Figures
Abstract
Objectives
Although tacrolimus is useful as an induction therapy in patients with ulcerative colitis (UC), information regarding the long-term outcome after tacrolimus therapy is insufficient. The aim of this study was to evaluate the clinical significance of the pretreatment neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) as a prognostic factor in patients with UC receiving tacrolimus, to aid treatment selection.
Materials and methods
Patients with moderate-to-severe active UC who received oral tacrolimus induction therapy and subsequent immunomodulatory maintenance therapy at our hospital between 2009 and 2017 and who showed clinical response at week 12, were retrospectively enrolled. Cox regression analysis was conducted to study the prognostic role of the pretreatment NLR. The combined impact of the NLR and other known prognostic factors was investigated with multivariate regression.
Results
Among 45 patients included in this study, 21 patients experienced relapse during a median follow-up period of 16.6 months. Multivariate Cox regression analysis identified the pretreatment NLR (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.82, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.72–0.94, P < 0.01) and the use of immunomodulators at the start of tacrolimus treatment (HR: 0.18, 95% CI: 0.05–0.66, P = 0.01) as independent predictors of clinical relapse.
Citation: Nishida Y, Hosomi S, Yamagami H, Sugita N, Itani S, Yukawa T, et al. (2019) Pretreatment neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio predicts clinical relapse of ulcerative colitis after tacrolimus induction. PLoS ONE 14(3): e0213505. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0213505
Editor: Emiko Mizoguchi, Kurume University School of Medicine, JAPAN
Received: December 14, 2018; Accepted: February 24, 2019; Published: March 7, 2019
Copyright: © 2019 Nishida et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
Data Availability: All relevant data are within the manuscript and its Supporting Information files.
Funding: This is an unfunded study and all authors received no specific funding for this work.
Competing interests: The following authors Tetsuya Tanigawa, Toshio Watanabe, and Yasuhiro Fujiwara were previously faculty members of a course sponsored by Eisai Co., Ltd, up to last year. They are now no longer faculty members of this course. This does not alter our adherence to PLOS ONE policies on sharing data and materials.
Introduction
Ulcerative colitis (UC) is a type of inflammatory bowel disease affecting the colorectum, with an unknown etiology. Corticosteroids are effective in inducing remission of UC; however, approximately 20–30% of cases are refractory to or dependent on corticosteroid therapy.[1, 2] In such cases, treatment with anti-tumor necrosis factor (TNF) agents (i.e., infliximab, adalimumab, or golimumab) or calcineurin inhibitors (i.e., cyclosporine or tacrolimus) has been recommended.[3–5] Infliximab administration is well established as both an induction therapy and a maintenance therapy in patients with UC. Nevertheless, although randomized controlled trials have demonstrated the efficacy of oral tacrolimus for remission induction therapy for patients with UC, [3, 6] immunomodulators (IMs) are recommended for maintaining remission after the induction therapy.[5] In fact, the long-term outcome after tacrolimus treatment has been disappointing, [7] and poor relapse-free survival and long-term colectomy-free rates have been reported.[8, 9] However, the risk factors for clinical relapse after tacrolimus therapy have not been sufficiently analyzed.
The neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) is an easily accessible laboratory test and has been reported as a useful predicting factor for various types of cancer, [10–13] rheumatoid arthritis[14] and coronary heart disease.[15, 16] Several studies have reported the existence of a relationship between the NLR and the disease activity of UC.[17, 18] There has been a previous report on the utility of the pretreatment NLR as a useful marker for predicting the loss of response to infliximab in patients with UC.[19] Namely, a high NLR is strongly and independently associated with an increased risk of loss of response to infliximab in patients with UC.[19] However, the clinical utility of the pretreatment NLR for patients with UC receiving tacrolimus has not been analyzed. Therefore, the objective of this study was to evaluate the clinical significance of the pretreatment NLR as a prognostic factor in patients with UC receiving tacrolimus, which would aid in treatment selection.
