ArticleOrphanet journal of rare diseases2026
Impact of CFTR modulators on caregiver burden in cystic fibrosis: a cross-sectional study in Brazil.
Article in Orphanet journal of rare diseases, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo assess caregiver burden, health-related quality of life, and work productivity among primary caregivers of individuals with cystic fibrosis (CF) in Brazil, comparing caregivers of patients using elexacaftor/tezacaftor/ivacaftor (ETI) with those of non-users, and analyzing differences according to the age group of the care recipient.
methodsThis cross-sectional study was conducted between September and November 2025 using an online questionnaire. Eligible participants were primary caregivers of individuals with CF living in Brazil. Collected data included sociodemographics, CFTR modulator use, caregiving time, and out-of-pocket health-related expenses. Validated instruments included the 12-item Zarit Burden Interview (ZBI-12), the EQ-5D-3L (utility index and Visual Analogue Scale), and the Work Productivity and Activity Impairment Questionnaire for Caregivers (WPAI: CG). Descriptive analyses and group comparisons were stratified by ETI use and age group of the care recipient.
resultsA total of 174 caregivers from all Brazilian regions participated; 90.2% were mothers, with a median age of 35 years (IQR: 28-45). The individuals receiving care had a median age of 11 years (IQR: 7-14) among modulator users and 3 years (IQR: 1-7) among non-users, and 44.8% used CFTR modulators. Caregivers of non-modulator users dedicated significantly more time to daily caregiving (300 min [IQR: 180-300] vs. 180 min [IQR: 90-240]; p = 0.002) and reported more frequent consultations (p = 0.003). ZBI-12 scores were higher in the no-modulator group (20.0 [IQR: 16.0-25.2] vs. 15.5 [IQR: 11.2-23.0]; p = 0.006), with the greatest difference observed among caregivers of children under 5 years (20.0 vs. 14.0; p = 0.003), a group currently without access to modulators through the public health system. EQ-VAS was lower in the no-modulator group (65.0 [IQR: 50.0-80.0] vs. 70.0 [IQR: 50.0-80.0]; p = 0.041). Absenteeism (15.8% [IQR: 0.0-28.6] vs. 0.0% [IQR: 0.0-16.4]; p = 0.034), presenteeism (50.0% [IQR: 5.0-60.0] vs. 20.0% [IQR: 0.0-50.0]; p = 0.048), and activity impairment (50.0% [IQR: 22.5-70.0] vs. 30.0% [IQR: 0.0-60.0]; p = 0.011) were significantly higher among caregivers without modulator access.
conclusionUse of CFTR modulators was associated with lower caregiver burden, better health perception, and reduced work productivity loss.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42920171What 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.