A dose-ranging study of azathioprine pharmacokinetics after single-dose administration of a delayed-release oral formulation

Advances in Thiopurine Drug Delivery: The Current State-of-the-Art

Thiopurines (mercaptopurine, azathioprine and thioguanine) are well-established maintenance treatments for a wide range of diseases such as leukemia, inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) and other inflammatory and autoimmune diseases in general. Worldwide, millions of patients are treated with thiopurines. The use of thiopurines has been limited because of off-target effects such as myelotoxicity and hepatotoxicity. Therefore, seeking methods to enhance target-based thiopurine-based treatment is relevant, combined with pharmacogenetic testing. Controlled-release formulations for thiopurines have been clinically tested and have shown promising outcomes in inflammatory bowel disease. Latest developments in nano-formulations for thiopurines have shown encouraging pre-clinical results, but further research and development are needed. This review provides an overview of novel drug delivery strategies for thiopurines, reviewing modified release formulations and with a focus on nano-based formulations.

A Model-Based Workflow to Benchmark the Clinical Cholestasis Risk of Drugs

We present a generic workflow combining physiology-based computational modeling and in vitro data to assess the clinical cholestatic risk of different drugs systematically. Changes in expression levels of genes involved in the enterohepatic circulation of bile acids were obtained from an in vitro assay mimicking 14 days of repeated drug administration for 10 marketed drugs. These changes in gene expression over time were contextualized in a physiology-based bile acid model of glycochenodeoxycholic acid. The simulated drug-induced response in bile acid concentrations was then scaled with the applied drug doses to calculate the cholestatic potential for each compound. A ranking of the cholestatic potential correlated very well with the clinical cholestasis risk obtained from medical literature. The proposed workflow allows benchmarking the cholestatic risk of novel drug candidates. We expect the application of our workflow to significantly contribute to the stratification of the cholestatic potential of new drugs and to support animal-free testing in future drug development.

Model-based contextualization of in vitro toxicity data quantitatively predicts in vivo drug response in patients

Understanding central mechanisms underlying drug-induced toxicity plays a crucial role in drug development and drug safety. However, a translation of cellular in vitro findings to an actual in vivo context remains challenging. Here, physiologically based pharmacokinetic (PBPK) modeling was used for in vivo contextualization of in vitro toxicity data (PICD) to quantitatively predict in vivo drug response over time by integrating multiple levels of biological organization. Explicitly, in vitro toxicity data at the cellular level were integrated into whole-body PBPK models at the organism level by coupling in vitro drug exposure with in vivo drug concentration–time profiles simulated in the extracellular environment within the organ. PICD was exemplarily applied on the hepatotoxicant azathioprine to quantitatively predict in vivo drug response of perturbed biological pathways and cellular processes in rats and humans. The predictive accuracy of PICD was assessed by comparing in vivo drug response predicted for rats with observed in vivo measurements. To demonstrate clinical applicability of PICD, in vivo drug responses of a critical toxicity-related pathway were predicted for eight patients following acute azathioprine overdoses. Moreover, acute liver failure after multiple dosing of azathioprine was investigated in a patient case study by use of own clinical data. Simulated pharmacokinetic profiles were therefore related to in vivo drug response predicted for genes associated with observed clinical symptoms and to clinical biomarkers measured in vivo. PICD provides a generic platform to investigate drug-induced toxicity at a patient level and thus may facilitate individualized risk assessment during drug development.

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

BACKGROUND

The results from controlled clinical trials investigating the efficacy of azathioprine and 6-mercaptopurine for the treatment of active Crohn's disease have been conflicting and controversial. An updated meta-analysis was performed to assess the effectiveness of these drugs for the induction of remission in active Crohn's disease.

OBJECTIVES

The primary objective was to determine the efficacy and safety of azathioprine and 6-mercaptopurine for induction of remission in active Crohn's disease.

SEARCH METHODS

A literature search for relevant studies (inception to June 13, 2012) was performed using MEDLINE, EMBASE and the Cochrane Library. Review articles and conference proceedings were also searched to identify additional studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of oral azathioprine or 6-mercaptopurine compared to placebo or active therapy involving adult patients with active Crohn's disease were selected for inclusion.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Data were extracted by two independent observers based on the intention-to-treat principle. Outcomes of interest included: clinical remission, clinical improvement, fistula improvement or healing, steroid sparing, adverse events, withdrawals due to adverse events and serious adverse events. We calculated the pooled relative risk (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) for each outcome. The methodological quality of included studies was evaluated using the Cochrane risk of bias tool. The overall quality of the evidence supporting each outcome was assessed using the GRADE criteria.

