This page shows what was measured, who it was measured in, and what that does not settle.
What Elexacaftor does in the body
If the patient's genotype is unknown, an FDA-cleared CF genetic test should be used to confirm the presence of at least one variant in the CFTR gene that is either responsive based on clinical and/or in vitro data or results in production of CFTR protein.
Elexacaftor and tezacaftor bind to different sites on the CFTR protein and have an additive effect in facilitating the cellular processing and trafficking of select mutant forms of CFTR (including F508del-CFTR) to increase the amount of CFTR protein delivered to the cell surface compared to either molecule alone. Ivacaftor potentiates the channel open probability (or gating) of the CFTR protein at the cell surface. The combined effect of elexacaftor, tezacaftor and ivacaftor is increased quantity and function of CFTR at the cell surface, resulting in increased CFTR activity as measured both by CFTR-mediated chloride transport in vitro and by sweat chloride in patients with CF. CFTR Chloride Transport Assay in Fischer Rat Thyroid Cells Expressing Mutant CFTR Protein Effects of elexacaftor/tezacaftor/ivacaftor on chloride transport for mutant CFTR proteins was determined in Ussing chamber electrophysiology studies using a panel of Fischer Rat Thyroid (FRT) cell lines stably expressing individual mutant CFTR protein.
Why people take it. If the patient's genotype is unknown, an FDA-cleared CF genetic test should be used to confirm the presence of at least one variant in the CFTR gene that is either responsive based on clinical and/or in vitro data or results in production of CFTR protein.
What happened in people
RNAWiki has not yet published a reviewed conclusion for this use.
§ A fixed RNAWiki sentence
Where this came from
Wording RNAWiki always uses, not a finding about this substance.
No reviewed claim names a result for any goal on this record.
No source is stored against this line.
The limit that matters most
Not recorded.
Where it acts
Not recorded.
Kind of result
No result is published, so no kind of result applies yet
Supervision
RNAWiki has not recorded a supervision or regulatory status for this substance.
What the registries record it as
The substance registry classes this as chemical.
FDA substance registry · RRN67GMB0V · read 2026-08-29
Its recorded molecular formula is C26H34N7O4SF3, weighing 597.66.
US prescribing information · f354423a-85c2-41c3-a9db-0f3aee135d8d · read 2026-08-30
Where each sentence above came from
The use the label states, quoted from it. No plain-language version of this sentence has been written.
The use the label states, quoted from it. It is written for a clinician, not for a reader without medical training.
No statement of the main limit is recorded.
The four opening statements run to 256 words.
Words this page uses
Four words worth knowing first
Chosen from what this page shows, with each one explained before the word it depends on.
Biomarker
A biomarker is a number from a test that stands in for something about health.
A picture of it, and where the picture fails
A biomarker is like a fuel gauge.
Where that stops being true. A gauge is wired to the tank. Many biomarkers are only loosely tied to health.
What people get wrong. A better number is read as a better life. Several medicines improved a number and helped nobody.
A measurable indicator used as a substitute for a clinical outcome of interest.
Stand-in result
A stand-in result is a number measured because the real result takes too long.
A picture of it, and where the picture fails
It is like judging a journey by the speedometer rather than by arriving.
Where that stops being true. Speed does predict arrival. Many stand-in results do not predict the real one.
What people get wrong. A stand-in result is often reported as the result itself.
A surrogate endpoint substituted for a clinical endpoint, valid only where the substitution has been shown to hold.
What happened in people◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
What happened in people
Each card is one study: the exact question it asked, who was in it, and whether it showed what it set out to show.
Absolute Change in Percent Predicted Forced Expiratory Volume in 1second (ppFEV1)
✗ The study did not show it
Who was studied
NCT05076149
How many people
597
Study design
Phase 3
Compared against
Not recorded for this study
Kind of result
A number that stands in for health
What was found
Result not recorded on this page
Repeated elsewhere
Unreplicated
What this does not prove. A study that did not show an effect does not show that no effect exists anywhere.
The limits of this study, and where it came from
Main limit. No limitation is recorded for this study.
How far it carries. This study is recorded from the curated record, not from the registry match.
