Azathioprine for maintenance of remission in Crohn's disease: Benefits outweigh the risk of lymphoma
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND & AIMS: Azathioprine is a commonly used and effective treatment for maintenance of remission for patients with steroid-dependent Crohn's disease (CD). However, azathioprine therapy is associated with an increased risk of non-Hodgkin's lymphoma. The objective of this analysis was to determine the impact of azathioprine therapy on survival and quality-adjusted life expectancy after accounting for both the benefits of therapy and potential increased risk of lymphoma. METHODS: A decision analysis using a Markov model depicting the natural history of alternative management strategies for maintenance of remission in patients with CD was performed. RESULTS: In the base-case analysis, treatment of CD patients with a steroid-induced remission with azathioprine resulted in an average increase in life expectancy of 0.04 years and 0.05 quality-adjusted years. The incremental gain in life expectancy decreased with increasing patient age and increasing risk of lymphoma. CONCLUSIONS: Therapy with azathioprine to preserve remission in patients with CD results in increased quality-adjusted life expectancy. This increase was greatest in young patients who have the lowest baseline risk of non-Hodgkin's lymphoma and who have the greatest life expectancy in the absence of a CD-related death.
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 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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) | 0.002 | 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".