Materials and methods
Patients
All patients with moderate-to-severe active UC, who started oral tacrolimus treatment at our hospital between January 2009 and December 2017, were retrospectively enrolled. As the aim of this study was to evaluate the prognostic value of the NLR for long-term outcome, patients who were nonresponsive to tacrolimus by week 12 were excluded. Patients who were not receiving IMs for maintaining remission at the time of withdrawal of tacrolimus or those receiving anti-TNF agents were also excluded.
The diagnosis of UC was based on clinical, endoscopic, and histopathologic findings. Demographic, clinical, and laboratory data were obtained from the medical records. The differential white blood cell count was analyzed using an XE-5000 hematology analyzer (Sysmex, Kobe, Japan), according to the manufacturer’s protocol. In each case, the NLR was calculated from a blood sample by dividing the absolute neutrophil count with the absolute lymphocyte count.
Patients were followed up from the time of tacrolimus administration to clinical relapse, cessation of IM maintenance therapy, loss to follow-up, or until the end of October 2018.
Tacrolimus therapy
The initial dosage of oral tacrolimus administration was 0.05 mg/kg twice per day. Blood tacrolimus levels were measured 2 or 3 times per week for the first 2 weeks of tacrolimus initiation. Doses were adjusted to achieve a high target trough level of 10–15 ng/mL. After maintaining high trough levels for 2 weeks, the dose was decreased to achieve a low trough level target of 5–10 ng/mL. The duration of tacrolimus administration is officially limited up to 12 weeks because of the absence of long-term data about the efficacy and safety of this regimen. Tacrolimus is withdrawn or continued according to clinical requirements under the discretion of the physician, and IMs are usually started as a maintenance therapy before the withdrawal of tacrolimus.
Definitions
The partial Mayo (p-Mayo) score[20] was used to assess clinical disease activity. Moderate-to-severe active disease was defined as a p-Mayo score of ≥4. Severe UC was defined as a p-Mayo score of ≥7. Clinical relapse was defined as an exacerbation of gastrointestinal symptoms that required secondary alternative therapies such as surgery, corticosteroids, or anti-TNFα drugs. Clinical response was defined as a p-Mayo score reduction of ≥3 points, accompanied by a decrease of at least 30% from the baseline and a decrease in the rectal bleeding subscore of ≥1 or an absolute rectal bleeding subscore of 0 or 1.[21] The pretreatment NLR was calculated from a blood sample obtained within 1 week before the start of tacrolimus. Post-treatment NLR was defined at approximately 12 week after the start of tacrolimus.
The steroid-refractory state was defined as the presence of active disease despite either intravenous prednisolone at >1 mg·kg-1·day-1 for at least 1 week or oral prednisolone at >30 mg/day for at least 2 weeks. The steroid-dependent state was defined either the inability to taper prednisolone to <10 mg/day without disease recurrence or relapse within 3 months of stopping prednisolone.
Statistical analysis
Continuous variables were summarized as medians and interquartile ranges. The differences in clinical characteristics were compared using either the chi-square test or Fisher’s exact test for categorical variables and the Mann-Whitney U-test for continuous variables. Correlations were calculated using Spearman’s rank correlation. Differences in the pretreatment and post-treatment NLR were compared using the Wilcoxon rank sum test. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were plotted to calculate the area under the ROC curve. The cumulative relapse-free rate was illustrated using a Kaplan-Meier plot. Differences in the survival curves were assessed with the log-rank test. Furthermore, continuous values of laboratory data were evaluated with the Cox proportional hazard model. Data were presented as hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Multivariate Cox regression analyses were performed to identify factors associated with clinical relapse; those factors speculated to be risk factors of clinical relapse were then entered into a multivariate analysis.
A P-value of <0.05 was considered statistically significant. All statistical analyses were performed with EZR (Saitama Medical Center, Jichi Medical University), a graphical user interface for R (The R Foundation for Statistical Computing, version 2.13.0). More precisely, it is a modified version of R commander (version 1.6–3) that includes statistical functions frequently used in biostatistics.
