A randomised, double-blind, parallel-group trial to assess mercaptopurine versus placebo to prevent or delay recurrence of Crohn’s disease following surgical resection (TOPPIC)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background Crohn’s disease (CD) is a chronic, relapsing, inflammatory bowel disease. Up to 65% of patients with CD require an operation to control the disease within 10 years. Both endoscopic and clinical recurrence is common within 2 years of operation, with re-operation rates cumulating at 5% of patients per year. Objectives This study assessed if the use of mercaptopurine (MP) can prevent or delay postoperative recurrence in CD. Design An individually randomised, multicentre, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial with follow-up at 6, 13, 31, 49, 67, 85, 103, 121, 139 and 157 weeks. Setting Twenty-nine tertiary referral hospitals in the UK. Participants Those aged ≥ 16 years in Scotland (or aged ≥ 18 years in England and Wales) with a histologically confirmed diagnosis of CD (according to the Lennard-Jones criteria) and surgical intervention ≤ 3 months prior to randomisation to remove all observable disease at ileocolonic or small bowel resections. Patients were excluded if they had a known intolerance of or hypersensitivity to thiopurines; were known to require further surgery; underwent strictureplasty alone; had a stoma; or had an active or untreated malignancy or absent thiopurineS-methyltransferase (TPMT) activity. Prior to randomisation any postoperative infections were fully treated and existing treatments for CD were stopped. Intervention Daily oral dose of MP or placebo, with dose adjusted according to body weight (kg) and TPMT status. Blood samples for genetic and serological analysis were taken at randomisation with additional blood and stool samples collected at weeks 0, 13, 49, 103 and 157 for central analysis of drug metabolite and faecal calprotectin levels, with endoscopic assessment at weeks 49 and 157. Main outcome measures The primary end point was clinical recurrence of CD (Crohn’s Disease Activity Index score of > 150 points plus 100-point rise) and the need for anti-inflammatory rescue therapy or primary surgical intervention. Secondary end points included faecal calprotectin and thioguanine levels, and assessment of endoscopic recurrence. The primary analysis was adjusted for baseline values of previous treatment with MP and azathioprine, with the adjusted analysis considered to be the primary analysis. Results Between June 2008 and April 2012, 240 patients were enrolled and received at least one dose of the study drug. A total of 128 (53%) participants were randomised to receive MP and 112 (47%) to receive placebo. No randomised patients were excluded from the analysis. More patients achieved the primary end point in the placebo group (n = 26, 23.2%) than in the MP group (n = 16, 12.5%), with an adjustedp-value of 0.073 [hazard ratio (HR) 0.535, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.27 to 1.06]. Of the smokers on MP, 3 out of 29 (10.3%) had clinical recurrence versus 12 out of 26 (46.2%) on placebo, demonstrating that MP was effective at preventing postoperative recurrence in smokers (HR 0.127, 95% CI 0.04 to 0.46) but not in non-smokers (HR 0.898, 95% CI 0.42 to 1.94). The proportion of patients experiencing adverse events was similar in the treatment and placebo groups. Limitations There was a lower than anticipated primary event rate (12.5% in the treatment group vs. 23.2% in the placebo group, as opposed to expected rates of 30% vs. 50%). Conclusions The Trial Of Prevention of Post operative Crohn’s disease (TOPPIC) is the largest single, double-blind trial assessing the use of thiopurines to prevent postoperative recurrence in CD. From the trial itself, MP was not effective in reducing the frequency of clinical postoperative recurrence of CD overall, but the data suggest that it has clinically meaningful effect among the subgroup of patients who continue to smoke after surgery. Future work Exploratory analyses of possible predictors of disease recurrence using collected data and samples. Trial registration Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN89489788 and EudraCT 2006-005800-15. Funding This project was funded by the Efficacy and Mechanism Evaluation programme, a Medical Research Council and National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) partnership, and will be published in full inEfficacy and Mechanism Evaluation; Vol. 4, No. 4. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.
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 | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 0.002 |
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".