Functional and radiological sinonasal outcomes of CFTR modulators for sinus disease in cystic fibrosis: A meta‐analysis

• Published in: International forum of allergy & rhinology Vol. 14; no. 10; pp. 1607 - 1617
• Main Authors: Tham, Tristan, Li, Felisha A., Schneider, Jacob R., Saleem, Matthew I., Werner, Michael T., Chaskes, Mark B., Tong, Charles C. L., Fastenberg, Judd H.
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: United States Wiley Subscription Services, Inc 01-10-2024
• Subjects: Aminophenols - therapeutic use; Benzodioxoles - therapeutic use; Clinical trials; Cystic fibrosis; Cystic Fibrosis - diagnostic imaging; Cystic Fibrosis - drug therapy; Cystic fibrosis transmembrane conductance regulator; Cystic Fibrosis Transmembrane Conductance Regulator - genetics; Humans; Lung diseases; Meta-analysis; Paranasal sinus; Paranasal Sinus Diseases - diagnostic imaging; Paranasal Sinus Diseases - drug therapy; paranasal sinuses; Paranasal Sinuses - diagnostic imaging; Patients; Quality control; Quinolones - therapeutic use; Rhinosinusitis; sinonasal outcome test; Treatment Outcome; cystic fibrosis transmembrane conductance regulator; sinonasal outcome test; paranasal sinuses
• ISSN: 2042-6976; 2042-6984; 2042-6984
• DOI: 10.1002/alr.23439

Background
Cystic fibrosis transmembrane conductance regulator (CFTR) modulators improve pulmonary outcomes in cystic fibrosis (CF) by stabilizing the CFTR protein on respiratory epithelial surfaces. To determine the efficacy of CFTR modulators on sinonasal outcomes in patients with CF, we performed a meta‐analysis of clinical trials to date that include functional and radiographic evidence of sinus disease.
Methods
English full‐text articles were searched in PubMed, Embase, and Scopus databases. Two reviewers screened articles and a third reviewer resolved disagreements. Articles were included if they reported functional or radiological sinonasal outcomes in patients with CF before and after CFTR modulator therapies. Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta‐Analyses guidelines were followed, and the risk of bias in non‐randomized studies of interventions tool was used for quality assessment. The generic inverse variance method with random effects model was used for meta‐analysis. Standardized mean difference (SMD) and mean difference (MD) were used as effect measurements.
Results
Seven prospective and two retrospective studies representing 248 patients were included in this analysis. There was a significant improvement in sinonasal outcome test‐22 scores on elexacaftor‒tezacaftor‒ivacaftor (MD = 12.80, [95% confidence interval, CI: 10.46‒15.13], p < 0.001, n = 222), with no heterogeneity detected (I2 = 0%, p = 0.820). There was also a significant improvement in Lund‒Mackay scores (SMD = 1.25, [95% CI: 0.58‒1.91], p < 0.001, n = 88), with heterogeneity detected (I2 = 67%, p = 0.030).
Conclusions
CFTR modulators improve functional and radiologic sinonasal outcomes. Given the utility of CFTR modulators, the treatment paradigm for CF‐related chronic rhinosinusitis promises to evolve.