Form and route.
Interval reported. Not recorded in this summary
Written into the record, not signed off as a reviewed claim.
openFDA Drugs@FDA · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
openFDA NDC Directory · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
Europe PMC · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
Treatment Period: Safety and Tolerability as Assessed by Number of Participants With Treatment Emergent Adverse Events (TEAEs) and Serious Adverse Events (SAEs)
✗ The study did not show it
Who was studied
NCT03525574
How many people
507
Study design
Phase 3
Compared against
Not recorded for this study
Kind of result
A number that stands in for health
What was found
Result not recorded on this page
Repeated elsewhere
Unreplicated
What this does not prove. A study that did not show an effect does not show that no effect exists anywhere.
The limits of this study, and where it came from
Main limit. No limitation is recorded for this study.
How far it carries. This study is recorded from the curated record, not from the registry match.
Form and route.
Interval reported. Not recorded in this summary
Written into the record, not signed off as a reviewed claim.
openFDA Drugs@FDA · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
openFDA NDC Directory · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
Europe PMC · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
Absolute Change in FEV1 % Predicted From Week 0 to Week 6
✗ The study did not show it
Who was studied
NCT06350474
How many people
477
Study design
Not applicable
Compared against
Not recorded for this study
Kind of result
A number that stands in for health
What was found
Result not recorded on this page
Repeated elsewhere
Unreplicated
What this does not prove. A study that did not show an effect does not show that no effect exists anywhere.
The limits of this study, and where it came from
Main limit. No limitation is recorded for this study.
How far it carries. This study is recorded from the curated record, not from the registry match.
Form and route.
Interval reported. Not recorded in this summary
Written into the record, not signed off as a reviewed claim.
openFDA Drugs@FDA · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
openFDA NDC Directory · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
Europe PMC · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
Part A: Safety and Tolerability as Assessed by Number of Participants With Treatment-Emergent Adverse Events (TEAEs) and Serious Adverse Events (SAEs)
✗ The study did not show it
Who was studied
NCT04043806
How many people
458
Study design
Phase 3
Compared against
Not recorded for this study
Kind of result
A number that stands in for health
What was found
Result not recorded on this page
Repeated elsewhere
Unreplicated
What this does not prove. A study that did not show an effect does not show that no effect exists anywhere.
The limits of this study, and where it came from
Main limit. No limitation is recorded for this study.
How far it carries. This study is recorded from the curated record, not from the registry match.
Form and route.
Interval reported. Not recorded in this summary
Written into the record, not signed off as a reviewed claim.
openFDA Drugs@FDA · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
openFDA NDC Directory · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
Europe PMC · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
Absolute Change in Percent Predicted Forced Expiratory Volume in 1 Second (ppFEV1)
✗ The study did not show it
Who was studied
NCT05033080
How many people
435
Study design
Phase 3
Compared against
Not recorded for this study
Kind of result
A number that stands in for health
What was found
Result not recorded on this page
Repeated elsewhere
Unreplicated
What this does not prove. A study that did not show an effect does not show that no effect exists anywhere.
The limits of this study, and where it came from
Main limit. No limitation is recorded for this study.
How far it carries. This study is recorded from the curated record, not from the registry match.
Form and route.
Interval reported. Not recorded in this summary
Written into the record, not signed off as a reviewed claim.
openFDA Drugs@FDA · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
openFDA NDC Directory · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
Europe PMC · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
Absolute Change in Lung Clearance Index (LCI) through Week 52, Relative to Week 0, in Hypertonic Saline (HS Study) and Dornase Alfa (DA Study) Therapy Arms.
✗ The study did not show it
Who was studied
NCT07696338
How many people
405
Study design
Not applicable
Compared against
Not recorded for this study
Kind of result
A number that stands in for health
What was found
Result not recorded on this page
Repeated elsewhere
Unreplicated
What this does not prove. A study that did not show an effect does not show that no effect exists anywhere.
The limits of this study, and where it came from
Main limit. No limitation is recorded for this study.
How far it carries. This study is recorded from the curated record, not from the registry match.
