The cost of simplifying treatments for cystic fibrosis: Implications of the SIMPLIFY trial.

BACKGROUND: Dornase alfa and hypertonic saline are mucoactive therapies that can improve respiratory symptoms in people with cystic fibrosis (CF). A recent randomized control trial showed that participants with well-preserved pulmonary function taking elexacaftor + tezacaftor + ivacaftor (ETI) who discontinued dornase alfa or hypertonic saline for 6 weeks had no clinically meaningful decline in lung function. This may prompt discussions with care providers regarding ongoing use of these medications. OBJECTIVE: To compare the costs of outpatient medications between people taking ETI who continued or discontinued (1) dornase alfa or (2) hypertonic saline from 2 clinical trials and project cost differences in the US CF population if these 2 medications were used only intermittently for symptom relief instead of chronically. METHODS: The SIMPLIFY study was 2 parallel multicenter trials that randomized participants 1:1 to either continue or discontinue therapy. To estimate costs, we used data from the Merative MarketScan Databases to identify people with CF from 2020 to 2021. Our primary outcomes were differences in costs of outpatient prescription drugs among those who continued vs discontinued dornase alfa and, separately, hypertonic saline. We obtained adjusted differences in median costs. To estimate the annual cost savings if the population of people with CF taking ETI used these medications only intermittently, we multiplied the proportion of people in MarketScan with CF diagnoses who were taking each of these medications by the median cost savings per year and subtracted the cost of "rescue" use. RESULTS: A total of 392 participants from the dornase alfa trial and 273 from the hypertonic saline trial were included in analyses. The adjusted difference in median medication costs was not significant for the hypertonic saline trial, but we observed a significantly decreased 6-week cost of medications in the dornase alfa trial (adjusted median difference in costs between discontinue and continue of $5,860 (95% CI = $4,870-$6,850); P < 0.0001). We estimated that two-thirds of people with CF use ETI and dornase alfa in the United States; if they discontinued dornase alfa except for intermittent use, the resulting annual savings would be $1.21 billion. CONCLUSIONS: Although the costs of dornase alfa and hypertonic saline are smaller compared with ETI, reduction in use would lead to substantial prescription drug cost savings and reduce the treatment burden. However, individual benefits of these therapies should be considered, and decisions regarding changes in therapy remain an important discussion between people with CF and their providers. Study registration number: NCT04378153.

The impact of SARS-CoV-2 on the cystic fibrosis foundation therapeutics development network.

The Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) global pandemic significantly impacted CF clinical research within the Cystic Fibrosis Foundation Therapeutics Development Network (CFF TDN). A Research Electronic Data Capture (REDCap) survey was developed and sent to network sites to monitor and understand the impact on research teams, ongoing and anticipated clinical research, and specific clinical and research procedures. Key findings indicated an early impact on participant enrollment, research team stability, and procedures such as spirometry and sputum induction. These trends steadily improved over the months as research activities began to recover across the TDN. While SARS-CoV-2 created a significant challenge it also highlights new opportunities to expand CF research with greater focus on data collection outside of research centers and increased access for remote participation.

Rate and predictors of prescription of lumacaftor - Ivacaftor in the 18 months following approval in the United States.

RATIONALE: Lumacaftor-ivacaftor (LUM-IVA) was approved in the US in 2015 for patients with CF aged >12 homozygous for the delF508 mutation, and patients aged 6 to 12 in 2016. OBJECTIVES: To examine the rate of initial LUM-IVA prescriptions following approval. METHODS: We compared patients eligible for LUM-IVA in the CF Foundation Patient Registry with and without prescriptions in 2015-2016. RESULTS: 5534 (53%) eligible patients had reported prescriptions. Prescription rate in children ages 6-11 was 19% and 61% among patients ≥12 years old. Individuals ≥12 with prescriptions more likely observed among those with private insurance, clinical trial participation, ages 18-30, FEV1 < 90%, more pulmonary exacerbations, and more use of chronic medications. CONCLUSIONS: LUM-IVA uptake was less rapid than what was previously observed for ivacaftor, a CFTR modulator approved for a different population. Age, insurance status, disease severity and use of other therapies differed in those prescribed LUM-IVA in the initial post-approval period.

Assessment of safety and efficacy of long-term treatment with combination lumacaftor and ivacaftor therapy in patients with cystic fibrosis homozygous for the F508del-CFTR mutation (PROGRESS): a phase 3, extension study.

