Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

Background

Cystic fibrosis (CF) is a genetic disease that may result in multiple systemic disorders and potentially fatal severe respiratory compromise. However, the advent of CF transmembrane conductance regulator (CFTR) modulators has changed the management of CF for patients with select mutations. Although clinical trials have highlighted increased pulmonary function and decreased exacerbations as a result of these novel therapies, their effect on the sinuses has not been well-described.

Objective

Our objective is to review the CFTR modulators to provide otolaryngologists, physicians who frequently care for patients with CF, a basic understanding of these drugs and their effects on chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) in patients with CF.

Methods

The clinically approved and available CFTR modulators and specific indications for their use are reviewed. Additionally, a systematic review of these therapies and effects on CRS in CF was performed.

Results

Four Food and Drug Administration approved CFTR modulators are available for patients with CF. Current drugs are approved for gating, residual function, or F508del mutations. Multiple reports describe CFTR modulators’ increase in transepithelial ion transport in nasal epithelial cultures; however, clinical studies regarding effects of these modulators on sinonasal health are limited to 5 studies that present new data of the effects of CFTR modulators in CRS.

Conclusions

CFTR modulators have changed management of CF. Initial studies of these medications demonstrate promising results in CF; however, there is a paucity of literature describing the effect of CFTR modulators on CF-associated CRS, although initial results are encouraging.

Keywords

rhinology rhinosinusitis chronic rhinosinusitis cystic fibrosis CFTR modulator ivacaftor tezacaftor lumacaftor elexacaftor triple therapy

Introduction

Cystic fibrosis (CF) is a genetic disease that can result in severe respiratory compromise and potentially respiratory failure or death.¹ Over 2000 mutations in the CFTR gene result in absent, partially functional, or nonfunctional CF transmembrane conductance regulator (CFTR) proteins which are critical cell surface chloride channels. CFTR is synthesized intracellularly and transported to the cell surface, where it regulates the transport of salt ions in and out of the cell.² In the presence of CFTR mutations, the defective ion transport leads to a dehydration of airway surface liquid volume leading to compromised mucociliary clearance.² Systemic CFTR deficiency manifests as pulmonary, endocrine, gastrointestinal, reproductive, and sinonasal disease.³ The phenotypic disease expression varies widely and is partially driven by specific mutations.^4–6

CFTR mutations have traditionally been divided into 6 classes (Figure 1).^7,8 Class I mutations introduce premature termination codons, leading to severely reduced or absent CFTR protein. Class II mutations result in protein misfolding, degradation in the endoplasmic reticulum, and decreased protein biogenesis; this leads to a marked reduction in CFTR reaching the cell surface. Class III mutations lead to diminished CFTR protein channel opening probability and are known as “gating mutations.” Class IV mutations cause diminished channel conduction in response to stimulation. Class V mutations impact the abundance of CFTR protein by introducing promoter or splicing abnormalities. Class VI mutations diminish the protein conformational stability, decreasing the quantity of functional CFTR protein present at the plasma membrane.

Figure 1.

CF mutation classes. Adapted from Cystic Fibrosis Foundation 2017 Patient Registry Annual Data Report.9 CFTR, cystic fibrosis transmembrane conductance regulator.

The advent of CFTR modulators has radically changed the management of CF as patients with select mutations now have options for genetic-directed treatment.^10–17 Current modulators are indicated for patients with specific mutations (Tables 1 to 3).

Table 1.

CFTR Mutations FDA Approved for Ivacaftor Monotherapy.