MAIN RESULTS

Thirteen RCTs (n = 1211 patients) of azathioprine and 6-mercaptopurine therapy in adult patients were identified: nine included placebo comparators and six included active comparators. The majority of included studies were rated as low risk of bias. There was no statistically significant difference in clinical remission rates between azathioprine or 6-mercaptopurine and placebo. Forty-eight per cent (95/197) of patients receiving antimetabolites achieved remission compared to 37% (68/183) of placebo patients (5 studies, 380 patients; RR 1.23, 95% CI 0.97 to 1.55). There was no statistically significant difference in clinical improvement rates between azathioprine or 6-mercaptopurine and placebo. Forty-eight per cent (107/225) of patients receiving antimetabolites achieved clinical improvement or remission compared to 36% (75/209) of placebo patients (8 studies, 434 patients; RR 1.26, 95% CI 0.98 to 1.62). There was a statistically significant difference in steroid sparing (defined as prednisone dose < 10 mg/day while maintaining remission) between azathioprine and placebo. Sixty-four per cent (47/163) of azathioprine patients were able to reduce their prednisone dose to < 10 mg/day compared to 46% (32/70) of placebo patients (RR 1.34, 95% CI 1.02 to 1.77). GRADE analyses rated the overall quality of the evidence for the outcomes clinical remission, clinical improvement and steroid sparing as moderate due to sparse data. There was no statistically significant difference in withdrawals due to adverse events or serious adverse events between antimetabolites and placebo. Ten percent of patients in the antimetabolite group withdrew due to adverse events compared to 5% of placebo patients (8 studies, 510 patients; RR 1.70, 95% CI 0.94 to 3.08). Serious adverse events were reported in 14% of patients receiving azathioprine compared to 4% of placebo patients (2 studies, 216 patients; RR 2.57, 95% CI 0.92 to 7.13). Common adverse events reported in the placebo controlled studies included: allergic reactions. leukopenia, pancreatitis and nausea. Azathioprine was significantly inferior to infliximab for induction of steroid-free clinical remission. Thirty per cent (51/170) of azathioprine patients achieved steroid-free remission compared to 44% (75/169) of infliximab patients (1 study, 339 patients; RR 0.68, 95% CI 0.51 to 0.90). The combination of azathioprine and infliximab was significantly superior to infliximab alone for induction of steroid-free clinical remission. Sixty per cent (116/194) of patients in the combined azathioprine and infliximab group achieved steroid-free remission compared to 48% (91/189) of infliximab patients (2 studies, 383 patients; RR 1.23, 95% CI 1.02 to 1.47). Azathioprine or 6-mercaptopurine therapy was found to be no better at inducing steroid free clinical remission compared to methotrexate (RR 1.13, 95% CI 0.85 to 1.49) and 5-aminosalicylate or sulfasalazine (RR 1.24, 95% CI 0.80 to 1.91). There were no statistically significant differences in withdrawals due to adverse events between azathioprine or 6-mercaptopurine and methotrexate (RR 0.78, 95% CI 0.23 to 2.71); between azathioprine or 6-mercaptopurine and 5-aminosalicylate or sulfasalazine (RR 0.98, 95% CI 0.38 to 2.54); between azathioprine and infliximab (RR 1.47, 95% CI 0.96 to 2.23); or between the combination of azathioprine and infliximab and infliximab (RR 1.16, 95% CI 0.75 to 1.80). Common adverse events in the active comparator trials included nausea, abdominal pain, pyrexia and headache.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Azathioprine and 6-mercaptopurine offer no advantage over placebo for induction of remission or clinical improvement in active Crohn's disease. Antimetaboilte therapy may allow patients to reduce steroid consumption. Adverse events were more common in patients receiving antimetabolites although differences with placebo were not statistically significant. Azathioprine therapy is inferior to infliximab for induction of steroid-free remission. However, the combination of azathioprine and infliximab was superior to infliximab alone for induction of steroid-free remission.

