Theranostics vs theratyping or theranostics plus theratyping?

Abstract

Treating all people with Cystic Fibrosis (pwCF) to the level of benefit achieved by highly efficient CFTR modulator therapies (HEMT) remains a significant challenge. Theratyping and theranostics are two distinct approaches to advance CF treatment. Both theratyping in cell lines and pwCF-derived biomaterials theranostics have unique strengths and limitations in the context of studying and treating CF. The challenges, advantages and disadvantages of both approaches are discussed here. While theratyping in cell lines offers ease of use, cost-effectiveness, and standardized platforms for experimentation, it misses physiological relevance and patient-specificity. Theranostics, on the other hand, provides a more human-relevant model for personalized medicine approaches but requires specialized expertise, resources, and access to patient samples. Integrating these two approaches in parallel and leveraging their respective strengths may enhance our understanding of CF and facilitate the development of more effective therapies for all pwCF.