Theratyping in cystic fibrosis

Understanding and addressing the needs of people with cystic fibrosis in the era of CFTR modulator therapy

Cystic fibrosis is a multiorgan disease caused by impaired function of the cystic fibrosis transmembrane conductance regulator (CFTR). Since the introduction of the CFTR modulator combination elexacaftor-tezacaftor-ivacaftor (ETI), which acts directly on mutant CFTR to enhance its activity, most people with cystic fibrosis (pwCF) have seen pronounced reductions in symptoms, and studies project marked increases in life expectancy for pwCF who are eligible for ETI. However, modulator therapy has not cured cystic fibrosis and the success of CFTR modulators has resulted in immediate questions about the new state of cystic fibrosis disease and clinical challenges in the care of pwCF. In this Series paper, we summarise key questions about cystic fibrosis disease in the era of modulator therapy, highlighting state-of-the-art research and clinical practices, knowledge gaps, new challenges faced by pwCF and the potential for future health-care challenges, and the pressing need for additional therapies to treat the underlying genetic or molecular causes of cystic fibrosis.

Standards of care for CFTR variant-specific therapy (including modulators) for people with cystic fibrosis

Cystic fibrosis (CF) has entered the era of variant-specific therapy, tailored to the genetic variants in the Cystic Fibrosis Transmembrane Conductance Regulator (CFTR) gene. CFTR modulators, the first variant-specific therapy available, have transformed the management of CF. The latest standards of care from the European CF Society (2018) did not include guidance on variant-specific therapy, as CFTR modulators were becoming established as a novel therapy. We have produced interim standards to guide healthcare professionals in the provision of variant-specific therapy for people with CF. Here we provide evidence-based guidance covering the spectrum of care, established using evidence from systematic reviews and expert opinion. Statements were reviewed by key stakeholders using Delphi methodology, with agreement (≥80%) achieved for all statements after one round of consultation. Issues around accessibility are discussed and there is clear consensus that all eligible people with CF should have access to variant-specific therapy.

Characterizing CFTR modulated sweat chloride response across the cf population: Initial results from the CHEC-SC study

BACKGROUND

CHEC-SC is an ongoing epidemiologic study characterizing modulator-induced sweat chloride (SC) responses across the CF population, with interim results available prior to the availability of triple combination modulator therapy.

METHODS

Eligible participants had been prescribed a modulator for ≥90 days with re-enrollment allowed upon establishment of a new modulator. Pre-modulator SC values were obtained from chart review; post-modulator sweat was collected and analyzed locally. SC changes were descriptively summarized with biologic sex effects adjusted for age, weight, and CFTR genotype. Heterogeneity in ivacaftor SC response was characterized in relation to published CFTR functional responses.

RESULTS

1848 participants provided 2004 SC measurements, 26.2% on ivacaftor, 39.1% on lumacaftor/ivacaftor, and 34.7% on tezacaftor/ivacaftor. Average SC changes for all modulators were consistent with those reported in previous clinical studies, with greater variation in SC response observed among rarer mutations and notable shifts in the proportion with SC <60mmol/L independent of the magnitude of SC change. Ivacaftor induced in vitro CFTR functional change was significantly correlated with ivacaftor-modulated SC response (Pearson correlation= ‒0.52, 95% CI: ‒0.773, ‒0.129). Average SC change from ivacaftor to tezacaftor/ivacaftor was ‒4.9 mmol/L (n=17,95% CI:‒9.3, ‒0.5) and differed from those switching from lumacaftor/ivacaftor (10.0 mmol/L, n=139, 95% CI:7.8,12.3). Sex at birth was not associated with SC response.

CONCLUSIONS

CHEC-SC is the largest study characterizing modulator-induced SC changes across the CF population. There was a strong association between ivacaftor induced in vitro CFTR function and SC response across a genotypically heterogenous cohort. Biological sex was not associated with SC response.

Oligonucleotide-based therapies for cystic fibrosis

In the clinically successful era of CFTR modulators and Theratyping, 10-20% of individuals with cystic fibrosis (CF) may develop disease due to CFTR mutations that remain undruggable. These individuals produce low levels of CFTR mRNA and/or not enough protein to be rescued with modulator drugs. Alternative therapeutic approaches to correct the CFTR defect at the mRNA level using nucleic acid technologies are currently feasible; e.g., oligonucleotides platforms, which are being rapidly developed to correct genetic disorders. Drug-like properties, great specificity, and predictable off-target effects by design make oligonucleotides a valuable approach with fewer clinical and ethical challenges than genomic editing strategies. Together with personalized and precision medicine approaches, oligonucleotides are ideal therapeutics to target CF-causing mutations that affect only a few individuals resilient to modulator therapies.

