ArticleFrontiers in medicine2026
Post-marketing safety profile of lumacaftor/ivacaftor in cystic fibrosis treatment: a pharmacovigilance analysis based on FAERS.
Article in Frontiers in medicine, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Lumacaftor/ivacaftor (LUM/IVA) is a CFTR modulator approved for the treatment of cystic fibrosis (CF) caused by the F508del mutation. While clinical trials have demonstrated its efficacy, the long-term safety profile remains inadequately characterized. This study aims to assess the real-world safety of LUM/IVA through a comprehensive analysis of adverse drug events (ADEs) reported in the U. S. FDA Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS) from the third quarter of 2015 to 2024. Methods: Disproportionality analysis including the reporting odds ratio (ROR) and Bayesian confidence Propagation Neural Network (BCPNN) was employed to identify potential safety signals associated with LUM/IVA. Furthermore, sensitivity analyses were conducted to eliminate potential confounding arising from concomitant medication use and underlying indications. Potential risk factors for LUM/IVA-associated depression were identified through logistic regression analysis. Finally, time-to-onset (TTO) analysis was conducted to evaluate the temporal patterns of ADEs. Results: A total of 7,843 LUM/IVA-related ADE reports were extracted, spanning 27 system organ classes (SOCs). We identified 221 positive signals, with 37 signals consistent with the drug label, 61 signals might be associated with disease progression, and 123 signals not listed in the drug label. Positive signals with most reported cases included infective pulmonary exacerbations ( Conclusion: This study provides a detailed real-world safety profile of LUM/IVA, identifying both known and unexpected adverse events. Our findings underscore the importance of continuous post-marketing surveillance and the need for updated drug label to reflect associated risks, particularly those related to psychiatric symptoms and long-term adverse effects. Personalized treatment strategies based on patient characteristics, including sex, are recommended to optimize safety during LUM/IVA therapy.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.