Genetic Mutation
G1244E	G1349D	G178R	G551D
G551S	S1251N	S549N	S549R
R117H	S1255P

Studies have demonstrated that CFTR modulators result in improved sweat chloride levels, fewer pulmonary exacerbations, greater forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV₁), as well as greater body mass.^11,18,19 However, the pathology of CF is not limited to the pulmonary mucosa, and thus the benefit is not limited to pulmonary manifestations. The CFTR protein is also highly expressed in the reproductive tract, digestive tract, as well as in the sinonasal mucosa, leading to the systemic manifestations of disease.^20–22 The sinonasal mucosa is exquisitely sensitive to CFTR dysfunction. Over 60% of adults have symptomatic chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS).⁹ The CFTR mutations manifest with characteristic viscous mucous of the sinonasal cavity, impaired mucociliary clearance, as well as chronic inflammation and infection of the sinonasal cavity.^22–24 Despite hypoplastic sinuses, radiographic evidence of sinus disease is present in >90% of adults with CF.²⁵

The Role of CFTR Modulator Therapies

Prior to the advent of these genetic-focused personalized therapies, the medical treatment of CF primarily emphasized augmenting pulmonary toilet with respiratory therapy, improving mucociliary clearance with saline or DNAse, and eradicating infection with topical and systemic antibiotic therapy.¹⁵ In the last 10 years, medical management of CF has dramatically changed for patient with select mutations. As clinicians who take care of patients with CF, it is important we have an understanding of these new therapeutics. Current CFTR modulators can be classified as CFTR potentiators or CFTR correctors. Potentiators affect the CFTR protein at the plasma membrane, improving that ion transport function of mutated, dysfunctional ion channels (Figure 2). Correctors improve CFTR protein processing and trafficking to the plasma membrane (Figure 2).

Figure 2.

Effect location of CFTR modulators.

Potentiators

CFTR mutations can lead to ineffective ion channels at the plasma membrane that do not allow for adequate Cl⁻ flux. In this circumstance, CFTR potentiators improve channel function by increasing Cl⁻ transport. The only current potentiator on the market is ivacaftor (marketed under the trade name Kalydeco).

Ivacaftor

Ivacaftor increases chloride ion flux in epithelial cells expressing G551D gating mutation, potentiating dysfunctional CFTRs.²⁶ Further studies have demonstrated some quality-of-life benefit for other non-G551D class III gating mutations as well as some mutations with class III/IV cellular phenotypes, often termed “residual function mutations”; however, improvement to pulmonary function in this cohort is equivocal. Ivacaftor has been shown to potentiate 38 different CF-causing mutations.^27,28 Ivacaftor monotherapy is approved in patients as early as 6 months of age. During the initial clinical trial, ivacaftor was shown to have a good safety profile.¹⁸ Adverse events that occurred more frequently in the ivacaftor group were headache, upper respiratory tract infection, nasal congestion, rash, and dizziness—none of which were considered to be serious or led to discontinuation of the study drug.¹⁸ Percentage predicted FEV₁ (ppFEV₁) was noted to improve by 10.4% in the ivacaftor group while ppFEV₁ decreased by 0.2% in the placebo group at 24 weeks after treatment initiation.¹⁸ At 48 weeks, the mean difference of ppFEV₁ was 10.4%.² Fewer pulmonary exacerbations were seen in patients taking ivacaftor, which led to fewer hospitalizations as well as number of days hospitalized.¹⁸ Subjective symptoms, weight gain, sweat chloride levels have been shown to improve as well.² It is currently recommended in patients ages 6 months to 6 years old with specific gating and residual function mutations (Table 1).

Correctors

Although ivacaftor is effective in certain CFTR mutations, it is effective only if the CFTR protein is expressed at the plasma membrane. If the CFTR is not expressed at the cell surface, ivacaftor will have no benefit. Class II mutations result in impaired CFTR transport to the plasma membrane. Corrector therapeutics help increase the amount of CFTR protein that is transported and inserted into the plasma membrane. Currently, 3 Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved correctors are on the market, lumacaftor, tezacaftor, and elexacaftor. These drugs facilitate the improved folding and translocation of the CFTR protein to the plasma membrane; however, the CFTR is still defective and does not have normal ion transport properties. In combination with a CFTR potentiator such as ivacaftor, improved chloride movement is facilitated.

