Azathioprine or 6-mercaptopurine for induction of remission in Crohn's disease

Optimizing 6-mercaptopurine and azathioprine therapy in the management of inflammatory bowel disease

The thiopurine drugs, 6-mercaptopurine (6-MP) and azathioprine, are efficacious in the arsenal of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) therapy. Previous reports indicate that 6-thioguanine nucleotide (6-TGN) levels correlate with therapeutic efficacy, whereas high 6-methylmercaptopurine (6-MMP) levels are associated with hepatotoxicity and myelotoxicity. Due to their complex metabolism, there is wide individual variation in patient response therein, both in achieving therapeutic drug levels as well as in developing adverse reactions. Several strategies to optimize 6-TGN while minimizing 6-MMP levels have been adopted to administer the thiopurine class of drugs to patients who otherwise would not tolerate these drugs due to side-effects. In this report, we will review different approaches to administer the thiopurine medications, including the administration of 6-mercaptopurine in those unsuccessfully treated with azathioprine; co-administration of thiopurine with allopurinol; co-administration of thiopurine with anti-tumor necrosis factor α; 6-TGN administration; desensitization trials; and split dosing of 6-MP.

Optimization of conventional therapy in patients with IBD

The majority of patients with IBD use conventional therapy (namely, aminosalicylates, antibiotics, corticosteroids and immunomodulatory agents) for prolonged periods of time, to both induce and maintain remission. Treatment paradigms in IBD have evolved towards a rapid escalation of therapy to achieve stringent goals, including mucosal healing and a reduction in the need for hospital admission and surgery. In this context, the failure to optimize conventional therapy can lead to a potentially effective treatment being abandoned too early, which is undesirable when only a limited number of drugs are effective in the management of IBD, and could also lead to patients being unnecessarily exposed to potentially toxic and/or expensive biologic drugs. This Review provides an overview of the many ways in which conventional therapy can be optimized, and describes strategies to improve adherence to drug regimens, such as simplifying the dosing regimen, optimizing drug delivery and dose, and tailoring medication on the basis of metabolite levels.

Conventional medical management of inflammatory bowel disease

Conventional therapies for ulcerative colitis and Crohn's disease (CD) include aminosalicylates, corticosteroids, thiopurines, methotrexate, and anti-tumor necrosis factor agents. A time-structured approach is required for appropriate management. Traditional step-up therapy has been partly replaced during the last decade by potent drugs and top-down therapies, with an accelerated step-up approach being the most appropriate in the majority of patients. When patients are diagnosed with CD or ulcerative colitis, physicians should consider the probable pattern of disease progression so that effective therapy is not delayed. This can be achieved by setting arbitrary time limits for administration of biological therapies, changing therapy from mesalamine in patients with active ulcerative colitis, or using rescue therapy for acute severe colitis. In this review, we provide algorithms with a time-structured approach for guidance of therapy. Common mistakes in conventional therapy include overprescription of mesalamine for CD; inappropriate use of steroids (for perianal CD, when there is sepsis, or for maintenance); delayed introduction or underdosing with azathioprine, 6-mercaptopurine, or methotrexate; and failure to consider timely surgery. The paradox of anti-tumor necrosis factor therapy is that although it too is used inappropriately (when patients have sepsis or fibrostenotic strictures) or too frequently (for diseases that would respond to less-potent therapy), it is also often introduced too late in disease progression. Conventional drugs are the mainstay of current therapy for inflammatory bowel diseases, but drug type, timing, and context must be optimized to manage individual patients effectively.

Current and emerging drugs for the treatment of inflammatory bowel disease

During the last decade a large number of biological agents against tumor necrosis factor-α (TNF-α), as well as many biochemical substances and molecules specifically for the medical treatment of patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), have been developed. This enormous progress was a consequence of the significant advances in biotechnology along with the increased knowledge of the underlying pathophysiological mechanisms involved in the pathogenesis of IBD. However, conventional therapies remain the cornerstone of treatment for most patients. During recent years conventional and biologic IBD therapies have been optimized. Newer mesalazine formulations with a reduced pill size and only one dose per day demonstrate similar efficacy to older formulations. New corticosteroids retain the efficacy of older corticosteroids while exhibiting a higher safety profile. The role of antibiotics and probiotics has been further clarified. Significant progress in understanding thiopurine metabolism has improved the effective dose along with adjunctive therapies. Quite a large number of substances and therapies, including biologic agents other than TNF-α inhibitors, unfractionated or low-molecular-weight heparin, omega-3 polyunsaturated fatty acids, microbes and microbial products, leukocytapheresis, and other substances under investigation, could offer important benefits to our patients. In this paper we review the established and emerging therapeutic strategies in patients with Crohn’s disease and ulcerative colitis.

Optimising use of thiopurines in inflammatory bowel disease

Azathioprine (AZA) and 6-mercaptopurine (6-MP) are the most widely used immunosuppressive therapies in inflammatory bowel disease. Pretreatment measurement of thiopurine methyltransferase (TPMT) activity is recommended and although conventional practice is to use a dose of 2 mg/kg AZA (1 mg/kg 6-MP), higher doses of 2.5 mg/kg AZA or more may be required in some patients, particularly if TPMT activity is high. Dose raising is limited by toxicity, and a robust monitoring system is mandatory. Patients with side effects to AZA may tolerate 6-MP but pancreatitis is a contraindication to switching. Metabolite monitoring is not widely available but may be useful, particularly if non-compliance is possible or where metabolite shunting to 6-methylmercaptopurine is suspected, on the basis of non-response or toxicity. It may allow dose optimisation before switching to alternative immunosuppressants. The drug appears safe in pregnancy and breast feeding. Long term duration of therapy is a balance between benefits in relation to the underlying disease extent, activity and aggressiveness, and the risk of neoplasia, particularly lymphoma.