Form and route.
Interval reported. Not recorded in this summary
Written into the record, not signed off as a reviewed claim.
openFDA Drugs@FDA · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
openFDA NDC Directory · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
Europe PMC · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
What we know
RNAWiki holds 6 written-up human studies for this substance, each with the question it asked.
How we know it
Each card names the study, the number of people and what the study set out to measure.
What this does not prove
These summaries were written by a person and have not been signed off as reviewed claims.
Why it matters
A study that failed is as informative as one that worked, and both are here.
What we still do not know
No reviewed claim exists, so no exact population, effect size or interval is published yet.
What happened in people◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
How close this is to real life
The top step is something a person would feel or care about. The bottom is a guess from software. Filled steps are where evidence exists for this substance.
□Living longer, or avoiding a major eventNo evidence recorded. Death, a heart attack, a stroke, a hospital stay.No registered study measures this.
□What a body can do day to dayNo evidence recorded. Walking, dressing, breathing, recovering.No registered study measures this.
□Measured performanceNo evidence recorded. How much was lifted, how far was run, how fast.No registered study measures this.
□Symptoms and quality of lifeNo evidence recorded. Pain, tiredness, mood, sleep, as the person rated it.No registered study measures this.
■A number that stands in for healthEvidence recorded. Cholesterol, blood sugar, bone density. A stand-in, not the thing itself.1 registered measure of this kind.
■A step measured inside a personEvidence recorded. Something measured in human tissue or human cells.A human record sits on the stored organism ladder.
□AnimalsNo evidence recorded. Mice, rats, dogs. Useful for ideas, not proof about people.No animal record is stored.
□Cells in a dishNo evidence recorded. Cells or chemistry on a bench, far from a whole body.No cell or bench record is stored.
□A guess from softwareNo evidence recorded. Nobody measured it. RNAWiki never publishes one as a finding.RNAWiki stores no prediction for this record. Software can suggest a link. RNAWiki does not publish one as a finding.
Higher on these steps means closer to something a person would feel. It does not mean better done.
What it would be like to take◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
Felt, measured, or meaningful
Three different things that get called the same word. Registered studies measured all three, and mixing them is how a blood test becomes a health claim.
Felt
Things a person could notice without a test.
No registered study measured anything of this kind.
Measured
Things only a test, a scale or a device shows.
concentration
Meaningful
Things that change how a life goes, not only a number.
No registered study measured anything of this kind.
A registered study says what someone planned to measure. It does not say what they found. A number moving is not the same as a life going better. The two are shown apart here.
Felt, but not shown to help. A person notices a change. No study showed it leads anywhere good.
Measured, but not felt. A number moves. The person notices nothing. Both can be true.
Measured, but not shown to matter. A number moves in the good direction. Nobody showed that lives went better.
Matters, but takes years. The result that counts may take longer than anyone would keep watching.
Names that fit none of the three (1)
forced expiratory volume in one second
These are harms, study-process measures, or names the rules did not recognise. They are shown rather than dropped.
What is missing or unclear◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
Were people like you studied?
RNAWiki cannot tell whether a study fits you. It can show who was in it, and where the result stops carrying.
Who was studied
No description of who was studied is recorded.
Who is missing from the studies
Which groups were under-represented in the studies has not been recorded for this substance. Pregnancy, breastfeeding, children, older adults, and people with liver or kidney conditions are commonly excluded from trials; nothing here says whether they were.
What the label states about particular groups
On pediatric, the label states: “The safety and effectiveness of TRIKAFTA in patients with CF younger than 2 years of age have not been established.”
US prescribing information · f354423a-85c2-41c3-a9db-0f3aee135d8d · read 2026-08-30
On older people, the label states: “Clinical studies of TRIKAFTA did not include any patients aged 65 years and older.”
US prescribing information · f354423a-85c2-41c3-a9db-0f3aee135d8d · read 2026-08-30
On people who are pregnant, the label states: “Risk Summary There are limited and incomplete human data from clinical trials on the use of TRIKAFTA or its individual components, elexacaftor, tezacaftor and ivacaftor, in pregnant women to inform a drug-associated risk.”