Lumacaftor

Lumacaftor is a CFTR corrector that has been shown to improve pulmonary function, sweat chloride levels, and body mass index.²⁹ It is used as a combination therapy with ivacaftor, marketed under the trade name Orkambi, and has been tested and approved only in homozygote F508del mutations for ages 2 and up.¹⁹ Pulmonary function has been shown to improve, with the initial trial demonstrating ppFEV₁ improvement in the treatment group of ∼5% at 24 weeks after treatment initiation. This dual therapy has been shown to increase weight gain and decrease sweat chloride levels. Furthermore, quality-of-life scores measured with the Cystic Fibrosis Questionnaire are improved, as well as dose-dependent decreased pulmonary exacerbations compared to placebo (Hazard Risk [HR] 0.61–0.70).³⁰ However, it has an increased side-effect profile, with the initial trial having adverse events that led to discontinuation of the study regimen (4.2% of patients) in patients including elevation of creatine kinase and transaminase levels, hemoptysis, bronchospasm, dyspnea, pulmonary exacerbation, and rash. There are associated longer term increases in blood pressure as well.³⁰ Because of the increased side-effect profile compared to tezacaftor-ivacaftor, it is primarily clinically used in patient age 2 to 6 with F508del mutations, the age-group tezacaftor-ivacaftor has not been approved in.³¹

Tezacaftor

Tezacaftor is a CFTR corrector that improves plasma membrane expression for mutations with class II cellular phenotypes (ie, F508del).^11,32 Tezacaftor is utilized as combination therapy with ivacaftor marked under the tradename Symdeko. The initial study demonstrated ppFEV₁ improvements in tezacaftor–ivacaftor trial group of 6.8% compared to placebo, whereas ivacaftor monotherapy improved ppFEV₁ by 4.7% at 24 weeks after initiation of therapy. Other benefits seen are improvements in quality-of-life scores measured using the Cystic Fibrosis Questionnaire, as well as decreased pulmonary exacerbations compared to placebo (HR 0.64).³⁰ The medication was well tolerated with no serious side effects except for slightly increased creatine phosphokinase level (3.7% vs. 3.1% placebo). Tezacaftor and ivacaftor act synergistically in heterozygotes of residual function mutations and F508del homozygotes.^11,33 Currently, tezacaftor–ivacaftor dual therapy is recommended in all patients 6 years and older with the approved gating, residual function, or homozygous F508del mutations (Table 2).

Table 2.

CFTR Mutations FDA Approved for Tezacaftor–Ivacaftor Use.

Genetic Mutation
A1067T	E193K	L206W	R74W
A455E	E56K	P67L	S945L
D110E	E831X	R1070Q	S977F
D110H	F1052V	R1070W	2789 + 5G→A
D1152H	F1074L	R117C	3272 − 26A→G
D1270N	G1069R	R347H	3849 + 10kbC→T
D579G	K1060T	R352Q	711 + 3A→G
F508del homozygous	G1244E	G1349D	G178R
G551D	G551S	S1251N	S549N
S549R	R117H	S1255P

Table 3.

CFTR Mutations FDA Approved for Elexacaftor–Tezacaftor–Ivacaftor Triple Therapy.

Genetic Mutation
F508del heterozygous	F508del homozygous

Elexacaftor

Elexacaftor is a next-generation CFTR corrector that is utilized with tezacaftor and ivacaftor as a new “triple therapy” for patients heterozygous or homozygous for F508del mutations, marketed under trade name Trikafta.^32,34–37 Triple therapy for F508del heterozygotes increased ppFEV₁ by 14.3% at 24 weeks. In a superiority trial, the addition of elexacaftor for F508del homozygote patients already receiving tezacaftor–ivacaftor increased ppFEV₁ by 10% after 4 weeks of treatment, compared to those just receiving tezacaftor–ivacaftor. In vivo studies of patients with F508del/minimal function heterozygotes and F508del homozygotes also showed improvement in quality-of-life scores and sweat chloride concentration compared tezacaftor–ivacaftor. This triple therapy was FDA approved October 2019, and the additional benefit seen by F508del homozygotes and the extension to F508del/minimal function heterozygotes is projected to impact disease progression in approximately 90% of CF patients (Table 3).⁹

