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?
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.
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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 17 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
- 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 · 2026Observational
- Cystic Fibrosis Transmembrane Conductance Regulator Modulators in Cystic Fibrosis: A Review of Registry-Based Evidence.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
- Psychological interventions for improving adherence to inhaled therapies in people with cystic fibrosis.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2023Review
- The CFHealthHub Learning Health System: Using Real-Time Adherence Data to Support a Community of Practice to Deliver Continuous Improvement in an Archetypal Long-Term Condition.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Review
- Treatment Preference Among People With Cystic Fibrosis: The Importance of Reducing Treatment Burden.Chest · 2022Article
- Exploring the impact of elexacaftor-tezacaftor-ivacaftor treatment on opinions regarding airway clearance techniques and nebulisers: TEMPO a qualitative study in children with cystic fibrosis, their families and healthcare professionals.BMJ open respiratory research · 2022Article
- Dornase alfa in Cystic Fibrosis: indications, comparative studies and effects on lung clearance index.Italian journal of pediatrics · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
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
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.