US prescribing information · f354423a-85c2-41c3-a9db-0f3aee135d8d · read 2026-08-30
On people who are breastfeeding, the label states: “Risk Summary There is no information regarding the presence of elexacaftor, tezacaftor, or ivacaftor in human milk, the effects on the breastfed infant, or the effects on milk production.”
US prescribing information · f354423a-85c2-41c3-a9db-0f3aee135d8d · read 2026-08-30
On people with reduced liver function, the label states: “Severe Hepatic Impairment (Child-Pugh Class C): Should not be used.”
US prescribing information · f354423a-85c2-41c3-a9db-0f3aee135d8d · read 2026-08-30
On people with reduced kidney function, the label states: “TRIKAFTA has not been studied in patients with severe renal impairment or end-stage renal disease.”
US prescribing information · f354423a-85c2-41c3-a9db-0f3aee135d8d · read 2026-08-30
Where the result stopped carrying
This is a scope explorer, not a diagnosis engine.
It shows who was studied so you can see whether people similar to you were included.
RNAWiki cannot tell whether a study fits you. It can show who was in it.
What it would be like to take◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
Why it might seem to do nothing
A real effect and a noticed effect are different things. These are the recorded reasons the two come apart.
It was studied for a different goal
The studies measured something else entirely.
On this record: Some registered studies measured things that match no goal on this page.
It was studied in different people
The people in the studies were not much like the reader.
On this record: Which groups were under-represented in the studies has not been recorded for this substance. Pregnancy, breastfeeding, children, older adults, and people with liver or kidney conditions are commonly excluded from trials; nothing here says whether they were.
The evidence may simply be wrong
Small early studies often do not hold up.
On this record: RNAWiki has not yet published a reviewed conclusion for this use.
Other reasons RNAWiki checked and found nothing for (10)
A different form was studied
The studied form is not the form on the shelf. Nothing in this record points to this reason.
There was nothing to correct
Where a level is already normal, topping it up may change nothing. Nothing in this record points to this reason.
Something else had to happen too
In the studies it was paired with training, a diet or another treatment. Nothing in this record points to this reason.
The change is too small to feel
A real change can still sit below what a person notices. Nothing in this record points to this reason.
Day-to-day swing hides it
Sleep, food, stress and time of day move most numbers more than this would. Nothing in this record points to this reason.
Not enough time yet
The studies ran longer than the person has waited. Nothing in this record points to this reason.
It was not taken as studied
Missed days change the result, and studies count them. Nothing in this record points to this reason.
Something else changed at the same time
Two changes at once cannot be told apart afterwards. Nothing in this record points to this reason.
The product may not be what it says
Contents of a sold product are not always what the label states. Nothing in this record points to this reason.
No recorded reason
RNAWiki has nothing stored that would explain it. Nothing in this record points to this reason.
None of these is a reason to take more. Taking more is not a step this page ever suggests.
What it would be like to take◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
What taking it involves
The recorded facts about getting hold of it and using it. Nothing here is a suggestion about what you should do.
How it is supplied
Prescription only
❝ Quoted from a source
Where this came from
Copied from a source RNAWiki stored, with the source named.
Read from the recorded approval status.
No source is stored against this line.
Form and route
Not recorded.
∅ Nothing recorded
Where this came from
RNAWiki holds nothing here and says so rather than guessing.
No form or route is recorded.
No source is stored against this line.
Who oversees it
RNAWiki has not recorded a supervision or regulatory status for this substance.
❝ Quoted from a source
Where this came from
Copied from a source RNAWiki stored, with the source named.
No register row and no identity class settled the question.
No source is stored against this line.
What is in the pack
Not recorded.
∅ Nothing recorded
Where this came from
RNAWiki holds nothing here and says so rather than guessing.
Nothing is recorded about product quality.
No source is stored against this line.
Where it is registered
Regulatory records are listed in the technical disclosure at the foot of this page.
# Counted from records
Where this came from
A count of rows RNAWiki holds. It describes our records, not your body.
Register entries are stored per jurisdiction and shown with their dates.
No source is stored against this line.
Why people stop
Not recorded.