CFTR Modulators for CRS

We performed a search for English literature on National Center for Biotechnology Information (NCBI) using the following strategy: “(Ivacaftor[tiab] OR Kalydeco[tiab] OR Lumacaftor[tiab] OR Tezacaftor[tiab] OR Symdeko[tiab] OR Trikafta[tiab] OR elexacaftor[tiab]) AND (sinus[tiab] OR sinusitis[tiab] OR rhinosinusitis[tiab] OR sinonasal[tiab]).” This resulted in 19 hits. Abstracts were reviewed by A. J. K. and S. E. L. After excluding 1 nonrelevant study, 7 preclinical studies (ie, animal models or in vitro studies) and 6 reviews, we identified 5 studies present new data of the effects of CFTR modulators in rhinosinusitis (Table 4). Of these 5 included studies, 3 were case reports. References from included studies and review articles were examined for any additional studies and none were identified.

Table 4.

Review of Studies That Present New Clinical Data of CFTR Modulator Effect in Rhinosinusitis.

Study	Modulator	Population	Outcome
McCormick et al.³⁸	Ivacaftor	n = 153	Quality of life of rhinologic, psychologic, and sleep domains improved with ivacaftor
Chang et al.³⁹	Ivacaftor	n = 1	Radiologic evidence of sinus disease resolved at 10 months and sinus symptoms resolved at 1 month
Vreede et al.⁴⁰	Ivacaftor	n = 1	Radiologic evidence of sinus disease resolved at 5 months and sinus symptoms improved at 5 months
Sheikh et al.⁴¹	Ivacaftor	n = 12	BMI, ppFEV₁, radiologic evidence of sinus disease improved at 6 months
Hayes et al.⁴²	Ivacaftor	n = 1	BMI, ppFEV₁, FVC, sweat chloride improved at 18 months. Radiologic evidence of sinus disease and sinus symptoms resolved at 18 months

Abbreviations: BMI, body mass index; FEV₁, forced expiratory volume in 1 second; FVC, forced vital capacity.

CRS is nearly universal in patients with CF and contributes to the morbidity of the disease. As in the lower airways, the CFTR protein is critical in the sinonasal mucosa for normal mucociliary clearance. Decreased mucociliary clearance in the sinonasal tract results in chronic sinus infections, hypoplastic sinuses, and potential for bacterial seeding of the lungs. Because of this, CF patient frequently has an otolaryngologist as part of the multidisciplinary care team among pulmonologists, endocrinologists, gastroenterologists, respiratory therapists, and pharmacists.

The effect of CFTR potentiators and correctors on CRS is poorly understood. One case describes reversal of CRS after initiation of ivacaftor.³⁹ Sinus symptoms resolved by 1 month of treatment initiation and radiologic improvement was noted at 10 months.³⁹ In the case report by Chang et al., a biopsy of nasal epithelium showed improvement in potentiation of transepithelial current with ivacaftor, similarly to that of the bronchial epithelia described during drug development.³⁹

A recent study utilized the Sino-Nasal Outcome Test (SNOT-20) to evaluate CRS symptoms after initiation of ivacaftor.³⁸ The SNOT-20 is a validated, disease-specific patient-reported outcome measure for rhinosinusitis that include rhinologic, psychologic, sleep, and ear/facial quality-of-life subdomains.⁴³ SNOT-20 scores were minimally but statistically significantly improved at 1, 3, and 6 months after therapy initiation, with notable improvement in rhinologic, psychologic, and sleep domains. Unfortunately, there were no data regarding changes in nasal endoscopy findings or to microbiome.