BACKGROUND: The 24-week safety and efficacy of lumacaftor/ivacaftor combination therapy was shown in two randomised controlled trials (RCTs)-TRAFFIC and TRANSPORT-in patients with cystic fibrosis who were aged 12 years or older and homozygous for the F508del-CFTR mutation. We aimed to assess the long-term safety and efficacy of extended lumacaftor/ivacaftor therapy in this group of patients in PROGRESS, the long-term extension of TRAFFIC and TRANSPORT. METHODS: PROGRESS was a phase 3, parallel-group, multicentre, 96-week study of patients who completed TRAFFIC or TRANSPORT in 191 sites in 15 countries. Patients were eligible if they were at least 12 years old with cystic fibrosis and homozygous for the F508del-CFTR mutation. Exclusion criteria included any comorbidity or laboratory abnormality that, in the opinion of the investigator, might confound the results of the study or pose an additional risk in administering the study drug to the participant, history of drug intolerance, and history of poor compliance with the study drug. Patients who previously received active treatment in TRANSPORT or TRAFFIC remained on the same dose in PROGRESS. Patients who had received placebo in TRANSPORT or TRAFFIC were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive lumacaftor (400 mg every 12 h)/ivacaftor (250 mg every 12 h) or lumacaftor (600 mg once daily)/ivacaftor (250 mg every 12 h). The primary outcome was to assess the long-term safety of combined therapy. The estimated annual rate of decline in percent predicted FEV1 (ppFEV1) in treated patients was compared with that of a matched registry cohort. Efficacy analyses were based on modified intention-to-treat, such that data were included for all patients who were randomly assigned and received at least one dose of study drug. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01931839. FINDINGS: Between Oct 24, 2013, and April 7, 2016, 1030 patients from the TRANSPORT and TRAFFIC studies enrolled in PROGRESS, and 1029 received at least one dose of study drug. 340 patients continued treatment with lumacaftor 400 mg every 12 h/ivacaftor 250 mg every 12 h; 176 patients who had received placebo in the TRANSPORT or TRAFFIC studies initiated treatment with lumacaftor 400 mg every 12 h/ivacaftor 250 mg every 12 h, the commercially available dose, for which data are presented. The most common adverse events were infective pulmonary exacerbations, cough, increased sputum, and haemoptysis. Modest blood pressure increases seen in TRAFFIC and TRANSPORT were also observed in PROGRESS. For patients continuing treatment, the mean change from baseline in ppFEV1 was 0·5 (95% CI -0·4 to 1·5) at extension week 72 and 0·5 (-0·7 to 1·6) at extension week 96; change in BMI was 0·69 (0·56 to 0·81) at extension week 72 and 0·96 (0·81 to 1·11) at extension week 96. The annualised pulmonary exacerbation rate in patients continuing treatment through extension week 96 (0·65, 0·56 to 0·75) remained lower than the placebo rate in TRAFFIC and TRANSPORT. The annualised rate of ppFEV1 decline was reduced in lumacaftor/ivacaftor-treated patients compared with matched controls (-1·33, -1·80 to -0·85 vs -2·29, -2·56 to -2·03). The efficacy and safety profile of the lumacaftor 600 mg once daily/ivacaftor 250 mg every 12 h groups was generally similar to that of the lumacaftor 400 mg every 12 h/ivacaftor 250 mg every 12 h groups. INTERPRETATION: The long-term safety profile of lumacaftor/ivacaftor combination therapy was consistent with previous RCTs. Benefits continued to be observed with longer-term treatment, and lumacaftor/ivacaftor was associated with a 42% slower rate of ppFEV1 decline than in matched registry controls. FUNDING: Vertex Pharmaceuticals Incorporated.

Disparities in access to lung transplantation for patients with cystic fibrosis by socioeconomic status.

RATIONALE: Although previous studies suggest that access to care for patients with cystic fibrosis (CF) does not vary appreciably by socioeconomic status (SES), disparities with respect to access to lung transplantation for patients with CF are largely unknown. OBJECTIVES: To determine whether access to lung transplantation for patients with CF differs according to SES. METHODS: Observational study involving 2,167 adult patients with CF from the CF Foundation Patient registry who underwent their first lung transplant evaluation between 2001 and 2009. The primary outcome was acceptance for lung transplant after initial evaluation. The main SES indicator was Medicaid status. Alternate SES indicators included race, educational attainment, ZIP code-level median household income, and driving time from residence to closest lung transplant center. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: The odds that Medicaid recipients were not accepted for lung transplant were 1.56-fold higher (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.27-1.92) than patients without Medicaid, after multivariate adjustment for demographic characteristics, disease severity, and potential contraindications to lung transplant, and before or after use of the lung allocation score. This association was independent of other SES indicators, including race, educational attainment, ZIP code-level median household income, and driving time to closest transplant center (odds ratio [OR] = 1.37; 95% CI, 1.10-1.72). Patients not completing high school (OR = 2.37; 95% CI, 1.49-3.79) and those residing in the lowest (vs. highest) ZIP code median household income category (OR = 1.39; 95% CI, 1.01-1.93) also experienced a higher odds of not being accepted for lung transplant in multivariate analysis. CONCLUSIONS: In this nationally representative study of adult patients with CF, multiple indicators of low SES were associated with higher odds of not being accepted for lung transplant.