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

BACKGROUND

The results from controlled clinical trials investigating the efficacy of azathioprine and 6-mercaptopurine for the treatment of active Crohn's disease were conflicting and controversial. A meta-analysis was performed to assess the effectiveness of these drugs for the induction of remission in active Crohn's disease.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the effectiveness of azathioprine and 6-mercaptopurine in inducing remission of active Crohn's disease.

SEARCH STRATEGY

Studies were selected using the MEDLINE database (1966 to July 2009), abstracts from major gastrointestinal meetings and references from published articles and review. The Cochrane Trials Register and the Inflammatory Bowel Disease Review Group Trials Register were also searched. This search strategy was updated using the MEDLINE, EMBASE and the International Pharmaceutical Abstracts databases as well as the Cochrane Register of Controlled Trials and the Cochrane IBD/FBD group Specialized Trials Register.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials of oral azathioprine or 6-mercaptopurine involving adult patients (> 18 years) with active Crohn's disease were selected for inclusion.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Data were extracted by three independent observers based on the intention to treat principle. Each study was given a quality score based on predetermined criteria. Extracted data were converted to 2X2 tables (response versus no response and antimetabolite versus placebo) and then synthesized into a summary test statistic using the pooled odds ratio and 95% confidence intervals as described by Cochran and Mantel and Haenszel.

MAIN RESULTS

Eight randomized placebo controlled trials of azathioprine and 6-mercaptopurine therapy in adult patients were identified: five dealt with active disease and three had multiple therapeutic arms. The odds ratio (OR) of a response to azathioprine or 6-mercaptopurine therapy compared with placebo in active Crohn's disease was 2.43 (95% CI 1.62 to 3.64). This corresponded to a number needed to treat (NNT) of about 5 to observe an effect of therapy in one patient. When the two trials using 6-mercaptopurine in active disease were excluded from the analysis, the OR was 2.06 (95% CI 1.25 to 3.39). Treatment of > 17 weeks resulted in an OR of 2.61 (95% CI 1.69 to 4.03). A steroid sparing effect was seen with an OR of 3.69 (95% CI 2.12 - 6.42), corresponding to a NNTof about 3 to observe steroid sparing in one patient. Adverse events requiring withdrawal from a trial, principally allergy, leukopenia, pancreatitis, and nausea were increased with active therapy with an odds ratio of 3.44 (95% CI 1.52 to 7.77). The NNT to observe one adverse event in one patient treated with azathioprine or 6-mercaptopurine was 14.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Azathioprine and 6-mercaptopurine are effective therapy for inducing remission in active Crohn's disease. Adverse events were more common among patients on active therapy.

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

BACKGROUND

The results from controlled clinical trials investigating the efficacy of azathioprine and 6-mercaptopurine for the treatment of active Crohn's disease were conflicting and controversial. A meta-analysis was performed to assess the effectiveness of these drugs for the induction of remission in active Crohn's disease.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the effectiveness of azathioprine and 6-mercaptopurine in inducing remission of active Crohn's disease.

SEARCH STRATEGY

Studies were selected using the MEDLINE database (1966 to July 2009), abstracts from major gastrointestinal meetings and references from published articles and review. The Cochrane Trials Register and the Inflammatory Bowel Disease Review Group Trials Register were also searched. This search strategy was updated using the MEDLINE, EMBASE and the International Pharmaceutical Abstracts databases as well as the Cochrane Register of Controlled Trials and the Cochrane IBD/FBD group Specialized Trials Register.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials of oral azathioprine or 6-mercaptopurine involving adult patients (> 18 years) with active Crohn's disease were selected for inclusion.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Data were extracted by three independent observers based on the intention to treat principle. Each study was given a quality score based on predetermined criteria. Extracted data were converted to 2X2 tables (response versus no response and antimetabolite versus placebo) and then synthesized into a summary test statistic using the pooled odds ratio and 95% confidence intervals as described by Cochran and Mantel and Haenszel.