CFTR Modulator Challenges

Benefits achieved with CFTR modulator therapy are not sustained after treatment is stopped. For example, improvement in ventilation seen on magnetic resonance imaging after initiating ivacaftor therapy are lost if treatment with ivacaftor is discontinued.⁴⁴ In fact, clinical deterioration and symptom exacerbation can be seen after ivacaftor treatment cessation. This phenomenon is termed “ivacaftor withdrawal syndrome.”⁴⁵

There are several reasons why eligible patients may not be taking a modulator. Available modulators are metabolized through cytochrome P-450 enzymes. Ivacaftor and tezacaftor are substrates of CYP3A4. Use of CYP3A induces such as rifampin, phenobarbital, carbamazepine, phenytoin, and St. John’s wort will significantly decrease tezacaftor and ivacaftor levels; use of modulators in this setting is not recommended. Concomitant use of CYP3A4 inhibitors will lead to increased concentrations of ivacaftor and tezacaftor. Modulator dosing regimen can be adjusted if moderate or strong CYP3A4 inhibitors, such as triazole antifungals and macrolides (excluding azithromycin), are required. Ivacaftor is a weak inhibitor of CYP3A4 and P-glycoprotein (P-gp), which can increase drug levels of other enzyme substrates such as digoxin, cyclosporine, or tacrolimus. Since the latter 2 drugs are often used in solid organ transplant and many of these patients are also prescribed triazoles, CF patients who have undergone solid organ transplant are typically not prescribed CFTR modulators. The British National Formulary has listed organ transplant as a contraindication to modulation therapy, although this is not a listed contraindication on the product summary.⁴⁶

Additionally, there is limited efficacy of available monotherapies for some mutant alleles designated as class I, class II, or class III/IV. This could be explained by pleiotropic molecular defects caused by a single mutation with effects overlapping several classes. Furthermore, not all class III (gating mutations) respond the same to gating potentiators.⁴⁷

Cost of CFTR modulators is also a consideration, particularly for Medicare patients. Approximately 2700 adult CF patients in the Cystic Fibrosis Foundation Patient Registry have Medicare coverage. A portion of these patients will have Part D prescription drug coverage. While Part D will cover CF-specific medications, these specialty medications are Tier 5 and require patient cost sharing of 25% to 33% of total drug cost. The average annual cost without insurance is $306 600 for ivacaftor, $272 000 for ivacaftor/lumacaftor, $292 000 for ivacaftor/tezacaftor, and $311 000 for ivacaftor/tezacaftor/elexacaftor. Due to the antikickback statute, patients with government insurance (Medicare, Medicaid, Tricare) are not eligible for pharmacy assistance programs to lower the copay cost. Some Medicare Part D patients are simply unable to afford CFTR modulator therapy.⁴⁸ Additionally, in other countries, single-payer health systems are not covering CFTR modulators because of the high cost. There is limited data currently available on what percentage of CFTR modulator candidate are actually receiving treatment, but in a commercial insurance database study of 15 million members, only 54% of mutation-eligible patients were receiving modulators.⁴⁹ However, in cost-effectiveness analyses, quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained with CFTR modulator use ranges from $840 600 to $974 300, far exceeding the commonly accepted thresholds of $100 000 to $150 000 per QALY.⁵⁰

Currently CFTR modulators are only approved for CF lung disease. Active research is being conducted utilizing ivacaftor coated stents to help reduce biofilm formation in preclinical, non-CF, animal models.^51,52 In the future, CFTR modulators may have indications for CF sinus disease or for CRS in general.

Conclusions

CFTR modulators are a revolutionary CF treatment that have allowed for tailored, targeted therapies for specific gene mutations. These have improved objective and subjective measures in CF and are becoming increasingly available and accessible to patients. With the recent FDA approval of the novel triple therapy, treatment for CF patients has improved and is now accessible to many more patients. From a rhinologic standpoint, there are limited studies assessing the effect of these medications for CRS in CF patients. Further studies of the effect of CFTR modulators in CRS are warranted as development of these therapies continues.

