Stephanie Kuek , Angela McCullagh , Eldho Paul , David Armstrong
{"title":"Real world outcomes of CFTR modulator therapy in Australian adults and children","authors":"Stephanie Kuek , Angela McCullagh , Eldho Paul , David Armstrong","doi":"10.1016/j.pupt.2023.102247","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>Recent advances in CFTR modulator therapy have the potential to change the face of cystic fibrosis (CF). This retrospective observational study describes real world experience of the four available CFTR modulators in adults and children with CF in a single centre in Melbourne, Australia.</p></div><div><h3>Method</h3><p>Data were collected for all patients treated with CFTR modulators at MonashCF between May 2012 and September 2020. Primary outcomes included lung function, admission days and BMI/BMI centile over time. Adverse events and reasons for changing or ceasing medications were also analysed.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p><span>55% (74/133) adult and 46% (55/119) paediatric patients were treated with CFTR modulators. FEV1<span> increased in adults treated with ivacaftor (IVA) and elexacaftor/tezacaftor/ivacaftor (ELX/TEZ/IVA) by 4.73% and 10.07% respectively, and </span></span>BMI also improved in these groups. Nutrition improved in adults and children treated with lumacaftor/ivacaftor (LUM/IVA). There was no significant improvement in FEV1 or admission days with LUM/IVA or tezacaftor/ivacaftor (TEZ/IVA). 36% (31/85) ceased LUM/IVA, due to adverse effects in 81% (25/31). Of these, 92% (23/25) changed to TEZ/IVA, 78% (18/23) without significant adverse effects.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>Our findings for LUM/IVA and TEZ/IVA are less encouraging than those seen in clinical trials, with no significant improvement in lung function or admission days and a higher rate of adverse effects with LUM/IVA compared with phase 3 clinical trials. TEZ/IVA was generally well tolerated by those who experienced side effects with LUM/IVA. The small number of patients treated with ELX/TEZ/IVA had improvements in all parameters. These findings support ongoing use of IVA for individuals with gating mutations, and transition to ELX/TEZ/IVA once available for patients with at least one Phe508del mutation.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":20799,"journal":{"name":"Pulmonary pharmacology & therapeutics","volume":"82 ","pages":"Article 102247"},"PeriodicalIF":3.3000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Pulmonary pharmacology & therapeutics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1094553923000597","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background
Recent advances in CFTR modulator therapy have the potential to change the face of cystic fibrosis (CF). This retrospective observational study describes real world experience of the four available CFTR modulators in adults and children with CF in a single centre in Melbourne, Australia.
Method
Data were collected for all patients treated with CFTR modulators at MonashCF between May 2012 and September 2020. Primary outcomes included lung function, admission days and BMI/BMI centile over time. Adverse events and reasons for changing or ceasing medications were also analysed.
Results
55% (74/133) adult and 46% (55/119) paediatric patients were treated with CFTR modulators. FEV1 increased in adults treated with ivacaftor (IVA) and elexacaftor/tezacaftor/ivacaftor (ELX/TEZ/IVA) by 4.73% and 10.07% respectively, and BMI also improved in these groups. Nutrition improved in adults and children treated with lumacaftor/ivacaftor (LUM/IVA). There was no significant improvement in FEV1 or admission days with LUM/IVA or tezacaftor/ivacaftor (TEZ/IVA). 36% (31/85) ceased LUM/IVA, due to adverse effects in 81% (25/31). Of these, 92% (23/25) changed to TEZ/IVA, 78% (18/23) without significant adverse effects.
Conclusions
Our findings for LUM/IVA and TEZ/IVA are less encouraging than those seen in clinical trials, with no significant improvement in lung function or admission days and a higher rate of adverse effects with LUM/IVA compared with phase 3 clinical trials. TEZ/IVA was generally well tolerated by those who experienced side effects with LUM/IVA. The small number of patients treated with ELX/TEZ/IVA had improvements in all parameters. These findings support ongoing use of IVA for individuals with gating mutations, and transition to ELX/TEZ/IVA once available for patients with at least one Phe508del mutation.
期刊介绍:
Pulmonary Pharmacology and Therapeutics (formerly Pulmonary Pharmacology) is concerned with lung pharmacology from molecular to clinical aspects. The subject matter encompasses the major diseases of the lung including asthma, cystic fibrosis, pulmonary circulation, ARDS, carcinoma, bronchitis, emphysema and drug delivery. Laboratory and clinical research on man and animals will be considered including studies related to chemotherapy of cancer, tuberculosis and infection. In addition to original research papers the journal will include review articles and book reviews.
Research Areas Include:
• All major diseases of the lung
• Physiology
• Pathology
• Drug delivery
• Metabolism
• Pulmonary Toxicology.