MAIN RESULTS

Eight randomized placebo controlled trials of azathioprine and 6-mercaptopurine therapy in adult patients were identified: five dealt with active disease and three had multiple therapeutic arms. The odds ratio (OR) of a response to azathioprine or 6-mercaptopurine therapy compared with placebo in active Crohn's disease was 2.43 (95% CI 1.62 to 3.64). This corresponded to a number needed to treat (NNT) of about 5 to observe an effect of therapy in one patient. When the two trials using 6-mercaptopurine in active disease were excluded from the analysis, the OR was 2.06 (95% CI 1.25 to 3.39). Treatment > 17 weeks increased the OR to 2.61 (95% CI 1.69 to 4.03). A steroid sparing effect was seen with an OR of 3.69 (95% CI 2.12 - 6.42), corresponding to a NNTof about 3 to observe steroid sparing in one patient. Adverse events requiring withdrawal from a trial, principally allergy, leukopenia, pancreatitis, and nausea were increased with active therapy with an odds ratio of 3.44 (95% CI 1.52 to 7.77). The NNT to observe one adverse event in one patient treated with azathioprine or 6-mercaptopurine was 14.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Azathioprine and 6-mercaptopurine are effective therapy for inducing remission in active Crohn's disease. The OR of response increases after > 17 weeks of therapy, suggesting that there is a minimum length of time for a trial of azathioprine or 6-mercaptopurine therapy. Adverse events were more common among patients on active therapy.

Pharmacokinetic considerations in the treatment of inflammatory bowel disease

This review describes the pharmacokinetics of the major drugs used for the treatment of inflammatory bowel disease. This information can be helpful for the selection of a particular agent and offers guidance for effective and well tolerated regimens. The corticosteroids have a short elimination half-life (t1/2beta) of 1.5 to 4 hours, but their biological half-lives are much longer (12 to 36 hours). Most are moderate or high clearance drugs that are hepatically eliminated, primarily by cytochrome P450 (CYP) 3A4-mediated metabolism. Prednisone and budesonide undergo presystemic elimination. Any disease state or comedication affecting CYP3A4 activity should be taken into account when prescribing corticosteroids. Depending on the preparation used, 10 to 50% of an oral or rectal dose of mesalazine is absorbed. Rapid acetylation in the intestinal wall and liver (t1/2beta 0.5 to 2 hours) and transport probably by P-glycoprotein affect mucosal concentrations of mesalazine, which apparently determine clinical response. Any clinical condition influencing the release and topical availability of mesalazine might modify its therapeutic potential. Metronidazole has high (approximately 90%) oral bioavailability, with hepatic elimination characterised by a t1/2beta of 6 to 10 hours and a total clearance of about 4 L/h/kg. Ciprofloxacin is largely excreted unchanged both renally (about 45% of dose) and extrarenally (25%), with a relatively short t1/2beta (3.5 to 7 hours). Thus, renal function affects the systemic availability of ciprofloxacin. Both mercaptopurine and its prodrug azathioprine are metabolised to active compounds (6-thioguanine nucleotides; 6-TGN) by hypoxanthine-guanine phosphoribosyltransferase and to inactive metabolites by the polymorphically expressed thiopurine S-methyltransferase (TPMT) and xanthine oxidase. Patients with low TPMT activity have a higher risk of developing haemopoietic toxicity. Both mercaptopurine and azathioprine have a short t1/2beta (1 to 2 hours), but the t1/2beta of 6-TGN ranges from 3 to 13 days. Therapeutic response seems to be related to 6-TGN concentration. Almost complete bioavailability has been observed after intramuscular and subcutaneous administration of methotrexate, which is predominantly (85%) excreted as unchanged drug with a t1/2beta of up to 50 hours. Thus, renal function is the major determinant for disposition of methotrexate. Cyclosporin is slowly and incompletely absorbed. It is extensively metabolised by CYP3A4/5 in the liver and intestine (median t1/2beta and clearance 7.9 hours and 0.46 L/h/kg, respectively), and inhibitors and inducers of CYP3A4 can modify response and toxicity. Infliximab is predominantly distributed to the vascular compartment and eliminated with a t1/2beta between 10 and 14 days. No accumulation was observed when it was administered at intervals of 4 or 8 weeks. Methotrexate may reduce the clearance of infliximab from serum.

Topical azathioprine in the treatment of immune-mediated chronic oral inflammatory conditions: a series of cases

OBJECTIVES

After hematopoietic cell transplantation, a variety of complications can occur, including chronic graft-versus-host disease (GVHD), with 25% to 70% of these involving the oral cavity. Those lesions, as well as oral involvement of autoimmune mucocutaneous diseases, might present as painful, erythematous, and ulcerative oral lesions. Management includes topical and systemic immunosuppressive agents, including systemic azathioprine (AZA). The purpose of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of topical AZA in chronic oral GVHD and in oral autoimmune diseases in a series of patients.