Footnotes

Authors’ Note

This study was presented at American Rhinologic Society Annual Meeting, September 2019, New Orleans, Louisiana.

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

ORCID iDs

Saangyoung E. Lee

M. Leigh Anne Daniels

References

Drumm

Collins

FS.

Molecular biology of cystic fibrosis. Mol Genet Med. 2013; 3:33–68.

Patel

Sinha

Dwan

Echevarria

Schechter

Southern

KW.

Potentiators (specific therapies for class III and IV mutations) for cystic fibrosis.

Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2015; 3:CD009841.

Collins

FS.

Cystic fibrosis: molecular biology and therapeutic implications.

Science. 1992; 256:774–779.

McKone

Goss

Aitken

ML.

CFTR genotype as a predictor of prognosis in cystic fibrosis. Chest. 2006; 130(5):1441–1447.

Love-Gregory

Zehnbauer

Dietzen

Genotype-phenotype correlations in cystic fibrosis. In: Mitchell GS, Ann MG, Charles SE, eds. Tietz’s Applied Laboratory Medicine: Second Edition. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley; 2006:25–30.

McKone

Emerson

Edwards

Aitken

ML.

Effect of genotype on phenotype and mortality in cystic fibrosis: a retrospective cohort study. Lancet. 2003; 361(9370):1671–1676.

Kerem

Pharmacological induction of CFTR function in patients with cystic fibrosis: mutation-specific therapy. Pediatr Pulmonol. 2005; 40(3):183–196.

Koch

Cuppens

Rainisio

, et al. European epidemiologic registry of cystic fibrosis (ERCF): comparison of major disease manifestations between patients with different classes of mutations. Pediatr Pulmonol. 2001; 31:1–12.

Marshall

BC.

2017 patient registry: annual data report. Cyst Fibros Found. 2018;18.

10.

Grasemann

CFTR modulator therapy for cystic fibrosis. N Engl J Med. 2017; 377:2085–2088.

11.

Rowe

Daines

Ringshausen

, et al. Tezacaftor–ivacaftor in residual-function heterozygotes with cystic fibrosis. N Engl J Med. 2017; 377:2024–2035.

12.

Derichs

Targeting a genetic defect: cystic fibrosis transmembrane conductance regulator modulators in cystic fibrosis. Eur Respir Rev. 2013; 22:58–65.

13.

Burgener

Moss

RB.

Cystic fibrosis transmembrane conductance regulator modulators: precision medicine in cystic fibrosis. Curr Opin Pediatr. 2018; 30(3):372–377.

14.

Clancy

Rowe

Accurso

, et al. Results of a phase IIa study of VX-809, an investigational CFTR corrector compound, in subjects with cystic fibrosis homozygous for the F508del-CFTR mutation. Thorax. 2012; 67:12–18.

15.

Martiniano

Hoppe

Sagel

Zemanick

ET.

Advances in the diagnosis and treatment of cystic fibrosis. Adv Pediatr. 2014; 61:225–243.

16.

Brewington

McPhail

Clancy

JP.

Lumacaftor alone and combined with ivacaftor: preclinical and clinical trial experience of F508del CFTR correction. Expert Rev Respir Med. 2016; 10(1):5–17.

17.

O’Reilly

Elphick

HE.

Development, clinical utility, and place of ivacaftor in the treatment of cystic fibrosis. Drug Des Devel Ther. 2013; 7:929–937.

18.

Ramsey

Davies

McElvaney

, et al. A CFTR potentiator in patients with cystic fibrosis and the G551D mutation. N Engl J Med. 2011; 365(18):1663–1672.

19.

Wainwright

Elborn

Ramsey

BW.

