintenance dose. Patients requiring doses < 29 mg/week and doses ≥ 49 mg/week benefitted the most from pharmacogenetic dosing. Further, we have shown that the difference across ethnicities in percent variance explained by VKORC1 was largely accounted for by the allele frequency of rs9923231. Other novel genes affecting maintenance dose (NEDD4 and DDHD1), as well as the replicated CYP4F2 gene, have small effects on dose predictions and are not likely to be cost-effective, unless inexpensive genotyping is available.Three types of prediction models for warfarin dosing exist: maintenance dose models, loading dose models and dose revision models. The combination of these three models is currently being used in the warfarin treatment arm of the European Pharmacogenetics of Anticoagulant Therapy (EU-PACT) study. Other clinical trials aiming to prove the clinical validity and utility of pharmacogenetic dosing are also underway.The future of pharmacogenetic warfarin dosing relies on results from these ongoing studies, the availability of inexpensive genotyping and the cost-effectiveness of pharmacogenetic driven warfarin dosing compared with new oral anticoagulant drugs.

1,504 citations


Cited by
More filters
28 Jul 2005
TL;DR: PfPMP1)与感染红细胞、树突状组胞以及胎盘的单个或多个受体作用,在黏附及免疫逃避中起关键的作�ly.
Abstract: 抗原变异可使得多种致病微生物易于逃避宿主免疫应答。表达在感染红细胞表面的恶性疟原虫红细胞表面蛋白1(PfPMP1)与感染红细胞、内皮细胞、树突状细胞以及胎盘的单个或多个受体作用,在黏附及免疫逃避中起关键的作用。每个单倍体基因组var基因家族编码约60种成员,通过启动转录不同的var基因变异体为抗原变异提供了分子基础。

18,940 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: Authors/Task Force Members: Piotr Ponikowski* (Chairperson) (Poland), Adriaan A. Voors* (Co-Chair person) (The Netherlands), Stefan D. Anker (Germany), Héctor Bueno (Spain), John G. F. Cleland (UK), Andrew J. S. Coats (UK)

13,400 citations