The Utility of 6-Thioguanine Metabolite Levels in Managing Patients with Inflammatory Bowel Disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: We aimed at determining the utility of measuring 6-thioguanine (6-TG) and 6-methylmercaptopurine (6-MMP) in inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) patients on azathioprine (AZA) or 6-mercaptopurine (6-MP), whether the described therapeutic range for 6-TG (235-400 pmol/8 x 10(8) red blood cells, RBC) correlated with clinical remission or leukopenia, and if 6-MMP level was a marker for hepatotoxicity (>5,700 pmol/8 x 10(8) RBC). METHODS: Study eligibility included an IBD diagnosis of >6 months and either active disease or disease remission of <6 months and the use of AZA/6-MP for >10 wk consecutively. Metabolite levels were evaluated against clinical status, CBC, and hepatic parameters. RESULTS: Seventy-four of 166 AZA/6-MP users were eligible. 6-TG levels >235 pmol/8 x 10(8) RBC were found in 22/59 (38%) with active disease and in 7/15 with remission (47%, p= 0.16). There was a trend of higher 6-TG levels among those in remission versus those with active disease (mean 325 +/- 284 vs 223 +/- 159 pmol/8 x 10(8) RBC, p= 0.2). No hepatotoxicity was observed, although 12.2% had 6-MMP levels > 5,700 pmol/8 x 10(8) RBC. The correlation between 6-MP dose and 6-TG levels was weak (r = 0.22, p= 0.08). The 6-TG level did not correlate with WBC. There were five instances, each of markedly low levels of both 6-TG and 6-MMP, suggesting noncompliance and of marked 6-MMP levels versus 6-TG. CONCLUSIONS: There was a poor correlation between 6-TG levels and remission. Nonetheless, the measurements of these levels are helpful when patients are on high doses but not achieving remission since noncompliance or metabolism favoring 6-MMP can be established.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".