Elexacaftor/tezacaftor/ivacaftor in children aged ≥6 years with cystic fibrosis heterozygous for <i>F508del</i> and a minimal function mutation: results from a 96-week open-label extension study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background Elexacaftor/tezacaftor/ivacaftor (ELX/TEZ/IVA) was efficacious and safe in children aged 6–11 years with cystic fibrosis (CF) heterozygous for F508del and a minimal function CF transmembrane conductance regulator (CFTR) variant (F/MF genotypes) in a 24-week, placebo-controlled trial. We conducted a 96-week open-label extension study for children who completed the 24-week parent study. Methods In this phase 3b extension study, dosing was based on weight and age, with children weighing <30 kg and aged <12 years receiving ELX 100 mg once daily, TEZ 50 mg once daily and IVA 75 mg every 12 h, and children ≥30 kg or ≥12 years receiving ELX 200 mg once daily, TEZ 100 mg once daily and IVA 150 mg every 12 h. The primary end-point was safety and tolerability. Secondary and other efficacy end-points included absolute changes from parent study baseline in sweat chloride concentration, lung clearance index (LCI2.5), percentage predicted forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1) and Cystic Fibrosis Questionnaire-Revised (CFQ-R) respiratory domain score. Results A total of 120 children were enrolled and dosed. 118 children (98.3%) had adverse events (AEs), which for most were mild (43.3%) or moderate (48.3%) in severity. The most common AEs (≥20% of children) were COVID-19 (58.3%), cough (51.7%), nasopharyngitis (45.0%), pyrexia (40.0%), headache (37.5%), upper respiratory tract infection (30.8%), oropharyngeal pain (26.7%), rhinitis (24.2%), abdominal pain (22.5%) and vomiting (20.0%). Children who transitioned from the placebo and ELX/TEZ/IVA groups of the parent study had improvements from parent study baseline at Week 96 in mean sweat chloride concentration (−57.3 (95% CI −61.6– −52.9) and −57.5 (95% CI −62.0– −53.0) mmol·L−1), LCI2.5 (−1.74 (95% CI −2.09– −1.38) and −2.35 (95% CI −2.72– −1.97) units), FEV1 % pred (6.1 (95% CI 2.6–9.7) and 6.9 (95% CI 3.2–10.5) percentage points) and CFQ-R respiratory domain score (6.6 (95% CI 2.5–10.8) and 2.6 (95% CI −1.6–6.8) points). Conclusions ELX/TEZ/IVA treatment was generally safe and well tolerated, with a safety profile consistent with the parent study and older age groups. After starting ELX/TEZ/IVA, children had robust improvements in sweat chloride concentration and lung function that were maintained through 96 weeks. These results demonstrate the safety and durable efficacy of ELX/TEZ/IVA in this paediatric population.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".