ReviewThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2018
Correctors (specific therapies for class II CFTR mutations) for cystic fibrosis.
Review in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 papers, 6 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
24 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 56 citations in OpenAlex.
- Ivacaftor-tezacaftor-elexacaftor, tezacaftor-ivacaftor and lumacaftor-ivacaftor for treating cystic fibrosis: a systematic review and economic evaluation.Health technology assessment (Winchester, England) · 2025Pooled it
- Corrector therapies (with or without potentiators) for people with cystic fibrosis with class II CFTR gene variants (most commonly F508del).The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2023Pooled it
- Efficacy and safety profile of elexacaftor-tezacaftor-ivacaftor triple therapy on cystic fibrosis: a systematic review and single arm meta-analysis.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2023Pooled it
- Corrector therapies (with or without potentiators) for people with cystic fibrosis with class II CFTR gene variants (most commonly F508del).The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2020Pooled it
- Potentiators (specific therapies for class III and IV mutations) for cystic fibrosis.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2019Pooled it
- Ataluren and similar compounds (specific therapies for premature termination codon class I mutations) for cystic fibrosis.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2017Pooled it
- Randomized controlled study of aerosolized hypertonic xylitol versus hypertonic saline in hospitalized patients with pulmonary exacerbation of cystic fibrosis.Journal of cystic fibrosis : official journal of the European Cystic Fibrosis Society · 2020Trial
- High-throughput screening identifies a trafficking corrector for long QT syndrome-associated KCNQ1 variants.JCI insight · 2026Article
- Novel insight into CFTR gene's single nucleotide variants classification via in-silico analysis of a conserved site.Journal of computer-aided molecular design · 2025Article
- High Throughput Screening Identifies a Small Molecule Trafficking Corrector for Long-QT Syndrome Associated KCNQ1 Variants.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2025Article
- Real-world safety of Symdeko: insights from the food and drug administration adverse event reporting system.Frontiers in medicine · 2025Article
- Complementary Dual Approach for In Silico Target Identification of Potential Pharmaceutical Compounds in Cystic Fibrosis.International journal of molecular sciences · 2022Article
- Newly Discovered Cutting-Edge Triple Combination Cystic Fibrosis Therapy: A Systematic Review.Cureus · 2022Review
- Bicarbonate Effects on Antibacterial Immunity and Mucus Glycobiology in the Cystic Fibrosis Lung: A Review With Selected Experimental Observations.Infectious microbes & diseases · 2022Article
- Genistein-Opportunities Related to an Interesting Molecule of Natural Origin.Molecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Review
- CFTR Lifecycle Map-A Systems Medicine Model of CFTR Maturation to Predict Possible Active Compound Combinations.International journal of molecular sciences · 2021Article
- Comprehensive Analysis of Chemical Structures That Have Been Tested as CFTR Activating Substances in a Publicly Available Database CandActCFTR.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2021Article
- Lumacaftor/ivacaftor-associated health stabilisation in adults with severe cystic fibrosis.ERJ open research · 2021Article
- Role of unfolded proteins in lung disease.Thorax · 2021Review
- How can we relieve gastrointestinal symptoms in people with cystic fibrosis? An international qualitative survey.BMJ open respiratory research · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
- Updated by
Authors and funding
4 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundCystic fibrosis (CF) is a common life-shortening condition caused by mutation in the gene that codes for that codes for the cystic fibrosis transmembrane conductance regulator (CFTR) protein, which functions as a salt transporter. F508del, the most common CFTR mutation that causes CF, is found in up to 80% to 90% of people with CF. In people with this mutation, a full length of protein is transcribed, but recognised as misfolded by the cell and degraded before reaching the cell membrane, where it needs to be positioned to effect transepithelial salt transport. This severe mutation is associated with no meaningful CFTR function. A corrective therapy for this mutation could positively impact on an important proportion of the CF population.
objectivesTo evaluate the effects of CFTR correctors on clinically important outcomes, both benefits and harms, in children and adults with CF and class II CFTR mutations (most commonly F508del). SEARCH
methodsWe searched the Cochrane Cystic Fibrosis and Genetic Disorders Cystic Fibrosis Trials Register. We also searched reference lists of relevant articles and online trials registries. Most recent search: 24 February 2018. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) (parallel design) comparing CFTR correctors to placebo in people with CF with class II mutations. We also included RCTs comparing CFTR correctors combined with CFTR potentiators to placebo. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two authors independently extracted data, assessed risk of bias and quality of the evidence using the GRADE criteria. Study authors were contacted for additional data. MAIN
resultsWe included 13 RCTs (2215 participants), lasting between 1 day and 24 weeks. Additional safety data from an extension study of two lumacaftor-ivacaftor studies were available at 96 weeks (1029 participants). We assessed monotherapy in seven RCTs (317 participants) (4PBA (also known as Buphenyl), CPX, lumacaftor or cavosonstat) and combination therapy in six RCTs (1898 participants) (lumacaftor-ivacaftor or tezacaftor-ivacaftor) compared to placebo. Twelve RCTs recruited individuals homozygous for F508del, one RCT recruited participants with one F508del mutation and a second mutation with residual function.Risk of bias varied in its impact on the confidence we have in our results across different comparisons. Some findings were based on single RCTs that were too small to show important effects. For five RCTs, results may not be applicable to all individuals with CF due to age limits of recruited populations (i.e. adults only, children only) or non-standard design of converting from monotherapy to combination therapy.Monotherapy versus placeboNo deaths were reported and there were no clinically relevant improvements in quality of life in any RCT. There was insufficient evidence available from individual studies to determine the effect of any of the correctors examined on lung function outcomes.No placebo-controlled study of monotherapy demonstrated a difference in mild, moderate or severe adverse effects; however, it is difficult to assess the clinical relevance of these events with the variety of events and the small number of participants.Combination therapy versus placeboNo deaths were reported during any RCT (moderate- to high-quality evidence). The quality of life scores (respiratory domain) favoured combination therapy (both lumacaftor-ivacaftor and tezacaftor-ivacaftor) compared to placebo at all time points. At six months lumacaftor (600 mg once daily or 400 mg once daily) plus ivacaftor improved Cystic Fibrosis Questionnaire (CFQ) scores by a small amount compared with placebo (mean difference (MD) 2.62 points (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.64 to 4.59); 1061 participants; high-quality evidence). A similar effect size was observed for twice-daily lumacaftor (200 mg) plus ivacaftor (250 mg) although the quality of evidence was low (MD 2.50 points (95% CI 0.10 to 5.10)). The mean increase in CFQ scores with twice-daily tezacaftor (100 mg) and ivacaftor (150 mg) was approximately five points (95% CI 3.20 to 7.00; 504 participants; moderate-quality evidence). Lung function measured by relative change in forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV AUTHORS'
conclusionsThere is insufficient evidence that monotherapy with correctors has clinically important effects in people with CF who have two copies of the F508del mutation.Combination therapies (lumacaftor-ivacaftor and tezacaftor-ivacaftor) each result in similarly small improvements in clinical outcomes in people with CF; specifically improvements quality of life (moderate-quality evidence), in respiratory function (high-quality evidence) and lower pulmonary exacerbation rates (moderate-quality evidence). Lumacaftor-ivacaftor is associated with an increase in early transient shortness of breath and longer-term increases in blood pressure (high-quality evidence). These adverse effects were not observed for tezacaftor-ivacaftor. Tezacaftor-ivacaftor has a better safety profile, although data are not available for children younger than 12 years. In this age group, lumacaftor-ivacaftor had an important impact on respiratory function with no apparent immediate safety concerns, but this should be balanced against the increase in blood pressure and shortness of breath seen in longer-term data in adults when considering this combination for use in young people with CF.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.