Search

Background: In two pivotal phase 3 trials, up to 24 weeks of treatment with elexacaftor/tezacaftor/ivacaftor (ELX/TEZ/IVA) was efficacious and safe in patients with cystic fibrosis (CF) ≥12 years of age who have at least one F508del allele. The aim of this study is to assess long-term safety and efficacy of ELX/TEZ/IVA in these patients., Methods: In this phase 3, open-label, single-arm extension study, participants with F508del -minimal function (from a 24-week parent study; n=399) or F508del - F508del (from a 4-week parent study; n=107) genotypes receive ELX/TEZ/IVA at the same dose (ELX 200 mg once daily, TEZ 100 mg once daily and IVA 150 mg every 12 h). The primary end-point is safety and tolerability. A prespecified interim analysis was conducted when the last participant reached the Week 144 visit., Results: At the Week 144 interim analysis, mean duration of exposure to ELX/TEZ/IVA in the extension study was 151.1 weeks. Exposure-adjusted rates of adverse events (AEs) (586.6 events per 100 participant-years) and serious AEs (22.4 events per 100 participant-years) were lower than in the ELX/TEZ/IVA treatment group in the 24-week parent study (1096.0 and 36.9 events per 100 participant-years, respectively); most participants had AEs classified as mild (16.4% of participants) or moderate (60.3% of participants) in severity. 14 participants (2.8%) had AEs that led to treatment discontinuation. Following initiation of ELX/TEZ/IVA, participants had increases in forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV 1 ) percentage predicted, Cystic Fibrosis Questionnaire-Revised respiratory domain score and body mass index, and had decreases in sweat chloride concentration and pulmonary exacerbation rates that were maintained over the interim analysis period. The mean annualised rate of change in FEV 1 % pred was +0.07 (95% CI -0.12-0.26) percentage points among the participants., Conclusions: ELX/TEZ/IVA was generally safe and well tolerated, with a safety profile consistent with the 24-week parent study. Participants had sustained improvements in lung function, respiratory symptoms, CF transmembrane conductance regulator function, pulmonary exacerbation rates and nutritional status. These results support the favourable safety profile and durable, disease-modifying clinical benefits of ELX/TEZ/IVA., Competing Interests: Conflicts of interest: All authors received nonfinancial support (assistance with manuscript preparation) from Nucleus Global, which received funding from Vertex Pharmaceuticals Incorporated. C.L. Daines has nothing further to disclose. E. Tullis has received consulting, speaker and travel fees from Vertex Pharmaceuticals. S. Costa serves on an advisory board for Vertex Pharmaceuticals. R.W. Linnemann serves on an advisory board and reports grants paid to her institution and consulting fees from Vertex Pharmaceuticals. M.A. Mall reports patient recruitment fees paid to his institution and advisory fees from Vertex Pharmaceuticals, consulting fees from Antabio, Arrowhead Pharmaceuticals, Boehringer Ingelheim, Enterprise Therapeutics, Santhera, Sterna Biologicals and Vertex Pharmaceuticals, speaker fees from Arrowhead Pharmaceuticals, Boehringer Ingelheim and Vertex Pharmaceuticals, travel fees from Boehringer Ingelheim and Vertex Pharmaceuticals, advisory fees from Antabio, Arrowhead Pharmaceuticals, Boehringer Ingelheim, Enterprise Therapeutics, Kither Biotech, Santhera and Vertex Pharmaceuticals, and serves on the European Cystic Fibrosis Society (ECFS) board. E.F. McKone reports grants, lecture fees and serving on an advisory board for Vertex Pharmaceuticals, lecture fees from Roche, travel fees from A. Menarini, and serving on advisory boards for Janssen, Insmed and CF Storm. D. Polineni reports grants from Laurent Pharmaceuticals, Parion Sciences, Proteostasis Therapeutics and Vertex