Lumacaftor–ivacaftor in patients with cystic fibrosis homozygous for Phe508del CFTR. N Engl J Med. 2015; 373(18):1783.

20.

Chan

Ruan

, et al. The cystic fibrosis transmembrane conductance regulator in reproductive health and disease. J Physiol. 2009; 587(Pt 10):2187–2195.

21.

Kaminski

Goldsweig

Sidhaye

Blackman

Schindler

Moran

Cystic fibrosis related diabetes: nutrition and growth considerations. J Cyst Fibros. 2019; 18:S32–S37.

22.

Chang

EH.

New insights into the pathogenesis of cystic fibrosis sinusitis.

Int Forum Allergy Rhinol. 2014; 4:132–137.

23.

McCrary

Chang

Cystic fibrosis sinusitis. Adv Otorhinolaryngol. 2016; 79:29–37.

24.

Fokkens

Lund

Mullol

, et al. European position paper on rhinosinusitis and nasal polyps 2012. Rhinol Suppl. 2012; 23:1–298.

25.

Gentile

Isaacson

Patterns of sinusitis in cystic fibrosis. Laryngoscope. 1996; 106(8):1005–1009.

26.

Van Goor

Hadida

Grootenhuis

PDJ

, et al. Rescue of CF airway epithelial cell function in vitro by a CFTR potentiator, VX-770. Proc Natl Acad Sci. 2009; 106(44):18825–18830.

27.

De Boeck

Munck

Walker

, et al. Efficacy and safety of ivacaftor in patients with cystic fibrosis and a non-G551D gating mutation. J Cyst Fibros. 2014; 13(6):674–680.

28.

Guigui

Wang

Cohen

RI.

The use of ivacaftor in CFTR mutations resulting in residual functioning protein. Respir Med Case Reports. 2016; 19:193–195.

29.

Rowe

Khan

Heltshe

, et al. Results of a multicenter prospective longitudinal study evaluating the effectiveness of lumacaftor/ivacaftor in F508DEL homozygous cf patients following FDA approval (prospect part B core study). Pediatr Pulmonol. 2017; 52:S382–S382.

30.

Southern

Patel

Sinha

Nevitt

SJ.

Correctors (specific therapies for class II CFTR mutations) for cystic fibrosis.

Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2018; 8:CD010966.

31.

Talamo Guevara

McColley

SA.

The safety of lumacaftor and ivacaftor for the treatment of cystic fibrosis.

Expert Opin Drug Saf. 2017; 16(11):1305–1311.

32.

Keating

Marigowda

Burr

, et al. VX-445–tezacaftor–ivacaftor in patients with cystic fibrosis and one or two Phe508del alleles. N Engl J Med. 2018; 379(17):1612–1620.

33.

Pilewski

Cooke

Lekstrom-Himes

Donaldson

. WS01. 4 VX-661 in combination with ivacaftor in patients with cystic fibrosis and the F508del-CFTR mutation. J Cyst Fibros. 2015; 14:S1.

34.

Davies

Moskowitz

Brown

, et al. VX-659-tezacaftor-ivacaftor in patients with cystic fibrosis and one or two Phe508del alleles. N Engl J Med. 2018; 379(17):1599–1611.

35.

Holguin

Triple CFTR modulator therapy for cystic fibrosis. N Engl J Med. 2018; 379(17):1671–1672.

36.

Middleton

Mall

Dřevínek

, et al. Elexacaftor-tezacaftor-ivacaftor for cystic fibrosis with a single Phe508del allele. N Engl J Med. 2019; 381(19):1809–1819.

37.

Heijerman

HGM

McKone

Downey

, et al. Efficacy and safety of the elexacaftor plus tezacaftor plus ivacaftor combination regimen in people with cystic fibrosis homozygous for the F508del mutation: a double-blind, randomised, phase 3 trial. Lancet. 2019; 394(10212):1940–1948.

38.