The impact of FDA and EMA regulatory decision-making process on the access to CFTR modulators for the treatment of cystic fibrosis

Background

Over the past decade, a new class of drugs called CFTR (cystic fibrosis transmembrane conductance regulator) modulators have shown to be able to improve clinical outcomes in patient with Cystic Fibrosis. In this analysis, we have extensively reviewed the regulatory pathways and decisions adopted by FDA and EMA to speed up the development, the review and the approval of these drugs, with the aim of identifying possible clinical and public health implications associated with differences.

Results

CFTR modulators have been developed towards addressing three main genetic domains: (1) F508del homozygous (F508del/F508del), (2) F508del heterozygous, and (3) genotypes not carrying F508del mutation; and expanded from adult to paediatric population. Programs to expedite the reviewing and licensing of CFTR modulators were extensively adopted by FDA and EMA. All CFTR modulators have been licensed in the US as orphan drugs, but in the EU the orphan status for LUM/IVA was not confirmed at the time of marketing authorization as results from the pivotal trial were not considered clinically significant. While FDA and EMA approved CFTR modulators on the basis of results from phase III double-blind RCTs, main differences were found on the extension of indications: FDA accepted non-clinical evidence considering a recovery of the CFTR function ≥ 10% based on chloride transport, a reliable indicator to correlate with improvement in clinical outcomes. By contrast, EMA did not deem preclinical data sufficient to expand the label of CFTR modulators without confirmatory clinical data.

Conclusions

Regulators played an important role in fostering the development and approval of CFTR modulators. However, differences were found between FDA and EMA in the way of reviewing and licensing CFTR modulators, which extended beyond semantics affecting patients’ eligibility and access: FDA’s approach was more mechanistic/biology-driven while the EMA’s one was more oriented by clinical evidence. This might refer to the connection between the EMA and the Member States, which tends to base decisions on pricing and reimbursement on clinical data rather than pre-clinical ones. Here we have proposed a two-step personalized-based model to merge the ethical commitment of ensuring larger access to all potential eligible patients (including those harboring very rare mutations) with the one of ensuring access to clinically assessed and effective medicines through Real World Data.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13023-022-02350-5.

Future of genetic therapies for rare genetic diseases: what to expect for the next 15 years?

Introduction

Rare genetic diseases affect millions of people worldwide. Most of them are caused by defective genes that impair quality of life and can lead to premature death. As genetic therapies aim to fix or replace defective genes, they are considered the most promising treatment for rare genetic diseases. Yet, as these therapies are still under development, it is still unclear whether they will be successful in treating these diseases. This study aims to address this gap by assessing researchers' opinions on the future of genetic therapies for the treatment of rare genetic diseases.

Methods

We conducted a global cross-sectional web-based survey of researchers who recently authored peer-reviewed articles related to rare genetic diseases.

Results

We assessed the opinions of 1430 researchers with high and good knowledge about genetic therapies for the treatment of rare genetic diseases. Overall, the respondents believed that genetic therapies would be the standard of care for rare genetic diseases before 2036, leading to cures after this period. CRISPR-Cas9 was considered the most likely approach to fixing or replacing defective genes in the next 15 years. The respondents with good knowledge believed that genetic therapies would only have long-lasting effects after 2036, while those with high knowledge were divided on this issue. The respondents with good knowledge on the subject believed that non-viral vectors are more likely to be successful in fixing or replacing defective genes in the next 15 years, while most of the respondents with high knowledge believed viral vectors would be more successful.

Conclusion

Overall, the researchers who participated in this study expect that in the future genetic therapies will greatly benefit the treatment of patients with rare genetic diseases.

Animal and Cell Culture Models for Cystic Fibrosis: Which Model Is Right for Your Application?

Over the past 30 years, a range of cystic fibrosis (CF) animal models have been generated for research purposes. Different species, including mice, rats, ferrets, rabbits, pigs, sheep, zebrafish, and fruit flies, have all been used to model CF disease. While access to such a variety of animal models is a luxury for any research field, it also complicates the decision-making process when it comes to selecting the right model for an investigation. The purpose of this review is to provide a guide for selecting the most appropriate CF animal model for any given application. In this review, the characteristics and phenotypes of each animal model are described, along with a discussion of the key considerations that must be taken into account when choosing a suitable animal model. Available in vitro systems of CF are also described and can offer a useful alternative to using animal models. Finally, the future of CF animal model generation and its use in research are speculated upon.