∅ Nothing recorded
Where this came from
RNAWiki holds nothing here and says so rather than guessing.
No record of why people stopped taking it is stored for this substance.
No source is stored against this line.
What it would be like to take∅Nothing found in the sources checked
What can go wrong
Sorted by where each line came from. A regulator's label and a report somebody sent in are not the same kind of fact.
∅Nothing found in the sources checked
No harm is recorded against this substance in the sources RNAWiki checked. Finding nothing is not the same as showing there is nothing.
The sources listed were searched and held nothing. That is not the same as nothing existing.
Over a long time. No completed tested study window is recorded, so long-term effects are not established by the registry record.
Groups the studies covered thinly. Which groups were under-represented in the studies has not been recorded for this substance. Pregnancy, breastfeeding, children, older adults, and people with liver or kidney conditions are commonly excluded from trials; nothing here says whether they were.
What is missing or unclear∅Nothing found in the sources checked
Does the exact form matter?
Evidence belongs to the exact thing that was tested. A different salt, a different mixture or a different preparation is a different question.
The form that was studied
Not recorded.
∅ Nothing recorded
Where this came from
RNAWiki holds nothing here and says so rather than guessing.
The exact form studied is not recorded.
No source is stored against this line.
What is sold
Not recorded.
∅ Nothing recorded
Where this came from
RNAWiki holds nothing here and says so rather than guessing.
Nothing further is recorded about which forms are sold.
No source is stored against this line.
Evidence carries across two names for one substance. It does not carry across a salt, a mirror form or a mixture.
What it would be like to take◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
What you could measure
This one is decided with a clinician, so this section holds questions to ask rather than a plan to run.
RNAWiki could not confidently classify this substance, so no self-experiment plan is offered.
Questions worth asking
Which of the trials of Elexacaftor studied people like me?
What was measured, and for how long?
Was the result a laboratory value or a health outcome?
What would we watch for, and when would we stop?
Tracking can show whether something changed for you. It cannot show what caused it.
RNAWiki records evidence. It does not say whether this substance is right for you.
What is missing or unclear◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
What nobody knows yet
Open questions, each with why it is open and what would close it.
How much did people take in the studies?
The sources RNAWiki checked hold nothing for this field.
Why it matters. A result belongs to an amount. Without the amount the result floats free.
What would answer it
A stored source that records it, and a reviewer to sign it off.
Last checked 2026-09-04. Searched: The sources listed in the receipts at the foot of this page.
How fast does the body clear it?
The sources RNAWiki checked hold nothing for this field.
Why it matters. Without this, nothing on this page can say how long anything lasts.
What would answer it
A stored source that records it, and a reviewer to sign it off.
Last checked 2026-09-04. Searched: The sources listed in the receipts at the foot of this page.
Missing populations
Which groups were under-represented in the studies has not been recorded.
Why it matters. Recorded by the evidence model as a gap on this record.
What would answer it
A study that measures it, and a reviewer to sign it off.
Last checked 2026-09-04. Searched: The sources listed in the receipts at the foot of this page.
Missing long-term data
No completed tested study window is recorded.
Why it matters. Recorded by the evidence model as a gap on this record.
What would answer it
A study that measures it, and a reviewer to sign it off.
Last checked 2026-09-04. Searched: The sources listed in the receipts at the foot of this page.
No reviewed conclusion
RNAWiki has not yet published a reviewed conclusion for this use.
Why it matters. Recorded by the evidence model as a gap on this record.
What would answer it
A study that measures it, and a reviewer to sign it off.
Last checked 2026-09-04. Searched: The sources listed in the receipts at the foot of this page.
Missing interaction studies
No interaction was found in the registers checked. Not finding one is not the same as showing there is none.
Why it matters. Recorded by the evidence model as a gap on this record.
What would answer it
A study that measures it, and a reviewer to sign it off.
Last checked 2026-09-04. Searched: The sources listed in the receipts at the foot of this page.
Formulation uncertainty
Several salts, forms or products of Elexacaftor are recorded. Results from one form may not transfer to another.
Why it matters. Recorded by the evidence model as a gap on this record.