METHODS

Four men and 2 women with GVHD and 2 men with autoimmune vesiculo-ulcerative oral lesions were treated with topical AZA. A rinse of 5 mL of 5 mg/mL AZA in methylcellulose were rinsed 3 to 4 times daily for over 1 minute and expectorated, or a gel in the same concentration in 3% methylcellulose was topically applied. The outcome was evaluated separately for total ulcer size, assessment of the erythema, and severity of pain by using a visual analogue scale. Global estimated improvements represented a proportional combined improvement of ulcers, erythema, and pain.

RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS

The mean estimated global improvement for 6 patients with GVHD who used AZA rinse was 60% in a mean of 16.67 weeks. Ulcers improved by 58%, erythema by 55%, and pain was reduced by 63%. Two patients with oral lesions of vesiculo-ulcerative diseases (1 AZA rinse and 1 topical gel) improved by 95% and 96%, respectively, in 3 months. One patient with GVHD applied topical AZA gel in addition to mouthrinses, and a 29% estimated global improvement was achieved in addition to 50% of improvement achieved with AZA mouthrinses. The observed effect of topical AZA suggests that it can be used for management of oral immune-mediated inflammatory conditions, and for patients who are provided with systemic immunosuppressives it can allow control of oral findings with lower systemic dosing. The therapeutic potential of topical AZA as mouthrinse versus topical applications and the most effective concentration should be further investigated.

Topical azathioprine in the combined treatment of chronic oral graft-versus-host disease

This paper presents the first report of the use of topical azathioprine in the management of persistent symptomatic chronic oral graft-versus-host disease (GVHD). Topical azathioprine suspension was used as an oral rinse and was swallowed, maintaining the previously prescribed systemic dose of azathioprine, and resulted in improvement in a case of oral GVHD that was resistant to other approaches to management. Topical azathioprine may provide additional therapy in the management of immune-mediated oral mucosal disease. Clinical trials appear warranted based upon the results of topical azathioprine use as presented in this case report.

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

OBJECTIVES

To determine the effectiveness of azathioprine and 6-mercaptopurine in inducing remission of active Crohn's disease.

SEARCH STRATEGY

Studies were selected using the MEDLINE data base (1966 - December 1997), abstracts from major gastrointestinal meetings and references from published articles and reviews. The Cochrane Controlled Trials Register and the Inflammatory Bowel Disease Review Group Trials Register was also searched.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Eight randomized placebo controlled trials of azathioprine and 6-mercaptopurine therapy in adult patients were identified: five dealt with active disease and three had multiple therapeutic arms.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Data were extracted by three independent observers based on the intention to treat principle. Each study was given a quality score based on predetermined criteria. Extracted data were converted to 2X2 tables (response versus no response and antimetabolite versus placebo) and then synthesized into a summary test statistic using the pooled odds ratio and 95% confidence intervals as described by Cochran and Mantel and Haenszel ('Odds Ratio' in MetaView).

MAIN RESULTS

The odds ratio of a response to azathioprine or 6-mercaptopurine therapy compared with placebo in active Crohn's disease was 2.36 (95% CI 1.57-3.53). This corresponded to a number needed to treat of about 5 to observe an effect of therapy in one patient. When the two trials using 6-mercaptopurine in active disease were excluded from the analysis, the odds ratio of response was 2.04 (CI 1.24 - 3.35). Treatment >/= 17 weeks increased the odds ratio of a response to 2.51 (CI 1.63-3. 88). A steroid sparing effect was seen with an odds ratio of 3.86 (CI 2.14 - 6.96), corresponding to a number needed to treat of about 3 to observe steroid sparing in one patient. Adverse events requiring withdrawal from a trial, principally allergy, leukopenia, pancreatitis, and nausea were increased on therapy with an odds ratio of 3.01 (CI 1.30 - 6.96). The number needed to treat to observe one adverse event in one patient treated with azathioprine or 6-mercaptopurine was 14.

REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS

Azathioprine and 6-mercaptopurine are effective therapy for inducing remission in active Crohn's disease. The odds ratio of response increases after >/= 17 weeks of therapy, suggesting that there is a minimum length of time for a trial of azathioprine or 6-mercaptopurine therapy. Adverse events were more common among patients on therapy.

