Efficacy and Safety of Triple Combination Cystic Fibrosis Transmembrane Conductance Regulator Modulators in Patients With Cystic Fibrosis: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Cystic fibrosis: desensitization in delayed hypersensitivity reactions to elexacaftor/tezacaftor/ivacaftor

Background: Cystic fibrosis transmembrane conductance regulator modulators are the only available treatment for cystic fibrosis. Although elexacaftor/tezacaftor/ivacaftor (ELX/TEZ/IVA) is well-tolerated, rash has been reported as very frequent. In severe rashes, ELX/TEZ/IVA withdrawal is necessary, leading to clinical deterioration. The objective of the study is to increment the experience of ELX/TEZ/IVA desensitization. Methods: Adult patients who developed a delayed hypersensitivity rash to ELX/TEZ/IVA between December 2021 and February 2023 and required withdrawal due to ineffective rescue medication were included. Skins test for ELX/TEZ/IVA and IVA were conducted to establish hypersensitivity mechanism. Balijepally ELX/TEZ/IVA desensitization protocol was selected. In cases where desensitization had to be discontinued due to rash, an extended desensitization was proposed. Clinical and health-related quality of life parameters were collected before ELX/TEZ/IVA and after desensitization. Results: 162 patients (81 women, 31.2 [23.8-42.5] years) started ELX/TEZ/IVA, developing rash 12 of them (7.4%, six women). Six patients (five women) required stopping ELX/TEZ/IVA and were selected for desensitization. Skin tests indicated delayed type-IV hypersensitivity in one patient. Two patients presented adequate tolerance to desensitization; while, four patients developed rash. Three of these patients, successfully concluded extended desensitization (one patient declined participation). No significant clinical deterioration or quality of life worsening was observed during desensitization; in fact, there was an improvement in practically all mesured parameters. All five patients who resumed ELX/TEZ/IVA are currently receiving therapy with good tolerance. Conclusion: Desensitization to ELX/TEZ/IVA could be a successful and safe strategy for reintroducing this essential treatment in cases of a delayed hypersensitivity rash.

Use of elexacaftor+tezacaftor+ivacaftor in individuals with cystic fibrosis and at least one F508del allele: a systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the effect of treatment with the combination of three cystic fibrosis transmembrane conductance regulator (CFTR) modulators-elexacaftor+tezacaftor+ivacaftor (ETI)-on important clinical endpoints in individuals with cystic fibrosis.

METHODS

This was a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials that compared the use of ETI in individuals with CF and at least one F508del allele with that of placebo or with an active comparator such as other combinations of CFTR modulators, following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) recommendations and the Patients of interest, Intervention to be studied, Comparison of interventions, and Outcome of interest (PICO) methodology. We searched the following databases: MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and ClinicalTrials.gov from their inception to December 26th, 2022. The risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool, and the quality of evidence was based on the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE).

RESULTS

We retrieved 54 studies in the primary search. Of these, 6 met the inclusion criteria and were analyzed (1,127 patients; 577 and 550 in the intervention and control groups, respectively). The meta-analysis revealed that the use of ETI increased FEV1% [risk difference (RD), +10.47%; 95% CI, 6.88-14.06], reduced the number of acute pulmonary exacerbations (RD, -0.16; 95% CI, -0.28 to -0.04), and improved quality of life (RD, +14.93; 95% CI, 9.98-19.89) and BMI (RD, +1.07 kg/m2; 95% CI, 0.90-1.25). Adverse events did not differ between groups (RD, -0.03; 95% CI, -0.08 to 0.01), and none of the studies reported deaths.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings demonstrate that ETI treatment substantially improves clinically significant, patient-centered outcomes.

