Elexacaftor/tezacaftor/ivacaftor (ELX/TEZ/IVA) was shown to be safe and efficacious in people with cystic fibrosis (CF) heterozygous for F508del and a minimal function mutation (F/MF) or homozygous for F508del (F/F) in two pivotal Phase 3 trials, significantly improving percentage predicted forced expiratory volume in 1 second, Cystic Fibrosis Questionnaire-Revised, Respiratory Domain (CFQ-R RD) scores, and sweat chloride concentration. Here, we analyzed the 11 non-respiratory domains (non-RDs) of the CFQ-R, which assess general health-related quality of life (i.e., Physical Functioning, Role Functioning, Vitality, Health Perceptions, Emotional Functioning, and Social Functioning) and quality of life impacted by CF (i.e., Body Image, Eating Problems, Treatment Burden, Weight, and Digestive Symptoms), for participants in these two Phase 3 trials. ELX/TEZ/IVA treatment led to higher scores in all CFQ-R non-RDs, with improvements in most domains compared with control treatments. These findings demonstrate that ELX/TEZ/IVA improves a range of CF-specific symptoms and general functioning and well-being.

For many people with cystic fibrosis (pwCF), CFTR modulators will be the cornerstone of their treatment. These modulators show robust treatment effects at group level in pwCF with specific mutations. The individual effect however, is variable. In this review we will explain reasons for reconsideration of dosing regimens of CFTR modulating therapy in order to improve treatment response and prevent side effects. Since the effect of a drug depends on pharmacodynamics and pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics and pharmacokinetic properties of CFTR modulators will be discussed. Pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic relationships will be used to gain insight in dosage response and exposure response relationships. To understand the cause of variation in drug exposure, pharmacokinetic properties that may change due to CF disease will be explained. We show that with current insight, there are conceivable situations that give reason for reconsideration of dosing regimens, however many questions need to be unravelled.

Ivacaftor has been shown to restore the functionality of the S1251N (also known as c.3752G>A) mutated CFTR, which may cause alterations in both airway and gut physiology and micro-environment, resulting in a change of microbiota in these organs. The aim of the present study was to analyze the effects of ivacaftor on the microbial community composition of both airway and gut in subjects with CF carrying one S1251N mutation, using a 16S rRNA gene-based sequencing approach. In 16 subjects with CF, repetitive samples from airways and gut were collected just before, and 2 months after, and, for 8 patients, also 9 and 12 months after, start of ivacaftor. 16S rRNA based sequencing identified 344 operational taxonomical units (OTUs) in a total of 139 samples (35 nasopharyngeal, 39 oropharyngeal, 29 sputum, and 36 fecal samples). Ivacaftor significantly enhanced bacterial diversity and overall microbiota composition in the gut (p < 0.01). There were no significant changes in the overall microbial composition and alpha diversity in upper and lower airways of these patients after ivacaftor treatment. Treatment with ivacaftor induces changes in gut microbiota whereas airway microbiota do not change significantly over time.

The clinical response to cystic fibrosis transmembrane conductance regulator (CFTR) modulators is variable within people with cystic fibrosis (pwCF) homozygous for the F508del mutation. The prediction of clinical effect in individual patients would be useful to target therapy to those who would benefit from it. A multicenter observational cohort study was conducted including 97 pwCF (F508del/F508del), who started lumacaftor/ivacaftor (LUM/IVA) treatment before June 2018. In order to assess the associations of individual in vivo and in vitro biomarkers with clinical outcomes, we collected clinical data regarding sex, age, and sweat chloride concentration (SwCl) at baseline and after six months of LUM/IVA; the percent predicted forced expiratory volume in 1 s (ppFEV1) and the number of pulmonary exacerbations (PEx) during the three years before up to three years after modulator initiation; and the forskolin-induced swelling (FIS) responses to LUM/IVA, quantified in intestinal organoids. On a group level, the results showed an acute change in ppFEV1 after LUM/IVA initiation (2.34%, 95% CI 0.85–3.82, p = 0.003), but no significant change in annual ppFEV1 decline in the three years after LUM/IVA compared to the three years before (change: 0.11% per year, 95%CI: −1.94–2.19, p = 0.913). Neither of these two outcomes was associated with any of the candidate predictors on an individual level. The median number of pulmonary exacerbations (PEx) per patient year did not significantly change in the three years after LUM/IVA compared to the years before (median: 0.33/patient year, IQR: 0–0.67 before vs. median: 0/patient year, IQR: 0–0.67 after p = 0. 268). The PEx rate after modulator initiation was associated with the PEx rate before (IRR: 2.26, 95%CI: 1.67–3.08, p < 0.001), with sex (males vs. females IRR: 0.36, 95%CI: 0.21–0.63, p = 0.001) and with sweat chloride concentration (SwCl) at baseline (IRR: 0.96, 95%CI: 0.94–0.98, p = 0.001). The change in SwCl was also significant (−22.9 mmol/L (95%CI: −27.1–−18.8, p < 0.001) and was associated with SwCl at baseline (−0.64, 95%CI: −0.90–−0.37, p < 0.001) and with sex (males vs. females 8.32, 95%CI: 1.82–14.82, p = 0.013). In conclusion, ppFEV1 decline after CFTR modulator initiation remains difficult to predict in individual patients in a real-world setting, with limited effectiveness for double CFTR modulator therapies. The PEx rate prior to CFTR modulator treatment initiation, sex and SwCl at baseline could be potential predictors of long-term PEx rate and of changes in SwCl after modulator initiation.