What would answer it
A study that measures it, and a reviewer to sign it off.
Last checked 2026-09-04. Searched: The sources listed in the receipts at the foot of this page.
Mechanism not reviewed
No reviewed mechanism story exists for this substance.
Why it matters. Recorded by the evidence model as a gap on this record.
What would answer it
A study that measures it, and a reviewer to sign it off.
Last checked 2026-09-04. Searched: The sources listed in the receipts at the foot of this page.
What happened in people◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
Check any of this yourself
Every line above traced back to the study it came from. This is the technical layer, and the vocabulary changes here.
Where else this substance is registered
FDA substance identifier (UNII)
RRN67GMB0V
CAS registry number
2216712-66-0
PubChem compound
134587348
WHO international nonproprietary name list entry
11180
RxNorm concept
2256951
EMA substance identifier
100000177684
DrugBank
DB15444
Checks this page had to pass
✓ Passed
Identity resolved
no open identity hold
✓ Passed
No unresolved merge across substance families
no quarantine open
✓ Passed
Every public sentence names a source
The opening statement carries the origin: Quoted from a stored source.
✗ Not passed
Trial roles classified for highlighted evidence
No registered study is classified as testing this substance.
✓ Passed
No internal keys in reader text
enforced by the copy-contract test over the rendered page
✗ Not passed
Safety mode resolved
No register row and no identity class settled the question.
✓ Passed
Canonical metadata present
slug and display name present
What is missing or unclear◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
How this medicine reached us
Kept near the foot of the page. A historical event moves up only when it changes something about this substance today.
What the approval register records
2 approved applications cover products containing this substance. The earliest was NDA212273, approved 20191021 to VERTEX PHARMS INC.
This order is fixed in code and does not count clicks or time on the page.
What is not here
7 questions this page could not answer
These sections were prepared and left out because there was nothing to put in them. They are listed rather than hidden, so the gaps in this record are visible.
What was measured, goal by goal — found nothing in the sources checked.
The path through the body — found nothing in the sources checked.
How long anything takes — found nothing in the sources checked.
What it may clash with — found nothing in the sources checked.
Other ways to the same goal — found nothing in the sources checked.
Claims that go past the evidence — found nothing in the sources checked.
What changed on this page — found nothing in the sources checked.
The record as stored
The full record, for auditing
Everything above is built from what is below. This layer keeps the technical vocabulary, record identifiers and every stored row, so a reader who wants to check the page can.
Recorded evidence blocks (8)
Q1
What did Elexacaftor's largest trial (500 people) and its longest (8.8 years) measure?
500 people in Elexacaftor's largest registered study, 8.8 years in its longest registered window, measuring Concentration (ng/mL). ClinicalTrials.gov · 2026-09-01
5 na or unstated, 3 phase4, 2 phase2, 1 phase1; NCT04602468; 2029-07-01; no ageing endpoint recorded. Last human test completed 2025, NCT05743946.
Interpretation These counts include studies where Elexacaftor was a comparison treatment, a background treatment or an exposure in an observational study, and the longest window may be a planned end date. Trial roles have not yet been classified for this record.
Show the evidence
na or unstated
5
phase4
3
phase2
2
phase1
1
Last recorded human testNCT05743946
2025-12-23
recorded 2026-09-01 · last checked 2026-09-04
Q2
Elexacaftor was tested only in human — what did it show?
Interpretation Concentration (ng/mL) — the recorded outcome words.
Show the evidence
humanNCT07148739
biomarker; Concentration (ng/mL); 10
recorded 2026-09-01 · last checked 2026-09-04
Q3
Did Elexacaftor move Horvath, and by how much?
Horvath: "In the present study, we studied epigenetic age, applying the Horvath clock model, in 52 adult subjects with CF, all treated with elexacaftor/tezacaftor/ivacaftor (ETI)." Europe PMC · epigenetic clock search · 2025-07-10
1 recorded sentence; 2025; biomarker
Show the evidence
HorvathPMID 40724864
2025; "In the present study, we studied epigenetic age, applying the Horvath clock model, in 52 adult subjects with CF, all treated with elexacaftor/tezacaftor/ivacaftor (ETI)."
recorded 2025-07-10 · last checked 2026-09-04
Q4
Could one person measure Elexacaftor's effect on forced expiratory volume in one second?