Azathioprine for maintaining remission of Crohn's disease

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness of azathioprine in maintaining remission of quiescent Crohn's disease.

SEARCH STRATEGY

Pertinent studies were selected using the MEDLINE data base (1966 - May 1998), the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register, the Inflammatory Bowel Disease Trials Register, as well as abstracts from major gastrointestinal research meetings and references from published articles and reviews.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Five randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials of azathioprine therapy were identified. Two of these trials consisted solely of patients with quiescent Crohn's disease. Three trials had multiple therapeutic arms for both induction of remission and maintenance of remission.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Data were extracted by three independent observers (GRM, GF, LRS) based on the intention to treat principle. Peto odds ratios for the overall maintenance of remission, steroid sparing, and withdrawals due to adverse effects were calculated, and from these, 95% confidence intervals were derived. Numbers needed to treat or harm (NNT, NNH respectively) for the maintenance of remission, steroid sparing, and withdrawals due to adverse effects were also determined.

MAIN RESULTS

Azathioprine had a positive effect on maintaining remission. The Peto odds ratio for maintenance of remission was 2.16 (CI 1.35 - 3.47) with an NNT of 7. A higher dose improved response. A steroid sparing effect was noted, with a Peto odds ratio of 5.22 (CI 1.06 - 25.68) and NNT of 3 for quiescent disease. The Peto odds ratio for withdrawals due to adverse events was 4.36 (CI 1.63 - 11.67), the NNH (Number Needed to Harm) was 19.

REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS

Azathioprine is effective in maintaining remission. There is evidence for a steroid sparing effect.

Azathioprine: state of the art in inflammatory bowel disease

INTRODUCTION

The use of 6-mercaptopurine (6MP) and its prodrug azathioprine (AZA) for inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) has increased in recent years. The pharmacology, patient response in controlled trials, new formulations and routes of administration and safety for these agents are reviewed.

PHARMACOLOGY

AZA is rapidly converted to 6MP, which is then further metabolized to the active metabolites, the 6-thioguanine nucleotides (6TGN). The half-life of 6TGN in erythrocytes is prolonged and weeks to months may be required to reach steady state. This prolonged time to 6TGN steady state may help explain the clinical observation that prolonged treatment (3-4 months) with 6MP/AZA for IBD is required before a therapeutic response occurs. CLINICAL RESPONSE: Controlled trials of 6MP (1.5 mg/kg/d) or AZA (1.0-3.0 mg/kg/d) support the following treatment indications for 6MP/AZA: inflammatory Crohn's disease; fistulizing Crohn's disease; steroid-sparing; and remission maintenance. Controlled trials of AZA (1.5-2.5 mg/kg/d) in UC have suggested efficacy for the indications of steroid sparing and remission maintenance, as well as a possible effect in chronically active disease. A therapeutic response appears to require > or = 17 weeks for most patients, and it has been suggested that a greater cumulative dose of AZA may result in increased likelihood of response to AZA. A recent pilot study suggested that administration of an i.v. loading dose of AZA (20-44 mg/kg over 36 h) may decrease the time to response in Crohn's disease patients treated with AZA, perhaps by administering a portion of the necessary cumulative dose more rapidly. Two recent pharmacokinetic studies demonstrated that use of a delayed release oral AZA formulation which delivers AZA directly to the ileocolon markedly reduces systemic absorption of AZA. This 'topical' or 'local' approach to AZA treatment of IBD holds the promise of equal or improved efficacy with a significant reduction in toxicity, and dose-ranging clinical trials with delayed release oral AZA are planned in the near future.

SAFETY

Side effects of AZA/6MP include pancreatitis, fever, nausea, leukopenia, infection, and hepatitis. It appears that the risk of malignancy during or following monotherapy with AZA/6MP for IBD is not increased relative to the general population.

CONCLUSIONS

AZA/6MP therapy is efficacious and reasonably safe for selected patients with IBD. Indications for treatment with AZA/6MP include refractory Crohn's disease, fistulizing Crohn's disease, steroid-dependent Crohn's disease, Crohn's disease remission maintenance, and possibly refractory UC, steroid dependent UC, and UC remission maintenance. The use of these immune modifier drugs in patients with IBD represents a significant therapeutic advance.