MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4411266312 · doi:10.1164/rccm.202502-0512oc

Long-Term Safety and Efficacy of Elexacaftor/Tezacaftor/Ivacaftor in Children ≥6 Years with Cystic Fibrosis and at Least One <i>F508del</i> Allele: A 192-Week, Phase 3, Open-Label Extension Study

2025· article· en· W4411266312 on OpenAlexaff
Claire Wainwright, Susanna A. McColley, Paul McNally, Michael R. Powers, Félix Ratjen, Jonathan H. Rayment, George Retsch‐Bogart, Erica A. Roesch, Bonnie W. Ramsey, Edward F. McKone, Elizabeth Tullis, Marcus Mall, Jennifer L. Taylor‐Cousar, David Waltz, Neil Ahluwalia, Chenghao Chu, Christina V. Scirica, Jane C. Davies

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCystic Fibrosis Research Advances
Canadian institutionsSt. Michael's HospitalBC Children's HospitalUniversity of Toronto
FundersVertex Pharmaceuticals
KeywordsIvacaftorMedicineCystic fibrosisOpen labelInternal medicinePediatricsAdverse effectCystic fibrosis transmembrane conductance regulator

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Rationale Elexacaftor (ELX)/tezacaftor (TEZ)/ivacaftor (IVA) was shown to be safe and efficacious in children 6 through 11 years of age with cystic fibrosis (CF) and at least one F508del allele in a 24-week phase 3 study. Children completing this study could enroll into a 192-week extension study. Objectives To evaluate the long-term safety and efficacy of ELX/TEZ/IVA in children ≥6 years of age. Methods In this two-part (part A [96 wk] and part B [96 wk]) phase 3 extension study, children <12 years of age weighing <30 kg received ELX 100 mg once daily/TEZ 50 mg once daily/IVA 75 mg every 12 hours, and children weighing ≥30 kg or aged ≥12 years received ELX 200 mg once daily/TEZ 100 mg once daily/IVA 150 mg every 12 hours. Measurements and Main Results Sixty-four children (F508del/minimal function [n = 36] and F508del/F508del [n = 28]) received at least one dose of ELX/TEZ/IVA. Mean exposure was 156.2 weeks, and 60.9% of children (n = 39) completed treatment in both parts of this 192-week study. The primary endpoint was safety. All children had adverse events, which for most were mild (31.3%) or moderate (64.1%) and generally consistent with common manifestations of CF. Two children (3.1%) had nonserious adverse events that led to treatment discontinuation (increased alanine aminotransferase [n = 1] and aggression [n = 1]). Secondary endpoints focused on efficacy. From parent study baseline, improvements were seen in percentage predicted FEV1 (9.6 percentage points [95% confidence interval (CI), 5.4 to 13.7 percentage points]), sweat chloride concentration (−57.9 mmol/L [95% CI, −63.3 to −52.5 mmol/L]), Cystic Fibrosis Questionnaire–Revised respiratory domain score (10.0 points [95% CI, 6.9 to 13.0 points]), lung clearance index at a 2.5% stopping point (−2.33 [95% CI, −2.87 to −1.79]), and body mass index z-score (0.39 [95% CI, 0.19 to 0.59]) at Week 192. The rate of pulmonary exacerbations per year was 0.05. The annualized rates of change in percentage predicted FEV1 and lung clearance index at a 2.5% stopping point were −0.09 percentage points (95% CI, −1.01 to 0.84 percentage points) and −0.07 units (95% CI, −0.12 to −0.01 units), respectively. Conclusions In this 4-year extension study in children ≥6 years of age, the longest clinical trial experience with a CFTR (cystic fibrosis transmembrane conductance regulator) modulator in this pediatric population, ELX/TEZ/IVA remained generally safe and well tolerated, with no new safety findings. Clinically meaningful improvements in lung function, CFTR function, and nutritional status reported in the parent study were maintained. These results confirm the long-term safety and efficacy of ELX/TEZ/IVA in children ≥6 years of age.Clinical trial registered with www.clinicaltrials.gov (NCT 04183790).

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Non-randomized trial · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.023
GPT teacher head0.367
Teacher spread0.343 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNon-randomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations10
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine→Same topicCystic Fibrosis Research Advances→French-language works237,207→