McCormick

Cho

Lampkin

, et al. Ivacaftor improves rhinologic, psychologic, and sleep-related quality of life in G551D cystic fibrosis patients. Int Forum Allergy Rhinol. 2019; 9(3):292–297.

39.

Chang

Tang

Shah

, et al. Medical reversal of chronic sinusitis in a cystic fibrosis patient with ivacaftor. Int Forum Allergy Rhinol. 2015; 5(2):178–181.

40.

Vreede

Berkhout

Sprij

Fokkens

Heijerman

HGM.

Ivacaftor and sinonasal pathology in a cystic fibrosis patient with genotype deltaF508/S1215N. J Cyst Fibros. 2015; 14(3):412–413.

41.

Sheikh

Long

Mccoy

Johnson

Ryan-Wenger

Hayes

Ivacaftor improves appearance of sinus disease on computerised tomography in cystic fibrosis patients with G551D mutation. Clin Otolaryngol. 2015; 40(1):16–21.

42.

Hayes

McCoy

Sheikh

SI.

Improvement of sinus disease in cystic fibrosis with ivacaftor therapy. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2014; 190(4):468.

43.

Piccirillo

Merritt

Richards

ML.

Psychometric and clinimetric validity of the 20-Item Sino-Nasal Outcome Test (SNOT-20).

Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2002; 126(1):41–47.

44.

Altes

Johnson

Miller

, et al. Hyperpolarized helium-3 magnetic resonance imaging of CFTR potentiator therapy in subjects with cystic fibrosis and the G551D mutation. Pediatr Pulmonol. 2011; 46:270–272.

45.

Trimble

Donaldson

SH.

Ivacaftor withdrawal syndrome in cystic fibrosis patients with the G551D mutation. J Cyst Fibros. 2018; 17(2):e13–e16.

46.

Mitchell

Jones

Barry

PJ.

CFTR modulator therapy in patients with cystic fibrosis and an organ transplant. Paediatr Respir Rev. 2018; 27:6–8.

47.

Veit

Avramescu

Chiang

, et al. From CFTR biology toward combinatorial pharmacotherapy: expanded classification of cystic fibrosis mutations. Mol Biol Cell. 2016; 27(3):424–433.

48.

Daniels ML, Wong ET. Impact of Medicare Drug Coverage on Cystic Fibrosis Medication Access. Pediatric Pulmonology. 2018;53(Suppl. 2):451.

49.

Prime Therapeutics. Prime Therapeutics forecasts cystic fibrosis spending could double in 2019. https://www.primetherapeutics.com/en/news/pressreleases/2019/release-amcp-cysticfibrosis.html. Published March 26, 2019. Accessed March 2, 2020.

50.

Institute for Clinical and Economic Review. A Look at CFTR Modulators for Cystic Fibrosis. https://icer-review.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/MWCEPAC_RAAG_060718.pdf. Published 2018.

51.

Lim DJ, McCormick J, Skinner D, et al. Controlled delivery of ciprofloxacin and ivacaftor via sinus stent in a preclinical model of pseudomonas sinusitis. International forum of allergy & rhinology. 2019:1–8. doi: 10.1002/alr.22514.

52.

Cho

Lim

Mackey

, et al. Ivacaftor, a cystic fibrosis transmembrane conductance regulator potentiator, enhances ciprofloxacin activity against Pseudomonas aeruginosa. Am J Rhinol Allergy. 2019; 33(2):129–136.

Cystic Fibrosis Transmembrane Conductance Regulator Modulator Therapy: A Review for the Otolaryngologist

Abstract

Background

Objective

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Keywords

Introduction

The Role of CFTR Modulator Therapies

Potentiators

Ivacaftor

Correctors

Lumacaftor

Tezacaftor

Elexacaftor

CFTR Modulators for CRS

CFTR Modulator Challenges

Conclusions

Footnotes

Authors’ Note

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

Funding

ORCID iDs

References