Pharmaceuticals, consulting fees from Vertex Pharmaceuticals, nonfinancial support for travel to investigator meeting from Vertex Pharmaceuticals, and serves on an advisory board for Sanofi. B.S. Quon reports payments paid to his institution and speaker fees from Vertex Pharmaceuticals. F.C. Ringshausen reports grants paid to his institution from Basilea Pharmaceutica, German Center for Lung Research (DZL), German Center for Infection Research (DZIF), Inhaled Antibiotics in Bronchiectasis and Cystic Fibrosis (iABC)/Innovative Medicines Initiative (IMI), European Federation of Pharmaceutical Industries and Associations (EFPIA), Insmed, Novartis and Polyphor, consulting fees from Grifols, Insmed, Parion, Shionogi and Zambon, speaker fees from AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Chiesi, Grifols, Insmed and Novartis, participation on advisory boards for Grifols, Insmed, Parion, Shionogi and Zambon, unpaid honoraria as co-chair of the German Bronchiectasis Registry (PROGNOSIS), and payments to his institution from AbbVie, AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Corbus, Celtaxsys, Insmed, Novartis, Parion, Polyphor, Vertex and Zambon; and is a steering committee member of the European Bronchiectasis Registry (EMBARC), a steering committee member of the European NTM registry (EMBARC-NTM), a core network lead in ERN-LUNG, a principal investigator for DZL, a chair of the cystic fibrosis working group of the German Respiratory Society (DGP), a steering committee member of the Group of German CF Physicians (AGAM), and co-chair of medical consultants of PCD Patient Advocacy Group (Kartagener Syndrom und Primäre Ciliäre Dyskinesie eV). S.M. Rowe reports grants paid to his institution from AbbVie, Arrowhead Pharmaceuticals, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Celtaxsys, Eloxx, Ionis Pharmaceuticals, Novartis, Proteostasis Therapeutics, Synedgen, Synspira Therapeutics, Translate Bio and Vertex Pharmaceuticals, nonfinancial support from AbbVie, Ionis Pharmaceuticals, Proteostasis Therapeutics, Renovion, Synedgen and Synspira Therapeutics, consulting fees from AbbVie, Arrowhead Pharmaceuticals, Bayer, Cystetic Medicines, Ionis Pharmaceuticals, Novartis, Renovion, Synedgen, Synspira Therapeutics and Vertex Pharmaceuticals, and serves as co-chair for the Next Generation Steering Committee on Vertex Pharmaceuticals. H. Selvadurai has nothing further to disclose. J.L. Taylor-Cousar serves on the board of trustees, clinical research executive committee, clinical research advisory board and Women's Health Research-Working Group for the US Cystic Fibrosis Foundation, serves on the scientific advisory board for Emily's Entourage, serves on the respiratory health awards working group, scientific grants review committee and clinical problems assembly programming committee for the American Thoracic Society; reports consulting fees from 4D Molecular Therapeutics, Celtaxsys, Prolarean Imaging, Protalix Biotherapeutics, Proteostasis Therapeutics and Santhera Pharmaceuticals, grants to her institution from Bayer, Celtaxsys, Eloxx Pharmaceuticals, Gilead, N30 and Proteostasis Therapeutics, speaking fees from Celtaxsys and Gilead, serves on advisory board for AbbVie, Genentech, Insmed and Novartis, and is an associate editor for the Journal of Cystic Fibrosis. N.J. Withers reports lecture fees from Vertex Pharmaceuticals and serves on an advisory board for Vertex Pharmaceuticals and Proteostasis Therapeutics. B. Ramsey reports travel fees and grants from, and serves on advisory board for Vertex Pharmaceuticals, and personal fees from Cystetic Medicines. M. Griese reports grants to his institution from Vertex Pharmaceuticals. N. Ahluwalia, S.M. Moskowitz, V. Prieto-Centurion, Y.V. Tan, S. Tian, T. Weinstock, F. Xuan and Y. Zhang are employees of Vertex and may own stock or stock options in Vertex., (Copyright ©The authors 2023.)