Forced expiratory volume in one second: measured in Elexacaftor's trials.
Interpretation forced expiratory volume in one second is the recorded endpoint.
Show the evidence
biomarkers
forced expiratory volume in one second; 2026-09-01
concentration; 2026-09-01
human trials at or under30
2
Not recorded for this substance
a recorded half-life
smallest human trial
17; NCT05699148; NA_OR_UNSTATED; the smallest recorded human enrolment at or below 30; the registry states no direction of its result; UNKNOWN
Q5
Which of Elexacaftor's 5 ongoing trials reports first?
To determine the effect of treatment with TCMT on pulmonary function (FEV1 and LCI) in children and adults with CF over a period of 2 years.; To examine the long-term pulmonary and nutritional effects of CFTR modulators.; latest 2030-12
Show the evidence
Trial
NCT04602468
"Real World Clinical Outcomes With Novel Modulator Therapy Combinations in People With CF (RECOVER)"; n 237; "To determine the effect of treatment with TCMT on pulmonary function (FEV1 and LCI) in children and adults with CF over a period of 2 years."; 2029-07-01
NCT05200429
"Canadian Observational Study Evaluating the Long-term IMPACT of Cystic Fibrosis Transmembrane Conductance Regulator (CFTR) Modulators on People With CF"; n 500; "To examine the long-term pulmonary and nutritional effects of CFTR modulators."; 2027-12-31
NCT05279040
"Trikafta Exercise Study in Cystic Fibrosis"; n 20; "Change in Iso-time Dyspnea Rating From Baseline (Visit 2) to Visit 3 and 4 During Constant-load Exercise Tests."; 2027-01
NCT07148739
"Ensuring Access to Optimal Therapy in CF: The ENACT Study"; n 100; "Concentration (ng/mL)"; 2030-12
NCT07363304
"Impact of Elexacaftor-Tezacaftor-Ivacaftor Treatment on Metabolic, Epigenetic and Fecal Microbiota Profiles in People With Cystic Fibrosis."; n 150; "Difference in DNA methylation level before and after the start of therapy"; 2029-04-30
recorded 2026-09-01 · last checked 2026-09-04
Q6
At the median, Elexacaftor's trials enrolled 115 people — anything larger?
Median enrolment
115
Largest enrolment
500
Registered trials counted
10
Q7
Elexacaftor and P-GP, BCRP and CYP1A2: shared by which compounds?
P-GP, BCRP and CYP1A2 appear in Elexacaftor's recorded interaction sentences, 11 in all. openfda-label+europepmc · 2026-08-30
Interpretation pharmacokinetics
Show the evidence
CYP1A2
pharmacokinetics
Based on in vitro results, elexacaftor, tezacaftor and ivacaftor are not likely to induce CYP3A, CYP1A2 and CYP2B6.
pharmacokinetics
Potential for Elexacaftor, Tezacaftor and/or Ivacaftor to Affect Other Drugs Based on in vitro results, elexacaftor and tezacaftor have a low potential to inhibit CYP1A2, CYP2B6, CYP2C8, CYP2C9, CYP2C19, CYP2D6 and CYP3A4, whereas ivacaftor has the potential to inhibit CYP2C8, CYP2C9 and CYP3A.
CYP2B6
pharmacokinetics
Based on in vitro results, elexacaftor, tezacaftor and ivacaftor are not likely to induce CYP3A, CYP1A2 and CYP2B6.
pharmacokinetics
Potential for Elexacaftor, Tezacaftor and/or Ivacaftor to Affect Other Drugs Based on in vitro results, elexacaftor and tezacaftor have a low potential to inhibit CYP1A2, CYP2B6, CYP2C8, CYP2C9, CYP2C19, CYP2D6 and CYP3A4, whereas ivacaftor has the potential to inhibit CYP2C8, CYP2C9 and CYP3A.
