Real-World Use of Azathioprine Metabolites Changes Clinical Management of Inflammatory Bowel Disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background Thiopurines such as 6-mercaptopurine and azathioprine have complex metabolism, resulting in significant inter-individual differences in clinical efficacy and risk of drug toxicity, making conventional weight-based dosing inaccurate and potentially unsafe. Therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) of thiopurine metabolites improves clinical outcomes through dose optimization and toxicity monitoring. Despite evidence for TDM, use is limited, due in part to test availability and awareness. The objectives of this study were twofold: (1) to investigate how thiopurine TDM impacts clinical management of IBD patients and (2) to evaluate proportion of patients outside therapeutic 6TGN levels or exhibiting signs of toxicity Methods Patients who received thiopurine TDM as part of routine care underwent chart review of demographics, disease activity, medication dosing, metabolite levels, and adverse events. Changes in clinical management following TDM were measured. Additionally, we conducted a retrospective review of clinical decision making blinded and unblinded to TDM result. Results A total of 92 IBD patients were included. Levels of 6TGN were therapeutic in 29% of patients. 6TGN levels correlated weakly with weight-based dosing (r2 = 0.057, P = 0.02). Adverse reactions were observed in 6.5%. TDM informed clinical management in 64%. Significantly more changes to clinical management occurred in those with active disease than in remission (73% versus 48%; P = 0.02) and in those on mono- versus combination therapy (48% versus 27.5%; P = 0.03). Conclusions TDM informs clinical decision making in over two-thirds of patients. The demonstrated poor efficacy of weight-based dosing and impact of TDM on clinical management contributes to the evidence supporting the need for greater availability and uptake of thiopurine TDM.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".