Ethical considerations
This study was approved by Osaka City University Hospital Certified Review Board; (no. 3569), which waived the requirement for written informed consent because the analysis used anonymized clinical data that were retrospectively obtained after each patient agreed to receive the treatment. Nevertheless, all patients were notified of the content and information of this study and given the opportunity to refuse participation. None of the patients refused participation. This study followed the Ethical Guidelines for Medical and Health Research Involving Human Subjects established by the Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology and the Ministry of Health, Labor and Welfare in Japan.
Results
Study subjects
In the present study, a cohort of 99 patients with UC treated with oral tacrolimus was screened. Among them, 2 patients were excluded because of loss to follow-up before week 12 and 33 patients were excluded for being nonresponsive to tacrolimus. Sixty-four patients (66.0%) were considered responders. Of those, 1 responder was excluded for receiving infliximab as a maintenance therapy and 18 patients were excluded for not receiving IMs as a maintenance therapy at the time of tacrolimus withdrawal. Finally, 45 patients were enrolled in this study (Fig 1). During a median follow-up period of 16.6 months (interquartile range: 6.9–54.6 months), 21 of 45 patients experienced relapsed. The demographic characteristics of the patients are summarized in Table 1. One patient was excluded from post-treatment NLR analysis because he did not present a differential white blood cell count at around 12 weeks. The NLR decreased after tacrolimus induction therapy in both patients with sustained response (P < 0.01) and patients with clinical relapse (P < 0.05), using the Wilcoxon rank sum test (S1 Fig).
Risk factors for relapse
The patients’ background, concomitant therapy, and laboratory data before tacrolimus therapy were analyzed to identify risk factors for relapse after tacrolimus therapy. According to univariate Cox regression analysis, relapse-free survival exhibited a significant relationship with the pretreatment NLR (HR: 0.89, 95% CI: 0.80–1.00, P < 0.05), which was mainly because of lymphocytes rather than neutrophils (Table 2). In contrast, it did not exhibit a significant relationship with the post-treatment NLR (HR: 0.98, 95% CI: 0.89–1.06, P = 0.75) (Table 2). Multivariate Cox regression analyses were performed to identify factors associated with clinical relapse; those factors speculated to be risk factors of clinical relapse were then entered into a multivariate analysis. The multivariate analysis identified the NLR (HR: 0.82, 95% CI: 0.72–0.94, P < 0.01) and the use of IMs at the start of tacrolimus (HR: 0.18, 95% CI: 0.05–0.66, P = 0.01) as independent prognostic factors for clinical relapse (Table 2).
When the NLR was examined as a dichotomous variable, a cutoff value of the NLR for the risk of relapse was determined using ROC analysis. The ROC analysis showed that the best cutoff value for the NLR was > 5.84 (sensitivity: 62.5%, specificity: 66.7%) (Fig 2). Therefore, the cutoff value of 5.84 was chosen for further study. Twenty-three (51.1%) patients had an NLR of < 5.84 at pretreatment (low NLR group), whereas 22 (48.9%) patients had an NLR of ≥ 5.84 (high NLR group). Table 1 shows a comparison of the baseline characteristics between the low NLR group and the high NLR group. The percentage of patients with concomitant corticosteroid use was higher in the high NLR group. No significant differences were detected between the high NLR group and the low NLR group in other clinical variables.
Area under curve (AUC): 0.65 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.49–0.82).
In the low NLR group, 60.9% (14 of 23) of the patients experienced relapse during the follow-up period. In the high NLR group, 31.8% (7 of 22) of the patients experienced relapsed. Fig 3 shows the overall relapse-free survival of all responders and the relapse-free survival based on the NLR. The overall survival rate was significantly better in the high NLR group (P < 0.05, log-rank test; Fig 3B).
Overall relapse-free survival in 45 responders to tacrolimus (A) and relapse-free survival based on the neutrophil-to- lymphocyte ratio (NLR). The overall survival rate was significantly better in the high NLR group (P < 0.05, log-rank test) (B).
Influence of concomitant therapy on the NLR
Concomitant therapies and corticosteroid response state may affect the NLR level as a prognostic factor after tacrolimus therapy. However, the median pretreatment NLR was 5.26 (interquartile range: 3.31–7.84) in corticosteroid dependent patients and 7.52 (interquartile range: 3.86–11.9) in corticosteroid resistant patients. No significant difference was noted between these two groups (P = 0.429). Patients using corticosteroid had higher NLR values mainly because of higher neutrophil counts, and patients using IM had lower NLR values mainly because of lower neutrophil counts (Table 3), whereas no correlation was noted between corticosteroid dosage and the pretreatment NLR (r = 0.0199, P = 0.91) (S2 Fig). Furthermore, the use of IMs before the start of tacrolimus was an independent prognostic factor for clinical relapse (Table 2). The influence of concomitant therapies before starting tacrolimus should be considered. Therefore, we next conducted a subgroup analysis based on the use of IMs or corticosteroids. As tacrolimus is usually administered for steroid-refractory patients, most patients in this study did not receive IMs but received corticosteroids. We performed a subgroup analysis for patients who did not receive IMs at the start of tacrolimus (n = 32, who had a tendency to have higher NLRs) and patients with corticosteroid use at the start of tacrolimus (n = 35, whose NLRs were significantly higher than those of patients without corticosteroid use) (Table 3). Fig 4 shows the Kaplan-Meir plot for clinical relapse in each group, and the relapse-free rate was significantly better in patients with a high NLR in each group. In multivariate Cox regression analysis, the NLR was also identified as an independent prognostic factor for clinical relapse in each group (patients without IM use, HR: 0.83, 95% CI: 0.72–0.95, P < 0.01; patients with corticosteroid use, HR: 0.82, 95% CI: 0.71–0.94, P < 0.01). With respect to patients with IM use or patients without corticosteroid use, we could not identify the NLR as a statistically significant prognostic factor in each group, possibly because of the small number of the patients.
Relapse-free survival in patients without immunomodulator use at the start of tacrolimus (A) and in patients with corticosteroid use at the start of tacrolimus (B). The overall survival rate was significantly better in those with a high neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) in each group.
Discussion
This is the first study to describe the utility of the pretreatment NLR in patients with UC receiving tacrolimus therapy. The principal finding of this study was that a low pretreatment NLR is strongly and independently associated with an increased risk of clinical relapse after tacrolimus induction therapy for UC. As the NLR cutoff value of 5.84 was a predictor of relapse, patients with low NLR should be followed up with caution and given optimal maintenance therapy.
To date, the underlying mechanism of the association of the NLR with the clinical course of UC remains poorly understood. The NLR represents the balance between systematic inflammatory response and immune response. This study showed that clinical relapse after tacrolimus therapy was associated with the NLR in patients with UC who received IMs as a maintenance therapy. That is, 13 patients received IMs at the start of tacrolimus and the remaining 32 patients received IMs as additional maintenance treatment before the withdrawal of tacrolimus. Therefore, the NLR may predict the efficacy of IMs as a maintenance therapy as UC relapses during IM maintenance therapy after the withdrawal of tacrolimus. In this study, the prognostic value of the NLR could be largely due to lymphocytes (Table 2). Azathioprine is a prodrug that enters the endogenous purine salvage pathway to be converted to its active end-product, thioguanine nucleotides (TGNs), which are incorporated into DNA and inhibit T-cell activation signals.[22–25] Several studies have reported the association between leukocyte counts or leukocyte subsets and IM efficacy, [26–29] and the mechanism of immune suppression by IMs is relevant to lymphocytes.[25] Smith et al. reported that lymphocyte counts were significantly different when patients with TGNs exceeding the target range were compared with those with undetectable TGN levels, and TGN levels do correlate with response to thiopurine treatment.[29, 30] Conversely, Fraser et al. reported that lymphocyte count had no value for predicting the induction of remission.[28] However, to our knowledge, no study has evaluated the value of lymphocytes as predictor of maintenance therapy. Our study may suggest that IMs are more effective for patients with low baseline lymphocyte counts. From this view, the NLR may also be useful for selecting the maintenance therapy after not only tacrolimus but also other induction therapies such as corticosteroids or cytapheresis. Further studies would be needed to assess the utility of the NLR for other therapies.
Concomitant therapies may affect the pretreatment NLR and clinical relapse after tacrolimus therapy. Although no correlation was noted between corticosteroid dosage and the pretreatment NLR (S2 Fig), patients receiving corticosteroids at the start of tacrolimus had a significantly higher pretreatment NLR, and those receiving IMs at the start of tacrolimus had a significantly lower NLR; however, the association between the NLR and the relapse-free survival rate was independent of concomitant corticosteroid use or concomitant IM use. Furthermore, we performed a subgroup analysis to elucidate the influence of concomitant therapies based on the use of concomitant corticosteroids or concomitant IMs. In both the corticosteroid group and the non-IM group, the NLR was identified as an independent prognostic factor for clinical relapse even in this subgroup analysis.
The appropriate therapies for steroid-refractory UC remain controversial. The European Crohn’s and Colitis Organization (ECCO) guidelines equally recommend the use of tacrolimus and infliximab for patients with intravenous steroid-refractory UC, [5] and many studies have compared the efficacy of tacrolimus and infliximab in terms of short-term and long-term outcomes[31–34]; however, their results were not consistent and the choice of treatment remains controversial. The choice of treatment for steroid-refractory UC depends on the physician’s decision. It has been previously reported that a high pretreatment NLR was risk factor of loss of response to infliximab, [19] whereas the current study showed that a high pretreatment NLR is a protective factor against clinical relapse after tacrolimus therapy. These studies suggest that patients with a high NLR should be preferably treated with tacrolimus and patients with a low NLR should be preferably treated with infliximab. Further studies comparing treatments with tacrolimus and infliximab would be needed to determine the utility of NLR for treatment selection.
In this study, we also identified the use of IMs at the start of tacrolimus as an independent prognostic factor for clinical relapse (Table 3). Thiopurines are slow-acting drugs, [35] taking up to 6 months to reach a therapeutic effect. Patients who started IMs just before tacrolimus withdrawal would experience relapse before the treatment takes effect. Although the ECCO guidelines recommend IM maintenance therapy after tacrolimus induction therapy, [5] the timing of the introduction of IM is not defined. Our findings suggest that IMs should be started as soon as possible after deciding to start tacrolimus therapy.
This study has some limitations. First, this is a retrospective study with relatively small cohort, which is susceptible to bias in data selection and analysis. Second, the NLR differs among patients and can be influenced by concurrent infection and concomitant drugs. Although we usually perform fecal culture to rule out infectious colitis or cytomegalovirus (CMV) antigenemia before starting tacrolimus, infectious colitis or bacterial translocation or viral infection may be involved in the disease state. We could not estimate the association between other viruses and NLR or the disease state and could not eliminate the possibility that such infections may have influenced the results. With respect to concomitant drugs, we considered the influence of concomitant corticosteroids or IMs. It would be preferable to analyze the predictive value of NLR by dividing the patients into 4 groups, as of presence / absence of corticosteroid and presence / absence of corticosteroid. However, in this study, the sample size was rather small, it was difficult to analyze the predictive value of NLR by dividing into these 4 groups. Furthermore, other drugs such as mesalamine may also affect the NLR or disease course. Further, as we do not routinely measure fecal calprotectin, which may be a prognostic factor of UC, or procalcitonin levels, we could not take into account other biomarkers. Therefore, further large prospective studies will help confirm the NLR as a key predictor in tacrolimus treatment for UC.
Despite these limitations, our study suggests that the pretreatment NLR could be associated with clinical relapse after tacrolimus therapy in patients with UC and should be introduced in clinical practice. Taking NLR into account may aid the treatment selection for patients with UC.
Supporting information
S1 Fig. Time course of the neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR).
The NLR decreased after tacrolimus induction therapy in both patients with sustained response (P < 0.01) (A) and patients with clinical relapse (P < 0.05) (B) (the Wilcoxon rank sum test).
