Macrolide antibiotics (including azithromycin) for cystic fibrosis.

BACKGROUND: Cystic fibrosis (CF) is a life-limiting genetic condition, affecting over 90,000 people worldwide. CF affects several organs in the body, but airway damage has the most profound impact on quality of life (QoL) and survival. Causes of lower airway infection in people with CF are, most notably, Staphylococcus aureus in the early course of the disease and Pseudomonas aeruginosa at a later stage. Macrolide antibiotics, e.g. azithromycin and clarithromycin, are usually taken orally, have a broad spectrum of action against gram-positive (e.g. S aureus) and some gram-negative bacteria (e.g. Haemophilus influenzae), and may have a modifying role in diseases involving airway infection and inflammation such as CF. They are well-tolerated and relatively inexpensive, but widespread use has resulted in the emergence of resistant bacteria. This is an updated review. OBJECTIVES: To assess the potential effects of macrolide antibiotics on clinical status in terms of benefit and harm in people with CF. If benefit was demonstrated, we aimed to assess the optimal type, dose and duration of macrolide therapy. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Cystic Fibrosis and Genetic Disorders Group Trials Register comprising references identified from comprehensive electronic database searches, handsearching relevant journals, and abstract books of conference proceedings. We last searched the Group's Cystic Fibrosis Trials Register on 2 November 2022. We last searched the trial registries WHO ICTRP and clinicaltrials.gov on 9 November 2022. We contacted investigators known to work in the field, previous authors and pharmaceutical companies manufacturing macrolide antibiotics for unpublished or follow-up data, where possible. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials of macrolide antibiotics in adults and children with CF. We compared them to: placebo; another class of antibiotic; another macrolide antibiotic; or the same macrolide antibiotic at a different dose or type of administration. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two authors independently extracted data and assessed risk of bias. We assessed the certainty of evidence using GRADE. MAIN RESULTS: We included 14 studies (1467 participants) lasting 28 days to 36 months. All the studies assessed azithromycin: 11 compared oral azithromycin to placebo (1167 participants); one compared a high dose to a low dose (47 participants); one compared nebulised to oral azithromycin (45 participants); and one looked at weekly versus daily dose (208 participants). Oral azithromycin versus placebo There is a slight improvement in forced expiratory volume (FEV1 % predicted) in one second in the azithromycin group at up to six months compared to placebo (mean difference (MD) 3.97, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.74 to 6.19; high-certainty evidence), although there is probably no difference at three months, (MD 2.70%, 95% CI -0.12 to 5.52), or 12 months (MD -0.13, 95% CI -4.96 to 4.70). Participants in the azithromycin group are probably at a decreased risk of pulmonary exacerbation with a longer time to exacerbation (hazard ratio (HR) 0.61, 95% CI 0.50 to 0.75; moderate-certainty evidence). Mild side effects were common, but there was no difference between groups (moderate-certainty evidence). There is no difference in hospital admissions at six months (odds ratio (OR) 0.61, 95% CI 0.36 to 1.04; high-certainty evidence), or in new acquisition of P aeruginosa at 12 months (HR 1.00, 95% CI 0.64 to 1.55; moderate-certainty evidence). High-dose versus low-dose azithromycin We are uncertain whether there is any difference in FEV1 % predicted at six months between the two groups (no data available) or in the rate of exacerbations per child per month (MD -0.05 (95% CI -0.20 to 0.10)); very low-certainty evidence for both outcomes. Only children were included in the study and the study did not report on any of our other clinically important outcomes. Nebulised azithromycin versus oral azithromycin We were unable to include any of the data into our analyses and have reported findings directly from the paper; we graded all evidence as being of very low certainty. The authors reported that there was a greater mean change in FEV1 % predicted at one month in the nebulised azithromycin group (P < 0.001). We are uncertain whether there was a change in P aeruginosa count. Weekly azithromycin versus daily azithromycin There is probably a lower mean change in FEV1 % predicted at six months in the weekly group compared to the daily group (MD -0.70, 95% CI -0.95 to -0.45) and probably also a longer period of time until first exacerbation in the weekly group (MD 17.30 days, 95% CI 4.32 days to 30.28 days). Gastrointestinal side effects are probably more common in the weekly group and there is likely no difference in admissions to hospital or QoL. We graded all evidence as moderate certainty. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Azithromycin therapy is associated with a small but consistent improvement in respiratory function, a decreased risk of exacerbation and longer time to exacerbation at six months; but evidence for treatment efficacy beyond six months remains limited. Azithromycin appears to have a good safety profile (although a weekly dose was associated with more gastrointestinal side effects, which makes it less acceptable for long-term therapy), with a relatively minimal treatment burden for people with CF, and it is inexpensive. A wider concern may be the emergence of macrolide resistance reported in the most recent study which, combined with the lack of long-term data, means we do not feel that the current evidence is strong enough to support azithromycin therapy for all people with CF. Future research should report over longer time frames using validated tools and consistent reporting, to allow for easier synthesis of data. In particular, future trials should report important adverse events such as hearing impairment or liver disease. More data on the effects of azithromycin given in different ways and reporting on our primary outcomes would benefit decision-making on whether and how to give macrolide antibiotics. Finally, it is important to assess azithromycin therapy for people with CF who are established on the relatively new cystic fibrosis transmembrane conductance regulator (CFTR) modulator therapies which correct the underlying molecular defect associated with CF (none of the trials included in the review are relevant to this population).

