Question · asked by 1 review
Summary of findings ‐ dual therapy: lumacaftor plus ivacaftor (once daily) vs placebo: FEV1 % predicted: relative change from baseline
What each review found
Current versions only| Finding | Effect | Studies | GRADE certainty |
|---|---|---|---|
Summary of findings ‐ dual therapy: lumacaftor plus ivacaftor (once daily) vs placebo FEV1 % predicted: relative change from baseline · adults and children with cystic fibrosis Corrector therapies (with or without potentiators) for people with cystic fibrosis with class II CFTR gene… (2023) · Cochrane Headline outcomes only | no estimate extracted | 3 studies · 1134 participants | High |
Summary of findings ‐ dual therapy: lumacaftor plus ivacaftor (once daily) vs placebo FEV1 % predicted: relative change from baseline · adults and children with cystic fibrosis Corrector therapies (with or without potentiators) for people with cystic fibrosis with class II CFTR gene… (2020) · Cochrane Headline outcomes onlyearlier version CD010966.PUB3, superseded | no estimate extracted | 2 studies · 1072 participants | High |
Summary of findings ‐ Lumacaftor plus ivacaftor (once daily) vs placebo FEV1 % predicted: relative change from baseline · adults and children with cystic fibrosis Corrector therapies (with or without potentiators) for people with cystic fibrosis with class II CFTR gene… (2018) · Cochrane Headline outcomes onlyearlier version CD010966.PUB2, superseded | no estimate extracted | 2 studies · 1072 participants | High |
Findings are shown side by side, never pooled across reviews.
The reviews
| Review | Searched up to | Included studies | AMSTAR 2 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Corrector therapies (with or without potentiators) for people with cystic fibrosis with class II CFTR gene variants (most commonly F508del) 2023 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only | Not reported | list not extracted yet | Not assessed |
Studies behind the findings
None of these reviews ties its included studies to this outcome in the data here. Cochrane reviews and reviews with headline outcomes only do not list their studies yet.
How reviews are matched to this question
Reviews word the same question differently. Four decision models (TypeSafe's Jev, Liquid AI's d1-ultra, SubQ Snap and Baseten's Elephant) judged each wording of the population, intervention, comparator and outcome against the others; two wordings count as the same when at least three of them agree and none clearly disagrees, and findings count as this question only when all four elements match. Timing, setting and subgroup never split a question: they are shown on each finding.