Dataset Information

From Ivacaftor to Triple Combination: A Systematic Review of Efficacy and Safety of CFTR Modulators in People with Cystic Fibrosis.

ABSTRACT: Over the last years CFTR (cystic fibrosis transmembrane conductance regulator) modulators have shown the ability to improve relevant clinical outcomes in patients with cystic fibrosis (CF). This review aims at a systematic research of the current evidence on efficacy and tolerability of CFTR modulators for different genetic subsets of patients with CF. Two investigators independently performed the search on PubMed and included phase 2 and 3 clinical trials published in the study period 1 January 2005-31 January 2020. A final pool of 23 papers was included in the systematic review for a total of 4219 patients. For each paper data of interest were extracted and reported in table. In terms of lung function, patients who had the most beneficial effects from CFTR modulation were those patients with one gating mutation receiving IVA (ivacaftor) and patients with p.Phe508del mutation, both homozygous and heterozygous, receiving ELX/TEZ/IVA (elexacaftor/tezacaftor/ivacaftor) had the most relevant beneficial effects in term of lung function, pulmonary exacerbation decrease, and symptom improvement. CFTR modulators showed an overall favorable safety profile. Next steps should aim to systematize our comprehension of scientific data of efficacy and safety coming from real life observational studies.

SUBMITTER: Gramegna A

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7461566 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Aug

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

From Ivacaftor to Triple Combination: A Systematic Review of Efficacy and Safety of CFTR Modulators in People with Cystic Fibrosis.

Gramegna Andrea A Contarini Martina M Aliberti Stefano S Casciaro Rosaria R Blasi Francesco F Castellani Carlo C

International journal of molecular sciences 20200816 16

Over the last years <i>CFTR</i> (cystic fibrosis transmembrane conductance regulator) modulators have shown the ability to improve relevant clinical outcomes in patients with cystic fibrosis (CF). This review aims at a systematic research of the current evidence on efficacy and tolerability of <i>CFTR</i> modulators for different genetic subsets of patients with CF. Two investigators independently performed the search on PubMed and included phase 2 and 3 clinical trials published in the study pe ...[more]

PMID: 32824306

Similar Datasets

Project description:IntroductionThe triple-combination (TC) cystic fibrosis transmembrane conductance regulator (CFTR) modulator regimen elexacaftor, tezacaftor, and ivacaftor was shown to be safe and efficacious in phase 3 trials of people with cystic fibrosis (pwCF) ≥ 12 years of age with ≥ 1 F508del-CFTR allele. Here, a simulation study predicted ivacaftor, tezacaftor, and elexacaftor exposures and impacts on CFTR modulation following transition from ivacaftor [a cytochrome P450 3A (CYP3A) substrate], lumacaftor (a CYP3A inducer)/ivacaftor, or tezacaftor/ivacaftor to TC.MethodsPhysiologically based pharmacokinetic (PBPK) modeling was used to evaluate plasma exposures during transition from mono- or dual-combination CFTR modulator regimens to TC. PBPK models were parameterized using data from human hepatocytes to account for CYP3A induction by lumacaftor and validated to match clinical data from healthy volunteers and pwCF. Using dosing regimens for pwCF ≥ 12 years of age, simulations were performed for ivacaftor, lumacaftor/ivacaftor, and tezacaftor/ivacaftor dosing for 14 days followed by immediate transition to elexacaftor/tezacaftor/ivacaftor dosing for 14 days. Drug exposures during transitions were compared with respective half-maximal effective concentrations (EC50) estimated from efficacy endpoint data from clinical studies.ResultsIn simulations of immediate transition from ivacaftor or tezacaftor/ivacaftor to TC, the preceding treatment had no impact on ivacaftor, tezacaftor, or elexacaftor exposures. In simulations of immediate transition from lumacaftor/ivacaftor to TC, ivacaftor exposure decreased to 64% of maximum effective concentration (EC), due to reduction in ivacaftor dose and residual CYP3A4 induction, then returned to 90-95% of maximum EC. Lumacaftor-mediated CYP3A induction resolved within approximately 2 weeks. In all simulations, ivacaftor, tezacaftor, and elexacaftor exposures approached steady state within 2 weeks following transition and, at all times, ivacaftor and ≥ 1 CFTR corrector remained above EC50.ConclusionPBPK modeling indicates that immediate transition to the elexacaftor/tezacaftor/ivacaftor regimen from an ivacaftor, lumacaftor/ivacaftor, or tezacaftor/ivacaftor regimen results in sustained CFTR modulation in pwCF ≥ 12 years of age.

