Lumacaftor/Ivacaftor in Patients Aged 6–11 Years with Cystic Fibrosis and Homozygous for <i>F508del-CFTR</i>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Rationale Combination lumacaftor/ivacaftor has been shown to improve lung function and other endpoints in patients aged 12 years and older with cystic fibrosis and homozygous for F508del-CFTR, but it has not been assessed in younger patients. Objectives In this open-label phase III trial, we evaluated the safety, tolerability, pharmacodynamics, and efficacy of lumacaftor/ivacaftor combination therapy in patients aged 6–11 years with cystic fibrosis who were homozygous for F508del-CFTR. Methods Patients (N = 58) received 200 mg lumacaftor/250 mg ivacaftor orally every 12 hours for 24 weeks in addition to their existing cystic fibrosis medications. Measurements and Main Results Lumacaftor/ivacaftor was well tolerated; the safety profile was generally similar to that observed in larger lumacaftor/ivacaftor trials with older patients. Four patients discontinued (two because of drug-related adverse events: elevated liver transaminases, n = 1; rash, n = 1). No safety concerns were associated with spirometry. No significant changes in percent predicted FEV1 were observed (change from baseline at Week 24, +2.5 percentage points; 95% confidence interval [CI], −0.2 to 5.2; P = 0.0671). At Week 24, significant improvements from baseline were observed in sweat chloride (−24.8 mmol/L; 95% CI, −29.1 to −20.5; P &lt; 0.0001), body mass index z score (+0.15; 95% CI, 0.08 to 0.22; P &lt; 0.0001), Cystic Fibrosis Questionnaire-Revised respiratory domain score (+5.4; 95% CI, 1.4 to 9.4; P = 0.0085), and lung clearance index based on lung volume turnover required to reach 2.5% of starting N2 concentration (−0.88; 95% CI, −1.40 to −0.37; P = 0.0018). Conclusions Lumacaftor/ivacaftor was well tolerated in this young population; no new safety concerns were identified. Improvements in lung clearance index, sweat chloride, nutritional status, and health-related quality of life were observed after 24 weeks of treatment. Clinical trial registered with www.clinicaltrials.gov (NCT01897233).
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".