Rationale: Elexacaftor/tezacaftor/ivacaftor (ELX/TEZ/IVA) has been shown to be safe and effective in people with cystic fibrosis (CF) aged ⩾6 years with at least one F508del-CFTR allele but has not been studied in younger children. Objectives: To evaluate the safety, pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics, and efficacy of ELX/TEZ/IVA in children with CF aged 2-5 years. Methods: In this phase 3, open-label, two-part study (parts A and B), children weighing <14 kg (on Day 1) received ELX 80 mg once daily (qd), TEZ 40 mg qd, and IVA 60 mg each morning and 59.5 mg each evening; children weighing ⩾14 kg received ELX 100 mg qd, TEZ 50 mg qd, and IVA 75 mg every 12 hours. Measurements and Main Results: The primary endpoints for part A (15-d treatment period) were pharmacokinetics and safety and tolerability. For part B (24-wk treatment period), the primary endpoint was safety and tolerability; secondary endpoints included pharmacokinetics and absolute changes from baseline in sweat chloride concentration and lung clearance index 2.5 (LCI 2.5 , defined as the number of lung turnovers required to reduce the end tidal N 2 concentration to 2.5% of its starting value) through Week 24. Analysis of pharmacokinetic data from 18 children enrolled in part A confirmed the appropriateness of the part B dosing regimen. In part B, 75 children ( F508del /minimal function genotypes, n  = 52; F508del / F508del genotype, n  = 23) were enrolled and dosed. Seventy-four children (98.7%) had adverse events, which were all mild (62.7%) or moderate (36.0%) in severity. The most common adverse events were cough, fever, and rhinorrhea. Decreases in sweat chloride concentration (-57.9 mmol/L; 95% confidence interval [CI], -61.3 to -54.6; n  = 69) and LCI 2.5 (-0.83 U; 95% CI, -1.01 to -0.66; n  = 50) were observed from baseline through Week 24. Mean body mass index was within the normal range at baseline and remained stable at Week 24. Conclusions: In this open-label study in children 2-5 years of age, ELX/TEZ/IVA treatment was generally safe and well tolerated, with a safety profile consistent with that observed in older age groups, and led to clinically meaningful reductions in sweat chloride concentration and LCI 2.5 . Clinical trial registered with www.clinicaltrials.gov (NCT04537793).

Rationale: A 24-week, phase 3, open-label study showed elexacaftor/tezacaftor/ivacaftor (ELX/TEZ/IVA) was safe and efficacious in children aged 6-11 years with cystic fibrosis (CF) and one or more F508del-CFTR alleles. Objectives: To assess long-term safety and efficacy of ELX/TEZ/IVA in children who completed the pivotal 24-week phase 3 trial. Methods: In this phase 3, two-part (part A and part B), open-label extension study, children aged ⩾6 years with CF heterozygous for F508del and a minimal function CFTR mutation ( F /MF genotypes) or homozygous for F508del ( F/F genotype) who completed the 24-week parent study received ELX/TEZ/IVA based on weight. Children weighing <30 kg received ELX 100 mg once daily/TEZ 50 mg once daily/IVA 75 mg every 12 hours, whereas children weighing ⩾30 kg received ELX 200 mg once daily/TEZ 100 mg once daily/IVA 150 mg every 12 hours (adult dose). The 96-week analysis of part A of this extension study is reported here. Measurements and Main Results: Sixty-four children ( F /MF genotypes, n  = 36; F/F genotype, n  = 28) were enrolled and received one or more doses of ELX/TEZ/IVA. Mean (SD) period of exposure to ELX/TEZ/IVA was 93.9 (11.1) weeks. The primary endpoint was safety and tolerability. Adverse events and serious adverse events were consistent with common manifestations of CF disease. Overall, exposure-adjusted rates of adverse events and serious adverse events (407.74 and 4.72 events per 100 patient-years) were lower than in the parent study (987.04 and 8.68 events per 100 patient-years). One child (1.6%) had an adverse event of aggression that was moderate in severity and resolved after study drug discontinuation. From parent study baseline at Week 96 of this extension study, the mean percent predicted FEV 1 increased (11.2 [95% confidence interval (CI), 8.3 to 14.2] percentage points), sweat chloride concentration decreased (-62.3 [95% CI, -65.9 to -58.8] mmol/L), Cystic Fibrosis Questionnaire-Revised respiratory domain score increased (13.3 [95% CI, 11.4 to 15.1] points), and lung clearance index 2.5 decreased (-2.00 [95% CI, -2.45 to -1.55] units). Increases in growth parameters were also observed. The estimated pulmonary exacerbation rate per 48 weeks was 0.04. The annualized rate of change in percent predicted FEV 1 was 0.51 (95% CI, -0.73 to 1.75) percentage points per year. Conclusions: ELX/TEZ/IVA continued to be generally safe and well tolerated in children aged ⩾6 years through an additional 96 weeks of treatment. Improvements in lung function, respiratory symptoms, and CFTR function observed in the parent study were maintained. These results demonstrate the favorable long-term safety profile and durable clinical benefits of ELX/TEZ/IVA in this pediatric population. Clinical trial registered with www.clinicaltrials.gov (NCT04183790).