Corrector therapies (with or without potentiators) for people with cystic fibrosis with class II CFTR gene variants (most commonly F508del)

BACKGROUND

Cystic fibrosis (CF) is a common life-shortening genetic condition caused by a variant in the cystic fibrosis transmembrane conductance regulator (CFTR) protein. A class II CFTR variant F508del is the commonest CF-causing variant (found in up to 90% of people with CF (pwCF)). The F508del variant lacks meaningful CFTR function - faulty protein is degraded before reaching the cell membrane, where it needs to be to effect transepithelial salt transport. Corrective therapy could benefit many pwCF. This review evaluates single correctors (monotherapy) and any combination of correctors (most commonly lumacaftor, tezacaftor, elexacaftor, VX-659, VX-440 or VX-152) and a potentiator (e.g. ivacaftor) (dual and triple therapies).

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the effects of CFTR correctors (with or without potentiators) on clinically important benefits and harms in pwCF of any age with class II CFTR mutations (most commonly F508del).

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane CF Trials Register (28 November 2022), reference lists of relevant articles and online trials registries (3 December 2022).

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) (parallel design) comparing CFTR correctors to control in pwCF with class II mutations.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently extracted data, assessed risk of bias and judged evidence certainty (GRADE); we contacted investigators for additional data.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 34 RCTs (4781 participants), lasting between 1 day and 48 weeks; an extension of two lumacaftor-ivacaftor studies provided additional 96-week safety data (1029 participants). We assessed eight monotherapy RCTs (344 participants) (4PBA, CPX, lumacaftor, cavosonstat and FDL169), 16 dual-therapy RCTs (2627 participants) (lumacaftor-ivacaftor or tezacaftor-ivacaftor) and 11 triple-therapy RCTs (1804 participants) (elexacaftor-tezacaftor-ivacaftor/deutivacaftor; VX-659-tezacaftor-ivacaftor/deutivacaftor; VX-440-tezacaftor-ivacaftor; VX-152-tezacaftor-ivacaftor). Participants in 21 RCTs had the genotype F508del/F508del, in seven RCTs they had F508del/minimal function (MF), in one RCT F508del/gating genotypes, in one RCT either F508del/F508del genotypes or F508del/residual function genotypes, in one RCT either F508del/gating or F508del/residual function genotypes, and in three RCTs either F508del/F508del genotypes or F508del/MF genotypes. Risk of bias judgements varied across different comparisons. Results from 16 RCTs may not be applicable to all pwCF due to age limits (e.g. adults only) or non-standard designs (converting from monotherapy to combination therapy). Monotherapy Investigators reported no deaths or clinically relevant improvements in quality of life (QoL). There was insufficient evidence to determine effects on lung function. No placebo-controlled monotherapy RCT demonstrated differences in mild, moderate or severe adverse effects (AEs); the clinical relevance of these events is difficult to assess due to their variety and few participants (all F508del/F508del). Dual therapy In a tezacaftor-ivacaftor group there was one death (deemed unrelated to the study drug). QoL scores (respiratory domain) favoured both lumacaftor-ivacaftor and tezacaftor-ivacaftor therapy compared to placebo at all time points (moderate-certainty evidence). At six months, relative change in forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV1) % predicted improved with all dual combination therapies compared to placebo (high- to moderate-certainty evidence). More pwCF reported early transient breathlessness with lumacaftor-ivacaftor (odds ratio (OR) 2.05, 99% confidence interval (CI) 1.10 to 3.83; I2 = 0%; 2 studies, 739 participants; high-certainty evidence). Over 120 weeks (initial study period and follow-up), systolic blood pressure rose by 5.1 mmHg and diastolic blood pressure by 4.1 mmHg with twice-daily 400 mg lumacaftor-ivacaftor (80 participants). The tezacaftor-ivacaftor RCTs did not report these adverse effects. Pulmonary exacerbation rates decreased in pwCF receiving additional therapies to ivacaftor compared to placebo (all moderate-certainty evidence): lumacaftor 600 mg (hazard ratio (HR) 0.70, 95% CI 0.57 to 0.87; I2 = 0%; 2 studies, 739 participants); lumacaftor 400 mg (HR 0.61, 95% CI 0.49 to 0.76; I2 = 0%; 2 studies, 740 participants); and tezacaftor (HR 0.64, 95% CI 0.46 to 0.89; 1 study, 506 participants). Triple therapy No study reported any deaths (high-certainty evidence). All other evidence was low- to moderate-certainty. QoL respiratory domain scores probably improved with triple therapy compared to control at six months (six studies). There was probably a greater relative and absolute change in FEV1 % predicted with triple therapy (four studies each across all combinations). The absolute change in FEV1 % predicted was probably greater for F508del/MF participants taking elexacaftor-tezacaftor-ivacaftor compared to placebo (mean difference 14.30, 95% CI 12.76 to 15.84; 1 study, 403 participants; moderate-certainty evidence), with similar results for other drug combinations and genotypes. There was little or no difference in adverse events between triple therapy and control (10 studies). No study reported time to next pulmonary exacerbation, but fewer F508del/F508del participants experienced a pulmonary exacerbation with elexacaftor-tezacaftor-ivacaftor at four weeks (OR 0.17, 99% CI 0.06 to 0.45; 1 study, 175 participants) and 24 weeks (OR 0.29, 95% CI 0.14 to 0.60; 1 study, 405 participants); similar results were seen across other triple therapy and genotype combinations.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is insufficient evidence of clinically important effects from corrector monotherapy in pwCF with F508del/F508del. Additional data in this review reduced the evidence for efficacy of dual therapy; these agents can no longer be considered as standard therapy. Their use may be appropriate in exceptional circumstances (e.g. if triple therapy is not tolerated or due to age). Both dual therapies (lumacaftor-ivacaftor, tezacaftor-ivacaftor) result in similar small improvements in QoL and respiratory function with lower pulmonary exacerbation rates. While the effect sizes for QoL and FEV1 still favour treatment, they have reduced compared to our previous findings. Lumacaftor-ivacaftor was associated with an increase in early transient shortness of breath and longer-term increases in blood pressure (not observed for tezacaftor-ivacaftor). Tezacaftor-ivacaftor has a better safety profile, although data are lacking in children under 12 years. In this population, lumacaftor-ivacaftor had an important impact on respiratory function with no apparent immediate safety concerns, but this should be balanced against the blood pressure increase and shortness of breath seen in longer-term adult data when considering lumacaftor-ivacaftor. Data from triple therapy trials demonstrate improvements in several key outcomes, including FEV1 and QoL. There is probably little or no difference in adverse events for triple therapy (elexacaftor-tezacaftor-ivacaftor/deutivacaftor; VX-659-tezacaftor-ivacaftor/deutivacaftor; VX-440-tezacaftor-ivacaftor; VX-152-tezacaftor-ivacaftor) in pwCF with one or two F508del variants aged 12 years or older (moderate-certainty evidence). Further RCTs are required in children under 12 years and those with more severe lung disease.

