An observational study in Cystic Fibrosis and Infections, sponsored by University of Pennsylvania. Recruiting at 4 sites in United States. Open to participants aged 18 Years and older. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2026-08-19.
Sponsored by University of Pennsylvania · Observational
Elexacaftor/Tezacaftor/Ivacaftor or Trikafta improves lung health in people with cystic fibrosis (CF), including decreased cough and mucous production. Diagnosing lung infections has become more challenging due to the decrease in sputum and rise of telehealth services. While the option of collecting sputum samples at home and sending them by mail may be feasible, uncertainty remains about how the collection of samples outside of clinic and delays in testing while in the mail impact infection detection. This study will compare bacterial cultures using sputum samples collected at home versus samples collected in clinic (saline-induced sputum and throat swab). This study seeks to shed light on how valuable home collected samples can be and help us better understand the usefulness of home-collected sputum samples for both clinical and research purposes.
The clinical standard of care of people with CF is conducting sputum culture for infection surveillance and detection. However, the introduction of Elexacaftor/Tezacaftor/Ivacaftor (ETI) and adoption of telehealth encounters have reduced the number of respiratory cultures and shifted the types of respiratory sampling over the past three years. People with CF on ETI who were previously able to expectorate sputum are now less likely to produce sputum during clinic visits. As a result, there has been an increase in oropharyngeal (OP) swab sampling in adults. OP swabs lack sensitivity for bacterial detection. Despite clinical improvements related to ETI use (eg lung function, decreased pulmonary exacerbation rates), chronic bacterial infection persists in CF airways. Therefore, additional non-invasive methods for infection surveillance are needed. The investigators propose remote collection of sputum is a promising option for detecting bacteria and fungi in people with CF. Yet, delayed processing and temperature storage conditions may impact the recovery of CF pathogens in remotely collected sputa. To address this, the investigators propose an observational study testing the accuracy and validity of remotely collected sputum. The study will achieve this by comparing CF pathogen detection by culture in sputum samples collected at home to those obtained through induced sputum and OP swabs during clinic visits. The aims of the study are to:
The study will enroll 150 participants. The sensitivity, specificity, overall accuracy, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV) with 95% confidence intervals will be calculated for the home-collected sputum method and clinic-induced sputum culture performed the local clinical laboratory as the gold standard (Aim 1). A receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve will be plotted and area under the curve (AUC) will be calculated. Similar analyses will be conducted for Aim 2 using OP swab as the clinical gold standard. For Aim 3, the investigators will conduct non-inferiority analyses to compare pathogen density in ambient and cooled shipping conditions. The findings will provide valuable insights to clinics and laboratories regarding the reliability and acceptability of using home-collected sputum samples for microbiological evaluation. Ultimately, this project has the potential to introduce a non-invasive and minimally burdensome method for infection detection and diagnosis in people with CF.
Adults with cystic fibrosis from three cystic fibrosis centers
Exclusion Criteria:
People with cystic fibrosis age 18 years or older without a history of solid organ transplantation.
Pseudomonas aeruginosa positive culture
Time frame: at baseline
Culture-positive detection of Staphylococcus aureus, Burkholderia cepacia complex, Aspergillus fumigatus and other CF pathogens.
Time frame: at baseline
Bacterial density in sputum measured by colony forming unit.
Time frame: at baseline
Plan to share: No
No publications or documents are linked to this record.
Eligibility is decided by the study team. Share this record with your doctor or contact the team directly.
Contact study teamGet an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.
Sign in to followQuestions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.
Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.
Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.
University of Pennsylvania