Objective: Inadequate lung nodule surveillance leads to diagnostic delays. We implemented a retrospective intervention program, Nodule Net, to improve surveillance in our hospital., Methods: 9,224 Chest computed tomography (CT) scans between January 1, 2015 and December 31, 2016 were manually reviewed for lung nodules. For patients without follow-up, charts were reviewed to assess follow-up. If follow-up appeared indicated, the clinician or patient was contacted, and follow-up was tracked., Results: Lung nodules were identified on 5,101 (55%) of 9,224 scans. Follow-up was potentially indicated and not completed in 1,385 (27%). 183 (13%) were excluded after imaging review. 1,202 received outreach. Of the 801 (66%) with a provider in our system, 225 (27%) returned for follow-up. Nodules were stable in 199 (88%), new or growing in 23 (11%), resolved in 3 (1%), and stage 1 lung cancer in 2 (1%). 90 (11%) had follow-up outside our system and 431 (51%) had no follow-up due to a clinical contraindication. 55 (7%) have imaging pending and 14 (2%) are awaiting pulmonary evaluation. Of the 302 (25%) patients with providers outside our system, 121 (40%) had followed-up elsewhere. 146 (48%) had no follow-up due to a clinical reason. 35 (12%) providers did not respond to outreach., Conclusions: We identified 1,202 patients with lung nodules who needed follow-up over a two-year period. Compliance was more successful with providers within our hospital system. We recommend robust surveillance for patients to ensure follow-up is completed and clinical contraindications are well documented., (Copyright © 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Study Objectives: A challenge in conducting randomized controlled trials of sleep apnea is the timely recruitment of participants to active and control arms. This study assesses the costs and efficiencies of alternative recruitment methods., Design: Analysis of recruitment data from the Best Apnea Intervention in Research planning study., Setting: Sleep clinics and cardiology practices., Participants: One hundred forty-eight individuals with an apnea-hypopnea index > 15 and cardiovascular (CV) risk factors randomized from a pool of more than 30,000 potentially eligible patients., Interventions: Comparisons: (1) modes of recruitment: face-to-face (F2F) recruitment versus mail-based recruitment (MBR); (2) recruitment source (sleep versus cardiology clinics)., Measurements and Results: Recruitment yield was defined as the ratio of the number of subjects randomized to the number of screened records. Recruitment costs were estimated based on staff time. Of the 148 randomized subjects, 25 were recruited from sleep clinics using F2F recruitment and 123 were recruited from cardiology using a F2F (n = 35) or MBR (n = 88) strategy. F2F recruitment yields were 0.17% and 0.30% for sleep versus cardiology sources, respectively (P = 0.04). A comparison of F2F to MBR showed recruitment yields of 1.11% and 0.90% and costs per randomized subject of $2,139 and $647, respectively., Conclusions: Large resources may be needed to meet the recruitment goals of sleep apnea intervention trials. Recruitment source and mode influence efficiencies. For a trial comparing active versus sham continuous positive airway pressure in patients with CV risk factors, recruiting from cardiology was more efficient than from sleep clinics. MBR was three times less costly than F2F recruitment., (© 2014 Associated Professional Sleep Societies, LLC.)