Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34497037›Full record

ArticleJournal of cystic fibrosis : official journal of the European Cystic Fibrosis Society2022

Treatment patterns in people with cystic fibrosis: have they changed since the introduction of ivacaftor?

Emily Granger, Gwyneth Davies, Ruth H Keogh

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of cystic fibrosis : official journal of the European Cystic Fibrosis Society, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.6field-weighted citation impact, top 16% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 17 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Elexacaftor/tezacaftor/ivacaftor is associated with long-term reduction in use of chronic respiratory therapies in cystic fibrosis.Journal of cystic fibrosis : official journal of the European Cystic Fibrosis Society · 2026
    Observational
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Emily GrangerDepartment of Medical Statistics, Faculty of Epidemiology and Population Health, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, Keppel St, Bloomsbury, London WC1E 7HT, United Kingdom. Electronic address: emily.granger@lshtm.ac.uk.
Gwyneth DaviesPopulation, Policy and Practice Research and Teaching Department, UCL Great Ormond Street Institute of Child Health (UCL GOS ICH), London WC1N 1EH, United Kingdom.
Ruth H KeoghDepartment of Medical Statistics, Faculty of Epidemiology and Population Health, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, Keppel St, Bloomsbury, London WC1E 7HT, United Kingdom; Centre for Statistical Methodology, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, Keppel St, Bloomsbury, London WC1E 7HT, United Kingdom.
University of London · GBGreat Ormond Street Hospital · GB

Funding

Medical Research Council MR/S017968/1Medical Research Council MR/T041285/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIn late 2012, ivacaftor became available in the UK for people with cystic fibrosis (CF) aged 6 years and over with a G551D mutation. Long-term changes in treatment patterns have not previously been reported. We investigated long-term treatment patterns in people with CF with a G551D mutation who took ivacaftor and compared these with non-ivacaftor-treated cohorts using the UK Cystic Fibrosis Registry.

methodsUsing 2007-2018 data we compared treatment patterns between four cohorts: 1: ivacaftor-treated; 2: ivacaftor era (2013-2018), ineligible genotype (no G551D mutation); 3: pre-ivacaftor era (2007-2012), eligible genotype (G551D mutation); 4: pre-ivacaftor era, ineligible genotype. Treatments included: inhaled antibiotics, dornase alfa, hypertonic saline, chronic oral antibiotics and supplementary feeding.

resultsUp to 2012 the percentages of people taking each treatment were similar between the two cohorts defined by genotype and tended to increase by year with a similar slope. Once ivacaftor was introduced, the use of other treatments tended to decrease or remain stable by year for the ivacaftor-treated cohort, whereas it remained stable or increased in the non-ivacaftor-treated cohort. This led to differences in treatment use between the two cohorts in the ivacaftor-era, which became more marked over time.

conclusionsWe have shown a clear divergence in treatment patterns since the introduction of ivacaftor in a number of key treatments widely used in CF. Further research is needed to investigate whether the differences in treatment patterns are associated with changes in health outcomes.

Indexed as

Cystic FibrosisAminophenolsAnti-Bacterial AgentsCystic Fibrosis Transmembrane Conductance RegulatorHumansMutationQuinolonesAminophenolsAnti-Bacterial AgentsCystic Fibrosis Transmembrane Conductance RegulatorivacaftorQuinolonescystic fibrosisivacaftorregistry datatreatment burdentreatment patterns

Identifiers

PMID34497037
PMCPMC9097695
OpenAlexW3170503017

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.