Project description:BackgroundLumacaftor/ivacaftor combination therapy has shown clinical benefits in patients with cystic fibrosis homozygous for the Phe508del CFTR mutation; however, pretreatment lung function is a confounding factor that potentially affects the efficacy and safety of this therapy. We aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of lumacaftor/ivacaftor therapy in these patients, defined by specific categories of lung function.MethodsBoth trials (TRAFFIC and TRANSPORT) included in this pooled analysis were multinational, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group, phase 3 studies. Eligible patients from 187 participating centres in North America, Australia, and the European Union (both trials) were aged 12 years or older with a confirmed diagnosis of cystic fibrosis, homozygous for the Phe508del CFTR mutation, and with a percent predicted FEV1 (ppFEV1) of 40-90 at the time of screening. Patients were randomly assigned with an interactive web response system (1:1:1) to receive placebo, lumacaftor (600 mg once daily) plus ivacaftor (250 mg every 12 h), or lumacaftor (400 mg every 12 h) plus ivacaftor (250 mg every 12 h) for 24 weeks. Prespecified subgroup analyses of pooled efficacy and safety data by lung function, as measured by ppFEV1, were done for patients with baseline ppFEV1 (<40 and ≥40) and screening ppFEV1 (<70 and ≥70). The primary endpoint was the absolute change from baseline in ppFEV1 at week 24 analysed in all randomised patients who received at least one dose of study drug. Both trials are registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (TRAFFIC: NCT01807923; TRANSPORT: NCT01807949).FindingsBoth trials were done between April, 2013, and April, 2014. Of the 1108 patients included in the efficacy analysis, 81 patients had a ppFEV1 that decreased to lower than 40 between screening and baseline and 1016 had a ppFEV1 of 40 or higher at baseline. At screening, 730 had a ppFEV1 of less than 70, and 342 had a ppFEV1 of 70 or higher. Improvements in the absolute change from baseline at week 24 in ppFEV1 were observed with both lumacaftor/ivacaftor doses in the subgroup with baseline ppFEV1 levels lower than 40 (least-squares mean difference vs placebo was 3·7 percentage points [95% CI 0·5-6·9; p=0·024] in the lumacaftor [600 mg/day]-ivacaftor group and 3·3 percentage points [0·2-6·4; p=0·036] in the lumacaftor [400 mg/12 h]-ivacaftor group). Improvements in ppFEV1 compared with placebo were also reported in the subgroup with baseline ppFEV1 levels of 40 or higher (3·3 percentage points [2·3-4·4; p<0·0001] in the lumacaftor [600 mg per day]-ivacaftor group and 2·8 percentage points [1·7-3·8; p<0·0001] in the lumacaftor [400 mg/12 h]-ivacaftor group). Similar absolute improvements in ppFEV1 compared with placebo were observed in subgroups with screening ppFEV1 levels lower than 70 and ppFEV1 levels of 70 or higher. Increases in body-mass index and reduction in number of pulmonary exacerbation events were observed in both lumacaftor/ivacaftor dose groups compared with placebo across all lung function subgroups. Treatment was generally well tolerated, although the incidence of some respiratory adverse events was higher with lumacaftor/ivacaftor than with placebo in all subgroups. In patients with baseline ppFEV1 levels lower than 40, these adverse events included cough, dyspnoea, and abnormal respiration.InterpretationThese analyses confirm that lumacaftor/ivacaftor combination therapy benefits patients with cystic fibrosis homozygous for Phe508del CFTR who have varying degrees of lung function impairment.FundingVertex Pharmaceuticals.

Project description:Ivacaftor has been previously assessed in patients with cystic fibrosis with Gly551Asp-CFTR or other gating mutations. We assessed ivacaftor in patients with Arg117His-CFTR, a residual function mutation.We did a 24-week, placebo-controlled, double-blind, randomised clinical trial, which enrolled 69 patients with cystic fibrosis aged 6 years and older with Arg117His-CFTR and percentage of predicted forced expiratory volume in 1 s (% predicted FEV1) of at least 40. We randomly assigned eligible patients (1:1) to receive placebo or ivacaftor 150 mg every 12 h for 24 weeks. Randomisation was stratified by age (6-11, 12-17, and ≥18 years) and % predicted FEV1 (<70, ≥70 to ≤90, and >90). The primary outcome was the absolute change from baseline in % predicted FEV1 through week 24. Secondary outcomes included safety and changes in sweat chloride concentrations and Cystic Fibrosis Questionnaire-Revised (CFQ-R) respiratory domain scores. An open-label extension enrolled 65 of the patients after washout; after 12 weeks, we did an interim analysis.After 24 weeks, the treatment difference in mean absolute change in % predicted FEV1 between ivacaftor (n=34) and placebo (n=35) was 2·1 percentage points (95% CI -1·13 to 5·35; p=0·20). Ivacaftor treatment resulted in significant treatment differences in sweat chloride (-24·0 mmol/L, 95% CI -28·01 to -19·93; p<0·0001) and CFQ-R respiratory domain (8·4, 2·17 to 14·61; p=0·009). In prespecified subgroup analyses, % predicted FEV1 significantly improved with ivacaftor in patients aged 18 years or older (treatment difference vs placebo: 5·0 percentage points, 95% CI 1·15 to 8·78; p=0·01), but not in patients aged 6-11 years (-6·3 percentage points, -11·96 to -0·71; p=0·03). In the extension study, both placebo-to-ivacaftor and ivacaftor-to-ivacaftor groups showed % predicted FEV1 improvement (absolute change from post-washout baseline at week 12: placebo-to-ivacaftor, 5·0 percentage points [p=0·0005]; ivacaftor-to-ivacaftor, 6·0 percentage points [p=0·006]). We did not identify any new safety concerns. The studies are registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (the randomised, placebo-controlled study, number NCT01614457; the open-label extension study, number NCT01707290).Although this study did not show a significant improvement in % predicted FEV1, ivacaftor did significantly improve sweat chloride and CFQ-R respiratory domain scores and lung function in adult patients with Arg117His-CFTR, indicating that ivacaftor might benefit patients with Arg117His-CFTR who have established disease.Vertex Pharmaceuticals Incorporated.

Dataset Information

From Ivacaftor to Triple Combination: A Systematic Review of Efficacy and Safety of CFTR Modulators in People with Cystic Fibrosis.

Publications

From Ivacaftor to Triple Combination: A Systematic Review of Efficacy and Safety of CFTR Modulators in People with Cystic Fibrosis.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets