Modeling the Outcome of Systematic TPMT Genotyping or Phenotyping Before Azathioprine Prescription: A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Thiopurine S-methyltransferase (TPMT) testing, either by genotyping or phenotyping, can reduce the incidence of adverse severe myelotoxicity episodes induced by azathioprine. The comparative cost-effectiveness of TPMT genotyping and phenotyping are not known. OBJECTIVE: Our aim was to assess the cost-effectiveness of phenotyping-based dosing of TPMT activity, genotyping-based screening and no screening (reference) for patients treated with azathioprine. METHODS: A decision tree was built to compare the conventional weight-based dosing strategy with phenotyping and with genotyping using a micro-simulation model of patients with inflammatory bowel disease from the perspective of the French health care system. The time horizon was set up as 1 year. Only direct medical costs were used. Data used were obtained from previous reports, except for screening test and admission costs, which were from real cases. The main outcome was the cost-effectiveness ratios, with an effectiveness criterion of one averted severe myelotoxicity episode. RESULTS: The total expected cost of the no screening strategy was €409/patient, the total expected cost of the phenotyping strategy was €427/patient, and the total expected cost of the genotyping strategy was €476/patient. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was €2602/severe myelotoxicity averted in using the phenotyping strategy, and €11,244/severe myelotoxicity averted in the genotyping strategy compared to the no screening strategy. At prevalence rates of severe myelotoxicity > 1%, phenotyping dominated genotyping and conventional strategies. CONCLUSION: The phenotype-based strategy to screen for TPMT deficiency dominates (cheaper and more effective) the genotype-based screening strategy in France. Phenotype-based screening dominates no screening in populations with a prevalence of severe myelosuppression due to azathioprine of > 1%.

Early Assessment of Thiopurine Metabolites Identifies Patients at Risk of Thiopurine-induced Leukopenia in Inflammatory Bowel Disease.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Only a quarter of thiopurine-induced myelotoxicity in inflammatory bowel disease [IBD] patients is related to thiopurine S-methyltransferase deficiency. We determined the predictive value of 6-thioguanine nucleotide [6-TGN] and 6-methylmercaptopurine ribonucleotide [6-MMPR] concentrations 1 week after initiation [T1] for development of leukopenia during the first 8 weeks of thiopurine treatment. METHODS: The study was performed in IBD patients starting thiopurine therapy as part of the Dutch randomized controlled TOPIC trial [ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00521950]. Blood samples for metabolite measurement were collected at T1. Leukopenia was defined by leukocyte counts of <3.0 × 109/L. For comparison, patients without leukopenia who completed the 8 weeks on the stable dose were selected from the first 272 patients of the TOPIC trial. RESULTS: Thirty-two patients with, and 162 patients without leukopenia were analysed. T1 threshold 6-TGN concentrations of 213 pmol/8 × 108 erythrocytes and 3525 pmol/8 × 108 erythrocytes for 6-MMPR were defined: patients exceeding these values were at increased leukopenia risk (odds ratio [OR] 6.2 [95% CI: 2.8-13.8] and 5.9 [95% CI: 2.7-13.3], respectively). Leukopenia rates were higher in patients treated with mercaptopurine, compared with azathioprine (OR 7.3 [95% CI: 3.1-17.0]), and concurrent anti-TNF therapy (OR 5.1 [95% CI: 1.6-16.4]). Logistic regression analysis of thiopurine type, threshold concentrations, and concurrent anti-tumour necrosis factor [TNF] therapy revealed that elevations of both T1 6-TGN and 6-MMPR resulted in the highest risk for leukopenia, followed by exceeding only the T1 6-MMPR or 6-TGN threshold concentration (area under the curve 0.84 [95% CI: 0.76-0.92]). CONCLUSIONS: In ~80% of patients, leukopenia could be explained by T1 6-TGN and/or 6-MMPR elevations. Validation of the predictive model is needed before implementing in clinical practice.

Implementation of TPMT testing.

The activity of the enzyme thiopurine methyltransferase (TPMT) is regulated by a common genetic polymorphism. One in 300 individuals lack enzyme activity and 11% are heterozygous for a variant low activity allele and have an intermediate activity. The thiopurine drugs azathioprine, mercaptopurine and thioguanine are substrates for TPMT; these drugs exhibit well documented myelosuppressive effects on haematopoietic cells and have a track record of idiosyncratic drug reactions. The development of severe bone marrow toxicity, in patients taking standard doses of thiopurine drugs, is associated with TPMT deficiency whilst the TPMT heterozygote is at an increased risk of developing myelosuppression. Factors influencing TPMT enzyme activity, as measured in the surrogate red blood cell, are discussed in this review to enable an appreciation of why concordance between TPMT genotype and phenotype is not 100%. This is particularly important for lower/intermediate TPMT activities to avoid misclassification of TPMT status. TPMT testing is now widely available in routine service laboratories. The British National Formulary suggests TPMT testing before starting thiopurine drugs. Dermatologists were quick to adopt routine TPMT testing whilst gastroenterologists do not specifically recommend TPMT screening. TPMT testing is mandatory prior to the use of mercaptopurine in childhood leukaemia. Thiopurine drug dose and other treatment related influences on cell counts explain some of the differing recommendations between clinical specialities. TPMT testing is cost-effective and the major role is in the identification of the TPMT deficient individual prior to the start of thiopurine drugs.