An Open-Label Pilot Study Using Thioguanine as a Therapeutic Alternative in Crohn's Disease Patients Resistant to 6-Mercaptopurine Therapy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND AIMS: A substantial number of patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) fail to achieve a complete clinical response with 6-mercaptopurine (6-MP) and azathioprine (AZA). Inability to achieve therapeutic 6-thioguanine nucleotide (6-TGN) levels due to the preferential overproduction of 6-methylmercaptopurine ribonucleotides (6-MMPR) upon dose escalation characterizes a newly described subgroup of IBD patients resistant to 6-MP/AZA therapy. Treatment with 6-thioguanine (6-TG), a related thiopurine, which forms 6-TGNs more directly may be beneficial in such patients. This pilot study evaluated the safety, tolerance, and efficacy of 6-TG in the subgroup of Crohn's disease (CD) patients failing to attain adequate disease control with traditional 6-MP/AZA therapy. METHODS: Ten CD patients with preferential 6-MMPR production upon 6-MP/AZA dose escalation were enrolled in an open-label pilot study. Seven of 10 patients had experienced dose-related 6-MP toxicities. RESULTS: Seventy percent of the patients (7 of 10) responded or were in remission at week 16. Clinical response was evident by week 4 in most. 6-TGN levels were nine-fold higher with 6-TG treatment than with 6-MP, whereas 6-MMPR levels were undetectable. No patient developed a recurrence of hepatic or hematological toxicity. CONCLUSIONS: 6-TG was a safer and more efficacious thiopurine in this subgroup of IBD patients resistant to 6-MP therapy. Larger controlled trials are warranted to further evaluate both the short- and long-term safety and efficacy in this subgroup of patients as well as a broader spectrum of IBD patients.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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".