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0213505.s001
(TIF)
S2 Fig. Scatter plot of the pretreatment neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratios (NLR) and corticosteroid dosage among patients with corticosteroid.
There was no correlation between corticosteroid dosage and the pretreatment NLR (r = 0.0199, P = 0.91) (the Spearman’s rank correlation).
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0213505.s002
(TIF)
References
- 1. Faubion WA Jr., Loftus EV Jr, Harmsen WS, Zinsmeister AR, Sandborn WJ. The natural history of corticosteroid therapy for inflammatory bowel disease: a population-based study. Gastroenterology. 2001;121(2):255–60. Epub 2001/08/07. pmid:11487534.
- 2. Turner D, Walsh CM, Steinhart AH, Griffiths AM. Response to corticosteroids in severe ulcerative colitis: a systematic review of the literature and a meta-regression. Clinical gastroenterology and hepatology: the official clinical practice journal of the American Gastroenterological Association. 2007;5(1):103–10. Epub 2006/12/05. pmid:17142106.
- 3. Ogata H, Matsui T, Nakamura M, Iida M, Takazoe M, Suzuki Y, et al. A randomised dose finding study of oral tacrolimus (FK506) therapy in refractory ulcerative colitis. Gut. 2006;55(9):1255–62. Epub 2006/02/18. pmid:16484504
- 4. Rutgeerts P, Sandborn WJ, Feagan BG, Reinisch W, Olson A, Johanns J, et al. Infliximab for induction and maintenance therapy for ulcerative colitis. The New England journal of medicine. 2005;353(23):2462–76. Epub 2005/12/13. pmid:16339095.
- 5. Harbord M, Eliakim R, Bettenworth D, Karmiris K, Katsanos K, Kopylov U, et al. Third European Evidence-based Consensus on Diagnosis and Management of Ulcerative Colitis. Part 2: Current Management. Journal of Crohn’s & colitis. 2017;11(7):769–84. Epub 2017/05/18. pmid:28513805.
- 6. Ogata H, Kato J, Hirai F, Hida N, Matsui T, Matsumoto T, et al. Double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of oral tacrolimus (FK506) in the management of hospitalized patients with steroid-refractory ulcerative colitis. Inflammatory bowel diseases. 2012;18(5):803–8. Epub 2011/09/03. pmid:21887732.
- 7. Matsuoka K, Saito E, Fujii T, Takenaka K, Kimura M, Nagahori M, et al. Tacrolimus for the Treatment of Ulcerative Colitis. Intestinal research. 2015;13(3):219–26. Epub 2015/07/02. pmid:26130996
- 8. Miyoshi J, Matsuoka K, Inoue N, Hisamatsu T, Ichikawa R, Yajima T, et al. Mucosal healing with oral tacrolimus is associated with favorable medium- and long-term prognosis in steroid-refractory/dependent ulcerative colitis patients. Journal of Crohn’s & colitis. 2013;7(12):e609–14. Epub 2013/05/18. pmid:23680174.
- 9. Baumgart DC, Pintoffl JP, Sturm A, Wiedenmann B, Dignass AU. Tacrolimus is safe and effective in patients with severe steroid-refractory or steroid-dependent inflammatory bowel disease—a long-term follow-up. The American journal of gastroenterology. 2006;101(5):1048–56. Epub 2006/04/01. pmid:16573777.
- 10. Shibutani M, Maeda K, Nagahara H, Noda E, Ohtani H, Nishiguchi Y, et al. A high preoperative neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio is associated with poor survival in patients with colorectal cancer. Anticancer research. 2013;33(8):3291–4. Epub 2013/07/31. pmid:23898094.
- 11. Shimada H, Takiguchi N, Kainuma O, Soda H, Ikeda A, Cho A, et al. High preoperative neutrophil-lymphocyte ratio predicts poor survival in patients with gastric cancer. Gastric cancer: official journal of the International Gastric Cancer Association and the Japanese Gastric Cancer Association. 2010;13(3):170–6. Epub 2010/09/08. pmid:20820986.
- 12. Mahmoud FA, Rivera NI. The role of C-reactive protein as a prognostic indicator in advanced cancer. Current oncology reports. 2002;4(3):250–5. Epub 2002/04/09. pmid:11937016.
- 13. Danese S, Rudzinski J, Brandt W, Dupas JL, Peyrin-Biroulet L, Bouhnik Y, et al. Tralokinumab for moderate-to-severe UC: a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase IIa study. Gut. 2015;64(2):243–9. Epub 2014/10/12. pmid:25304132.
- 14. Chandrashekara S, Rajendran A, Bai Jaganath A, Krishnamurthy R. Neutrophil-lymphocyte ratio, pain perception, and disease activity score may serve as important predictive markers for sustained remission in rheumatoid arthritis. Reumatismo. 2015;67(3):109–15. Epub 2016/02/16. pmid:26876190.
- 15. Cho KH, Jeong MH, Ahmed K, Hachinohe D, Choi HS, Chang SY, et al. Value of early risk stratification using hemoglobin level and neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio in patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention. The American journal of cardiology. 2011;107(6):849–56. Epub 2011/01/21. pmid:21247535.
- 16. Nunez J, Nunez E, Bodi V, Sanchis J, Minana G, Mainar L, et al. Usefulness of the neutrophil to lymphocyte ratio in predicting long-term mortality in ST segment elevation myocardial infarction. The American journal of cardiology. 2008;101(6):747–52. Epub 2008/03/11. pmid:18328833.
- 17. Demir AK, Demirtas A, Kaya SU, Tastan I, Butun I, Sagcan M, et al. The relationship between the neutrophil-lymphocyte ratio and disease activity in patients with ulcerative colitis. The Kaohsiung journal of medical sciences. 2015;31(11):585–90. Epub 2015/12/19. pmid:26678939.
- 18. Torun S, Tunc BD, Suvak B, Yildiz H, Tas A, Sayilir A, et al. Assessment of neutrophil-lymphocyte ratio in ulcerative colitis: a promising marker in predicting disease severity. Clinics and research in hepatology and gastroenterology. 2012;36(5):491–7. Epub 2012/07/31. pmid:22841412.
- 19. Nishida Y, Hosomi S, Yamagami H, Yukawa T, Otani K, Nagami Y, et al. Neutrophil-to-Lymphocyte Ratio for Predicting Loss of Response to Infliximab in Ulcerative Colitis. PloS one. 2017;12(1):e0169845. Epub 2017/01/12. pmid:28076386 faculty members of a course sponsored by Eisai Co., Ltd. The other authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest, and that there were no external funding sources for this study. This does not alter the authors’ adherence to PLOS ONE policies on sharing data and materials.
- 20. Lewis JD, Chuai S, Nessel L, Lichtenstein GR, Aberra FN, Ellenberg JH. Use of the noninvasive components of the Mayo score to assess clinical response in ulcerative colitis. Inflammatory bowel diseases. 2008;14(12):1660–6. Epub 2008/07/16. pmid:18623174
- 21. Sandborn WJ, Colombel JF, D’Haens G, Van Assche G, Wolf D, Kron M, et al. One-year maintenance outcomes among patients with moderately-to-severely active ulcerative colitis who responded to induction therapy with adalimumab: subgroup analyses from ULTRA 2. Alimentary pharmacology & therapeutics. 2013;37(2):204–13. Epub 2012/11/24. pmid:23173821.
- 22. Ling YH, Chan JY, Beattie KL, Nelson JA. Consequences of 6-thioguanine incorporation into DNA on polymerase, ligase, and endonuclease reactions. Molecular pharmacology. 1992;42(5):802–7. Epub 1992/11/01. pmid:1331762.
- 23. Somerville L, Krynetski EY, Krynetskaia NF, Beger RD, Zhang W, Marhefka CA, et al. Structure and dynamics of thioguanine-modified duplex DNA. The Journal of biological chemistry. 2003;278(2):1005–11. Epub 2002/10/29. pmid:12401802.
- 24. Swann PF, Waters TR, Moulton DC, Xu YZ, Zheng Q, Edwards M, et al. Role of postreplicative DNA mismatch repair in the cytotoxic action of thioguanine. Science (New York, NY). 1996;273(5278):1109–11. Epub 1996/08/23. pmid:8688098.
- 25. Thomas CW, Myhre GM, Tschumper R, Sreekumar R, Jelinek D, McKean DJ, et al. Selective inhibition of inflammatory gene expression in activated T lymphocytes: a mechanism of immune suppression by thiopurines. The Journal of pharmacology and experimental therapeutics. 2005;312(2):537–45. Epub 2004/09/25. pmid:15388785.
- 26. Meijer B, Wilhelm AJ, Mulder CJJ, Bouma G, van Bodegraven AA, de Boer NKH. Pharmacology of Thiopurine Therapy in Inflammatory Bowel Disease and Complete Blood Cell Count Outcomes: A 5-Year Database Study. Therapeutic drug monitoring. 2017;39(4):399–405. Epub 2017/05/11. pmid:28489727
- 27. Glas J, Torok HP, Daczo J, Tonenchi L, Folwaczny M, Folwaczny C. The leukocyte count predicts the efficacy of treatment with azathioprine in inflammatory bowel disease. European journal of medical research. 2005;10(12):535–8. Epub 2005/12/17. pmid:16356870.
- 28. Fraser AG, Orchard TR, Jewell DP. The efficacy of azathioprine for the treatment of inflammatory bowel disease: a 30 year review. Gut. 2002;50(4):485–9. Epub 2002/03/13. pmid:11889067
- 29. Smith M, Blaker P, Patel C, Marinaki A, Arenas M, Escuredo E, et al. The impact of introducing thioguanine nucleotide monitoring into an inflammatory bowel disease clinic. International journal of clinical practice. 2013;67(2):161–9. Epub 2012/12/21. pmid:23253089.
- 30. Osterman MT, Kundu R, Lichtenstein GR, Lewis JD. Association of 6-thioguanine nucleotide levels and inflammatory bowel disease activity: a meta-analysis. Gastroenterology. 2006;130(4):1047–53. Epub 2006/04/19. pmid:16618398.
- 31. Takeuchi K, Shimoyama T, Yamamoto T. Comparison of Safety and Efficacy of Tacrolimus versus Infliximab for Active Ulcerative Colitis. Digestive diseases (Basel, Switzerland). 2018;36(2):106–12. Epub 2017/10/20. pmid:29050007.
- 32. Yamagami H, Nishida Y, Nagami Y, Hosomi S, Yukawa T, Otani K, et al. A comparison of short-term therapeutic efficacy between infliximab and tacrolimus for moderate to severe ulcerative colitis. Romanian journal of internal medicine = Revue roumaine de medecine interne. 2017;55(3):151–7. Epub 2017/02/22. pmid:28222041.
- 33. Endo K, Onodera M, Shiga H, Kuroha M, Kimura T, Hiramoto K, et al. A Comparison of Short- and Long-Term Therapeutic Outcomes of Infliximab- versus Tacrolimus-Based Strategies for Steroid-Refractory Ulcerative Colitis. Gastroenterology research and practice. 2016;2016:3162595. Epub 2016/02/24. pmid:26904108
- 34. Yamamoto T, Shimoyama T, Umegae S, Matsumoto K. Tacrolimus vs. anti-tumour necrosis factor agents for moderately to severely active ulcerative colitis: a retrospective observational study. Alimentary pharmacology & therapeutics. 2016;43(6):705–16. Epub 2016/01/15. pmid:26762838.
- 35. Nielsen OH, Vainer B, Rask-Madsen J. Review article: the treatment of inflammatory bowel disease with 6-mercaptopurine or azathioprine. Alimentary pharmacology & therapeutics. 2001;15(11):1699–708. Epub 2001/10/31. pmid:11683683.