Real‐life experience with a generic formulation of lumacaftor‐ivacaftor in patients with cystic fibrosis homozygous for the Phe508del CFTR mutation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Introduction Cystic fibrosis (CF) is the most frequent recessive autosomal disorder in the Caucasian population. It is caused by mutations that result in a deficient or dysfunctional cystic fibrosis transmembrane conductance regulator (CFTR) protein activity. Among CFTR modulators, potentiator compounds increase channel opening, whereas corrector compounds increase CFTR quantity in the cell surface. Objective To report real‐life effects of a generic formulation of lumacaftor‐ivacaftor use in patients with CF homozygous for the Phe508del CFTR mutation. Patients and Methods Clinical variables (body mass index [BMI], pulmonary exacerbations, sweat test, and pulmonary function) were analyzed in 30 CF patients homozygous for the Phe508del CFTR mutation, treated with lumacaftor‐ivacaftor for 12 months, at the Respiratory Center of Hospital de Niños Ricardo Gutiérrez. These clinical variables were compared with those before the use of modulators. Results A total of 30 patients with CF homozygous for the Phe508del CFTR mutation receiving lumacaftor‐ivacaftor therapy were included in this study. The median (interquartile range [IQR]) age at the start of treatment was 10.79 (7.08–14.05) years. Nineteen patients were male. Before treatment, median (IQR) sweat chloride concentration was 80 (72–92) mEq/L, and it had decreased to 74 (68–78) mEq/L ( p = .05) 12 months after treatment. Median (IQR) BMI z‐score improved from −0.33 (−0.86 to 0.21) to −0.13 (−0.66 to 0.54) ( p = .003). A spirometry was performed in 28 of 30 patients. Median (IQR) ppFEV 1 was 83.5 (71–91) before treatment and 86.5 (67–103) after treatment ( p = .38), 73.3% of patients referred decreased sputum production and 40% reported improvement in their dyspnea at 12 months. Severe pulmonary exacerbations significantly decreased from 60% in the year before treatment, to 30% at 12 months after treatment ( p = .037); 13 patients showed an improvement in their exacerbation rates, 2 showed an increased rate, and 15 showed no change. Conclusions The use of a generic formulation of lumacaftor‐ivacaftor in patients homozygous for the Phe508del CFTR mutation was associated with improvement in nutritional status and respiratory symptoms, and a significant reduction in severe pulmonary exacerbations.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".