CYP2C19pharmacokinetics
Potential for Elexacaftor, Tezacaftor and/or Ivacaftor to Affect Other Drugs Based on in vitro results, elexacaftor and tezacaftor have a low potential to inhibit CYP1A2, CYP2B6, CYP2C8, CYP2C9, CYP2C19, CYP2D6 and CYP3A4, whereas ivacaftor has the potential to inhibit CYP2C8, CYP2C9 and CYP3A.
CYP2C8
pharmacokinetics
However, clinical studies showed that the combination regimen of tezacaftor/ivacaftor is not an inhibitor of CYP3A and ivacaftor is not an inhibitor of CYP2C8 or CYP2D6.
pharmacokinetics
Potential for Elexacaftor, Tezacaftor and/or Ivacaftor to Affect Other Drugs Based on in vitro results, elexacaftor and tezacaftor have a low potential to inhibit CYP1A2, CYP2B6, CYP2C8, CYP2C9, CYP2C19, CYP2D6 and CYP3A4, whereas ivacaftor has the potential to inhibit CYP2C8, CYP2C9 and CYP3A.
CYP2C9pharmacokinetics
Potential for Elexacaftor, Tezacaftor and/or Ivacaftor to Affect Other Drugs Based on in vitro results, elexacaftor and tezacaftor have a low potential to inhibit CYP1A2, CYP2B6, CYP2C8, CYP2C9, CYP2C19, CYP2D6 and CYP3A4, whereas ivacaftor has the potential to inhibit CYP2C8, CYP2C9 and CYP3A.
CYP2D6
pharmacokinetics
However, clinical studies showed that the combination regimen of tezacaftor/ivacaftor is not an inhibitor of CYP3A and ivacaftor is not an inhibitor of CYP2C8 or CYP2D6.
pharmacokinetics
Potential for Elexacaftor, Tezacaftor and/or Ivacaftor to Affect Other Drugs Based on in vitro results, elexacaftor and tezacaftor have a low potential to inhibit CYP1A2, CYP2B6, CYP2C8, CYP2C9, CYP2C19, CYP2D6 and CYP3A4, whereas ivacaftor has the potential to inhibit CYP2C8, CYP2C9 and CYP3A.
CYP3A4pharmacokinetics
Potential for Elexacaftor, Tezacaftor and/or Ivacaftor to Affect Other Drugs Based on in vitro results, elexacaftor and tezacaftor have a low potential to inhibit CYP1A2, CYP2B6, CYP2C8, CYP2C9, CYP2C19, CYP2D6 and CYP3A4, whereas ivacaftor has the potential to inhibit CYP2C8, CYP2C9 and CYP3A.
recorded 2026-08-30 · last checked 2026-09-04
Q8
Was Elexacaftor studied with exercise?
exercise is named in Elexacaftor's label sentences: "Muscle health has not been thoroughly analyzed in pediatric cystic fibrosis (CF) under elexacaftor/tezacaftor/ivacaftor (ETI) therapy together with exercise interventions in randomized controlled trials (RCTs)." openfda-label+europepmc · 2026-08-30
1 recorded statement; exercise
Show the evidence
exercise
Muscle health has not been thoroughly analyzed in pediatric cystic fibrosis (CF) under elexacaftor/tezacaftor/ivacaftor (ETI) therapy together with exercise interventions in randomized controlled trials (RCTs).
recorded 2026-08-30 · last checked 2026-09-04
Where it is registeredIdentifiers, relations and other names
ClinicalTrials.gov — US Government work · Europe PMC — metadata only, under the recorded legal gate · derived from this page's own recorded fields; no external licence · openFDA / DailyMed — US Government work
✗ required summary fields resolved: 3 required field(s) not terminal: Best-supported result, Biggest unanswered question, Human evidence
✓ public claims reviewed: 0 reviewed claim(s); drafts are never rendered
✓ source coverage passed: 7 source rows
✓ no critical contamination: no quarantine open
✓ canonical metadata passed: slug and display name present
✓ no raw internal fields: enforced by the copy-contract test over the rendered page
This is a record of evidence. It is not medical advice, and it does not say this substance suits you. Nothing here says any substance on RNAWiki is appropriate for a child.