ArticleERJ open research2025
Exploring reduced pulmonary exacerbation rates in cystic fibrosis: a pandemic or modulator effect?
Article in ERJ open research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Treatment with CFTR modulators and subsequent remission of AA amyloidosis.Clinical kidney journal · 2026Article
- Unmasking the true value of cystic fibrosis transmembrane conductance regulator modulators.ERJ open research · 2025Article
- Validating the Data Completeness and Accuracy of the Canadian Cystic Fibrosis Registry.Canadian respiratory journal · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Background: The impact of elexacaftor-tezacaftor-ivacaftor (ETI) on pulmonary exacerbations (PEx) in cystic fibrosis (CF) is difficult to estimate since ETI availability coincided with the COVID-19 pandemic. Later access to ETI in Canada created a natural experiment to adjust for the impact of the pandemic on PEx rates. The objective for this study was to compare PEx rates pre- and post-ETI in the USA using Canada as a control group. Methods: This retrospective cohort study utilised data from the US and Canadian CF patient registries from 1 January 2015 to 31 December 2022. Individuals with at least one F508del mutation and ≥12 years old were followed. Poisson regression was used to estimate PEx rates per 100 person-years of follow-up. A difference-in-difference approach was used to estimate the impact of ETI alone. Results: Longitudinal data from 22 590 US individuals and 3271 Canadians were analysed. Pre-pandemic, the PEx rate was significantly higher in the USA (70.6, 95% CI 70.1-71.2) compared to Canada (53.1, 95% CI 51.9-54.3). During the COVID-19 pandemic, the PEx rate decreased to 30.2 (95% CI 28.8-31.8) in Canada; whereas in the USA, the rates decreased to 14.7 (95% CI 14.3-15.1). After adjusting for covariates, the ETI effect was 2.48 times (95% percentile interval 2.26-2.70) that of the pandemic effect. Conclusions: Public health measures imposed during the pandemic resulted in a reduction in the number of PEx for both countries; however, the impact of ETI on reducing the rate of PEx was more than double the effect of the COVID-19 pandemic.
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.