Standards for the care of people with cystic fibrosis (CF); Planning for a longer life.

This is the final of four papers updating standards for the care of people with CF. That this paper "Planning a longer life" was considered necessary, highlights how much CF care has progressed over the past decade. Several factors underpin this progress, notably increased numbers of people with CF with access to CFTR modulator therapy. As the landscape for CF changes, so do the hopes and aspirations of people with CF and their families. This paper reflects the need to consider people with CF not as a "problem" to be solved, but as a success, a potential and a voice to be heard. People with CF and the wider CF community have driven this approach, reflecting many of the topics in this paper. This exercise involved wide stakeholder engagement. People with CF are keen to contribute to research priorities and be involved in all stages of research. People with CF want healthcare professionals to respect them as individuals and consider the impact of our actions on the world around us. Navigating life presents challenges to all, but for people with CF these challenges are heightened and complex. In this paper we highlight the concerns and life moments that impact people with CF, and events that the CF team should aim to support, including the challenges around having a family. People with CF and their care teams must embrace the updated standards outlined in these four papers to enjoy the full potential for a healthier life.

Standards for the care of people with cystic fibrosis; establishing and maintaining health.

This is the second in a series of four papers updating the European Cystic Fibrosis Society (ECFS) standards for the care of people with CF. This paper focuses on establishing and maintaining health. The guidance is produced using an evidence-based framework and with wide stakeholder engagement, including people from the CF community. Authors provided a narrative description of their topic and statements, which were more directive. These statements were reviewed by a Delphi exercise, achieving good levels of agreement from a wide group for all statements. This guidance reinforces the importance of a multi-disciplinary CF team, but also describes developing models of care including virtual consultations. The framework for health is reinforced, including the need for a physically active lifestyle and the strict avoidance of all recreational inhalations, including e-cigarettes. Progress with cystic fibrosis transmembrane conductance regulator (CFTR) modulator therapy is reviewed, including emerging adverse events and advice for dose reduction and interruption. This paper contains guidance that is pertinent to all people with CF regardless of age and eligibility for and access to modulator therapy.

Standards for the care of people with cystic fibrosis (CF); recognising and addressing CF health issues.

This is the third in a series of four papers updating the European Cystic Fibrosis Society (ECFS) standards for the care of people with CF. This paper focuses on recognising and addressing CF health issues. The guidance was produced with wide stakeholder engagement, including people from the CF community, using an evidence-based framework. Authors contributed sections, and summary statements which were reviewed by a Delphi consultation. Monitoring and treating airway infection, inflammation and pulmonary exacerbations remains important, despite the widespread availability of CFTR modulators and their accompanying health improvements. Extrapulmonary CF-specific health issues persist, such as diabetes, liver disease, bone disease, stones and other renal issues, and intestinal obstruction. These health issues require multidisciplinary care with input from the relevant specialists. Cancer is more common in people with CF compared to the general population, and requires regular screening. The CF life journey requires mental and emotional adaptation to psychosocial and physical challenges, with support from the CF team and the CF psychologist. This is particularly important when life gets challenging, with disease progression requiring increased treatments, breathing support and potentially transplantation. Planning for end of life remains a necessary aspect of care and should be discussed openly, honestly, with sensitivity and compassion for the person with CF and their family. CF teams should proactively recognise and address CF-specific health issues, and support mental and emotional wellbeing while accompanying people with CF and their families on their life journey.

Cystic Fibrosis Cases Missed by Newborn Bloodspot Screening-Towards a Consistent Definition and Data Acquisition.

Repeated European surveys of newborn bloodspot screening (NBS) have shown varied strategies for collecting missed cases, and information on data collection differs among countries/regions, hampering data comparison. The ECFS Neonatal Screening Working Group defined missed cases by NBS as either false negatives, protocol-related, concerning analytical issues, or non-protocol-related, concerning pre- and post-analytical issues. A questionnaire has been designed and sent to all key workers identified in each NBS programme to assess the feasibility of collecting data on missed cases, the stage of the NBS programme when the system failed, and individual patient data on each missed case.