α-Tocopherol Pharmacokinetics in Adults with Cystic Fibrosis: Benefits of Supplemental Vitamin C Administration

BACKGROUND

Numerous abnormalities in cystic fibrosis (CF) could influence tocopherol absorption, transportation, storage, metabolism and excretion. We hypothesized that the oxidative distress due to inflammation in CF increases vitamin E utilization, which could be positively influenced by supplemental vitamin C administration.

METHODS

Immediately before and after receiving vitamin C (500 mg) twice daily for 3.5 weeks, adult CF patients (n = 6) with moderately advanced respiratory tract (RT) disease consumed a standardized breakfast with 30% fat and a capsule containing 50 mg each hexadeuterium (d₆)-α- and dideuterium (d₂)-γ-tocopheryl acetates. Blood samples were taken frequently up to 72 h; plasma tocopherol pharmacokinetics were determined. During both trials, d₆-α- and d₂-γ-tocopherols were similarly absorbed and reached similar maximal plasma concentrations ~18-20 h. As predicted, during vitamin C supplementation, the rates of plasma d₆-α-tocopherol decline were significantly slower.

CONCLUSIONS

The vitamin C-induced decrease in the plasma disappearance rate of α-tocopherol suggests that vitamin C recycled α-tocopherol, thereby augmenting its concentrations. We conclude that some attention should be paid to plasma ascorbic acid concentrations in CF patients, particularly to those individuals with more advanced RT inflammatory disease and including those with severe exacerbations.