Answering the call to address cystic fibrosis treatment burden in the era of highly effective CFTR modulator therapy
- PMID: 31761739
- PMCID: PMC7239731
- DOI: 10.1016/j.jcf.2019.11.007
Answering the call to address cystic fibrosis treatment burden in the era of highly effective CFTR modulator therapy
Abstract
Background: We recognize an unprecedented opportunity to study the effects of withdrawing one or more chronic treatments in people with CF (PwCF) who benefit greatly from CFTR modulator therapy, but feasibility and acceptance of such a study within the community is unknown.
Methods: We surveyed PwCF, their families, and their acquaintances between November 16, 2018, and December 2, 2018, and CF clinicians between December 19, 2018, and January 2, 2019, about treatment withdrawal research. We sought feedback from these groups about their level of interest in this research, the consistency with which they were taking modulator and non-modulator treatments, the ways in which they conceptualized health changes, and what chronic non-modulator treatments they were most interested in stopping. We also asked for stakeholder perspectives on the design of a treatment withdrawal trial, but we intend to report these perspectives elsewhere.
Results: Eighty percent (541/675) of CF community respondents and 95% (206/218) of CF clinicians said that a trial of treatment simplification should be performed in the context of highly effective modulator therapy. Most current CFTR modulator users (292/359, 81%) have not stopped another chronic treatment. Worsening lung function by spirometry or increased daily symptoms were important health indicators. PwCF, their families, and/or their acquaintances ranked airway clearance techniques and inhaled antibiotics as the most burdensome treatments.
Conclusions: There is considerable support among the CF community and CF clinicians in the U.S. for controlled trials to assess the safety and impact of treatment simplification in patients taking highly effective modulator therapy.
Keywords: Cystic fibrosis; Modulator; Survey; Treatment burden; Withdrawal study.
Copyright © 2019. Published by Elsevier B.V.
Conflict of interest statement
Conflict of Interest Statement Dr. Alex H. Gifford has received grant funding from the Cystic Fibrosis Foundation. Dr. Nicole Mayer-Hamblett has no conflicts of interest to declare. Ms. Kelsie Pearson has no conflicts of interest to declare. Dr. David P. Nichols has received grant funding from the Cystic Fibrosis Foundation.
Figures



References
-
- Taylor-Cousar JL, Munck A, McKone EF, van der Ent CK, Moeller A, Simard C, et al. Tezacaftor-Ivacaftor in Patients with Cystic Fibrosis Homozygous for Phe508del. The New England journal of medicine. 2017;377:2013–23. - PubMed
-
- Rowe SM, Heltshe SL, Gonska T, Donaldson SH, Borowitz D, Gelfond D, et al. Clinical mechanism of the cystic fibrosis transmembrane conductance regulator potentiator ivacaftor in G551D-mediated cystic fibrosis. American journal of respiratory and critical care medicine. 2014;190:175–84. - PMC - PubMed
-
- Hisert KB, Heltshe SL, Pope C, Jorth P, Wu X, Edwards RM, et al. Restoring Cystic Fibrosis Transmembrane Conductance Regulator Function Reduces Airway Bacteria and Inflammation in People with Cystic Fibrosis and Chronic Lung Infections. American journal of respiratory and critical care medicine. 2017;195:1617–28. - PMC - PubMed
Publication types
MeSH terms
Substances
Grants and funding
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Medical
Miscellaneous