Search

BackgroundLung infections are among the most consequential manifestations of cystic fibrosis (CF) and are associated with reduced lung function and shortened survival. Drugs called CF transmembrane conductance regulator (CFTR) modulators improve activity of dysfunctional CFTR channels, which is the physiological defect causing CF. However, it is unclear how improved CFTR activity affects CF lung infections.MethodsWe performed a prospective, multicenter, observational study to measure the effect of the newest and most effective CFTR modulator, elexacaftor/tezacaftor/ivacaftor (ETI), on CF lung infections. We studied sputum from 236 people with CF during their first 6 months of ETI using bacterial cultures, PCR, and sequencing.ResultsMean sputum densities of Staphylococcus aureus, Pseudomonas aeruginosa, Stenotrophomonas maltophilia, Achromobacter spp., and Burkholderia spp. decreased by 2-3 log10 CFU/mL after 1 month of ETI. However, most participants remained culture positive for the pathogens cultured from their sputum before starting ETI. In those becoming culture negative after ETI, the pathogens present before treatment were often still detectable by PCR months after sputum converted to culture negative. Sequence-based analyses confirmed large reductions in CF pathogen genera, but other bacteria detected in sputum were largely unchanged. ETI treatment increased average sputum bacterial diversity and produced consistent shifts in sputum bacterial composition. However, these changes were caused by ETI-mediated decreases in CF pathogen abundance rather than changes in other bacteria.ConclusionsTreatment with the most effective CFTR modulator currently available produced large and rapid reductions in traditional CF pathogens in sputum, but most participants remain infected with the pathogens present before modulator treatment.Trial RegistrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT04038047.FundingThe Cystic Fibrosis Foundation and the NIH.

Background: The Characterizing CFTR Modulated Changes in Sweat Chloride and their Association with Clinical Outcomes (CHEC-SC) study is a large epidemiologic study designed to determine the relationship between sweat chloride response and clinical outcomes in people with cystic fibrosis (CF) on commercially approved CFTR modulators. A challenge to study feasibility was capturing sweat chloride measurements before modulator initiation. We tested the hypothesis that historic sweat chloride approximated contemporary pre-modulator values to estimate CFTR modulator-induced changes, allowing a single-visit study design., Methods: GOAL and PROSPECT were multi-center prospective studies of individuals initiating ivacaftor or lumacaftor-ivacaftor. At enrollment, pre-modulator sweat chloride was measured and historic results recorded. Post-modulator sweat chloride was measured at 1, 3 and 6 months. For this analysis, differences between historic and pre-modulator sweat chloride were estimated. CFTR modulator-induced sweat chloride mean changes were compared using historic and pre-modulator sweat chloride., Results: Paired historic and pre-modulator sweat chloride (n=406 participants) revealed a non-significant mean change of -1.0 mmol/L (95% CI: -2.71, 0.66) over an average of 17.2 years. Calculating sweat response to ivacaftor or lumacaftor-ivacaftor using historic or pre-modulator values resulted in similar estimates of modulator response. Based on these results, the CHEC-SC study was designed with a single, post-modulator sweat chloride measurement., Conclusions: Historic sweat chloride values provide a reliable estimate of pre-modulator sweat chloride for people starting on modulator therapy. The CHEC-SC study anticipates capturing approximately 5,000 sweat chloride values, providing an unprecedented understanding of sweat chloride across the CF population in the era of CFTR modulators., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest ETZ, NMH, DRV, SMR, MWK: grants or consulting CFF; DRV consults for aMoon, Arrevus, Eloxx, Enbiotix, Felix, Ionis, Matinas, Merck, Polyphor, Respirion, Savara; SMR consults for Vertex; MWK consults for Anthera, AzurRx, Celtaxsys, Chiesi, Ionis, Kala, Laurent, Merck, Paranta, pH Pharma, Santhera, Vertex; JPC, KOD and MS: none., (Copyright © 2021. Published by Elsevier B.V.)

Background: Retrospective studies indicate that more cystic fibrosis (CF) pulmonary exacerbations (PEx) are treated with oral (PO) than with intravenous (IV) antimicrobials despite little knowledge of the relative effects of PO treatment on lung function recovery or long-term impacts on lung disease progression. Previous studies have suggested that PO treatment may be associated with slower lung function recovery compared with IV treatment. We used longitudinal home spirometry data from the eICE study (NCT01104402) to compare PO versus IV antimicrobial treatment responses for PEx diagnosed by home spirometry and symptom assessment., Methods: Adolescent and adult eICE participants performed home spirometry twice weekly for one year. PEx were diagnosed by a protocol-defined algorithm of change in percent predicted forced expiratory volume in 1 second (ppFEV 1 ) and/or respiratory signs and symptoms. PO- and IV-treated PEx were grouped by initial ppFEV 1 drop magnitude. Group ppFEV 1 treatment responses were modeled with multivariate, repeat-measure linear regression., Results: Of 87 qualifying PEx from 56 participants, 62 were PO-treated and 25 were IV-treated. The average drop from best ppFEV 1 to PEx start was 11.0 [95%CI: 8.5, 13.5] with similar treatment group means (p=0.72). Participants with IV-treated PEx averaged 0.72 [0.24, 1.20] ppFEV 1 /day greater response than those treated with PO, who experienced minimal ppFEV1 recovery. Many PO-treated participants who had <10 ppFEV 1 drop from baseline tended to worsen or show no ppFEV 1 improvement., Discussion: These results suggest that, in this cohort, PO antimicrobial treatment of CF PEx were less effective than IVs at improving ppFEV 1 during treatment., (Copyright © 2021. Published by Elsevier B.V.)