Thiopurine methyl-transferase activity and azathioprine metabolite concentrations do not predict clinical outcome in thiopurine-treated inflammatory bowel disease patients.

La Princesa and Instituto de Investigación Sanitaria Princesa, Madrid, Spain.
Alimentary Pharmacology & Therapeutics (Impact Factor: 4.55). 07/2011; 34(5):544-54. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2036.2011.04756.x
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Low thiopurine-methyl-transferase (TPMT) activity and high 6-thioguanine-nucleotide (6TGN) concentrations have been linked to therapeutic success in inflammatory bowel disease patients treated with thiopurines; however, this has not been implemented in clinical practice.
To identify a therapeutic threshold value for TPMT or 6TGN concentrations, and their capability to predict treatment safety and efficacy.
Prospective multicentre study including steroid-resistant/dependent patients starting thiopurines. The TPMT activity was determined at inclusion (>5 U/mL required). Azathioprine metabolites [6TGN, 6-methyl-mercaptopurine ribonucleotides (6MMP), and 6TGN/6MMP and 6TGN/TPMT ratios] were periodically monitored during steroid tapering and after withdrawal for 6 months or until a new flare occurred.
A total of 113 patients were analysed (62% clinical response). Areas under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve (AUC) relating clinical response and metabolite levels at 2, 4 and 6 months after steroid withdrawal were less than 0.7. The AUCs relating final response and initial TPMT activity or metabolite concentrations at 2, 4, 8 and 16 weeks after starting thiopurines were less than 0.7. No cut-off point with worthwhile sensitivity/specificity was found. Eight (7%) patients developed thiopurine-related toxicity that could not be linked to TPMT activity or 6TGN levels.
Our results do not support determination of TPMT activity or 6TGN concentrations to predict treatment outcome, and no useful serum metabolites threshold value to adjust the drug's dose was identified.

  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Introduction: Corticosteroids alone or in combination with azathioprine are the mainstay therapies of autoimmune hepatitis. Suboptimal responses (treatment failure, partial response, drug toxicity), frequent relapse after drug withdrawal, and the emergence of alternative immunosuppressive medications have fueled the pursuit of new treatments. The goals of this review are to present current management strategies and evolving interventions. Areas covered: PubMed searches from 1970 - 2014 provide the bases for this review. Corticosteroid regimens should be administered until resolution of symptoms, laboratory tests, and liver tissue abnormalities. Treatment failure warrants high doses of the original regimen, and relapse warrants re-treatment followed by long-term maintenance with azathioprine. The calcineurin inhibitors, budesonide, and mycophenolate mofetil are evolving as frontline therapies, and they may be considered as salvage therapies with the exception of budesonide. Rapamycin, rituximab, and infliximab have also rescued refractory patients but experiences are limited. Anti-oxidants, recombinant molecules, mAbs, and modulators of critical cell populations are key prospects. Expert opinion: Autoimmune hepatitis must be managed by multiple medications that supplement or supplant current regimens depending on the clinical situation. Rescue therapies will emerge as adjunctive interventions to minimize tissue damage (prevent fibrosis and hepatocyte apoptosis) and improve immune tolerance (regulatory T cell manipulations).
    Expert Opinion on Pharmacotherapy 06/2014; · 2.86 Impact Factor
  • Source
    Alimentary Pharmacology & Therapeutics 02/2012; 35(3). · 4.55 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Many placebo controlled trials and meta-analyses evaluated the efficacy of different drugs for the treatment of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), including immunosuppressants and biologics. Their use is indicated in moderate to severe disease in non responders to corticosteroids and in steroid-dependent patients, as induction and maintainance treatment. Infliximab, as well as cyclosporine, is considered a second line therapy in the case of severe ulcerative colitis, or non-responders to intravenous corticosteroids. An adequate dosage and duration of therapy with thiopurines should be reached before evaluating their efficacy. Methotrexate is a valid option in patients with Crohn's disease but its use is confined to patients who are intolerant or non-responders to thiopurines. Evidence for the use of methotrexate in ulcerative colitis is insufficient. The use of thalidomide and mycophenolate mofetil is not recommended in patients with inflammatory bowel disease, these treatments could be considered in case of failure of all other therapeutic options. In patients with moderately active ulcerative colitis, refractory to thiopurines, the use of tacrolimus is considered an alternative to biologics. An increase of the dose or a decrease in the interval of administration of biological treatment could be useful in the presence of an incomplete clinical response. In the case of primary failure of an anti-tumor necrosis factor alpha a switch to another one should be considered. Data on the efficacy of combination therapy are up to now insufficient to consider this strategy in all IBD patients. The final outcome of the treatment should be considered the clinical remission, with mucosa healing, and not the clinical response. The evaluation of serum concentration of thiopurine methyl transferase activity, thiopurine metabolites, biologic serum levels and antibiologic antibodies could be useful for the management of the treatment but it has not been routinely applied in clinical practice. The evidence of high risk development of lymphoma and cutaneous malignancies should be considered in patients treated with immunosuppressants and biologics for a long period.
    World journal of gastroenterology : WJG. 08/2014; 20(29):9675-9690.

Full-text (2 Sources)

Available from
Sep 15, 2014