How to determine the mechanism of action of CFTR modulator compounds: A gateway to theranostics

The greatest challenge of 21st century biology is to fully understand mechanisms of disease to drive new approaches and medical innovation. Parallel to this is the huge biomedical endeavour of treating people through personalized medicine. Until now all CFTR modulator drugs that have entered clinical trials have been genotype-dependent. An emerging alternative is personalized/precision medicine in CF, i.e., to determine whether rare CFTR mutations respond to existing (or novel) CFTR modulator drugs by pre-assessing them directly on patient's tissues ex vivo, an approach also now termed theranostics. To administer the right drug to the right person it is essential to understand how drugs work, i.e., to know their mechanism of action (MoA), so as to predict their applicability, not just in certain mutations but also possibly in other diseases that share the same defect/defective pathway. Moreover, an understanding the MoA of a drug before it is tested in clinical trials is the logical path to drug discovery and can increase its chance for success and hence also approval. In conclusion, the most powerful approach to determine the MoA of a compound is to understand the underlying biology. Novel large datasets of intervenients in most biological processes, namely those emerging from the post-genomic era tools, are available and should be used to help in this task.

Ivacaftor for the treatment of cystic fibrosis in children under six years of age

Introduction: Cystic fibrosis (CF) results from aberrant ion transport due to abnormalities or absence of the cystic fibrosis transmembrane conductance regulator (CFTR), a chloride transporter that resides on the apical surface of epithelial cells. A novel class of medications, known as CFTR modulators, specifically target the abnormal protein.Areas covered: Ivacaftor increases the open probability of CFTR located on the cell surface, leading to enhanced chloride transport, and has been shown to improve lung function, weight, and quality of life. We reviewed the sentinel studies that lead to the approval of the use of ivacaftor in people with CF age six months and older with at least one CFTR gene mutation that is responsive to ivacaftor based on clinical trial and/or in vitro data. Children with CF have the greatest potential to benefit from CFTR modulator therapy when it is initiated prior to the development of permanent damage; however, challenges remain regarding use of ivacaftor in the youngest pediatric population.Expert opinion: Ivacaftor is safe and effective CFTR modulator that can be prescribed in children over six months of age with at least one CFTR gene mutation that is responsive to ivacaftor.

Tezacaftor and ivacaftor for the treatment of cystic fibrosis

Introduction: Cystic fibrosis (CF) is a complex, multi-system, genetic disease affecting over 70,000 people worldwide. The underlying defect is a mutation in the CFTR gene. Dysfunctional CFTR protein results in abnormal anion movement across epithelial membranes in affected organs. There has been a paradigm shift in CF treatment over the last decade with the advent of CFTR modulation, treatments which target this underlying genetic defect and have the potential to change the course of CF clinical disease.Areas covered: Available CFTR modulators in current clinical practice are reviewed in this article, with a direct comparison and summary of relevant pivotal clinical trials. The approval of ivacaftor and subsequent development of lumacaftor and tezacaftor dual combinations represents an exciting development in CF management in recent years.Expert opinion: Tezacaftor/ivacaftor (tez/iva) appears to have a more favorable adverse event and drug-drug interaction profile than lumacaftor/ivacaftor. Tez/iva has been approved, alongside Phe508del, for a large number of 'residual function' CFTR mutations, with some based on response to in vitro culture. Dual therapy with tez/iva has paved the way for triple CFTR modulation currently in clinical trials with an ultimate view to provide modulation therapy to the majority of CF genotypes in the future.

Theranostics by testing CFTR modulators in patient-derived materials: The current status and a proposal for subjects with rare CFTR mutations

The last decade has witnessed developments in the CF drug pipeline which are both exciting and unprecedented, bringing with them previously unconsidered challenges. The Task Force group came together to consider these challenges and possible strategies to address them. Over the last 18 months, we have discussed internally and gathered views from a broad range of individuals representing patient organizations, clinical and research teams, the pharmaceutical industry and regulatory agencies. In this and the accompanying article, we discuss two main areas of focus: i) optimising trial design and delivery for speed/efficiency; ii) drug development for patients with rare CFTR mutations. We propose some strategies to tackle the challenges ahead and highlight areas where further thought is needed. We see this as the start of a process rather than the end and hope herewith to engage the wider community in seeking solutions to improved treatments for all patients with CF.