Monitoring for 5-aminosalicylate toxicity: prognostic model development and validation
======================================================================================

* A Abhishek
* Georgina Nakafero
* Matthew J Grainge
* Tim Card
* Maarten W Taal
* Guruprasad P Aithal
* Christopher P Fox
* Christian D Mallen
* Matthew D Stevenson
* Richard D Riley

## Abstract

**Background and aim** To develop and validate a prognostic model for risk-stratified monitoring of 5-aminosalicylate (5-ASA) toxicity.

**Methods** This nationwide retrospective cohort study used data from the Clinical Practice Research Datalink (CPRD) Aurum and Gold for model development and validation respectively. It included adults newly diagnosed with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) and established on 5-ASAs between 01/01/2007 and 31/12/2019. 5-ASA discontinuation with abnormal monitoring blood test result was the outcome of interest. Patients prescribed 5-ASAs for ≥6 months i.e., established on treatment, were followed-up for up to five years. Penalised Cox-regression was used to develop the risk equation. Model performance was assessed in terms of calibration and discrimination. Statistical analysis was performed using STATA (StataCorp LLC).

**Results** 14,109 and 7,523 participants formed the development and validation cohorts with 401 and 243 events respectively. 185, 172, and 64 discontinuations were due to cytopenia, elevated creatinine and elevated liver enzymes respectively in the derivation cohort. Hazardous alcohol intake, chronic kidney disease, thiopurine use, and blood test abnormalities before follow-up were strong prognostic factors. The optimism adjusted R2D in development data was 0.08. The calibration slope and Royston D statistic (95% Confidence Interval) in validation cohort were 0.90 (0.61-1.19) and 0.57 (0.37-0.77) respectively.

**Conclusion** This prognostic model utilises information available during routine clinical care and can be used to inform decisions on the interval between monitoring blood-tests. The results of this study ought to be considered by guideline writing groups to risk-stratify blood test monitoring during established 5-ASA treatment.

**What is already known?**

*   Renal, hepatic and blood toxicity are uncommon during long-term 5-aminosalicylate (5-ASA) treatment.

*   There are no mechanisms to predict the risk of these toxicities during established treatment that may be used to risk stratify blood-test monitoring.

**What this study adds?**

*   Using a large national dataset originated during routine care, this study developed a prognostic model that discriminated patients at varying risk of 5-ASA toxicity during established treatment with good performance characteristics validated.

*   Most patients were at low-risk of toxicity due to 5-ASAs and could continue with annual monitoring blood-tests while others at high risk may require more frequent monitoring.

*   This prognostic model can be used to make an informed decision on the interval between monitoring blood tests and the findings ought to be considered by guideline writing groups to bring about equitable and sustainable change in clinical practice.

Keywords
*   5-aminosalicylate
*   nephritis
*   hepatotoxicity
*   myelotoxicity

## Introduction

5-aminosalicylates (5-ASA) are the mainstay of treatment for mild to moderate ulcerative colitis and are often combined with biologics in the treatment of severe disease1–3. Although effective, they can cause side-effects such as interstitial nephritis, hepatitis and blood-dyscrasias4–20. These side-effects are common early during the treatment17–19 but they also occur later. For instance, the median time to development of interstitial nephritis ranged between 2.3 and 3 years in published studies8,9. There is substantial variation in recommendations on screening for the occurrence of myelotoxicity, hepatotoxicity, and nephrotoxicity during established 5-ASA treatment.

For instance, the summary of product characteristics recommends three monthly full blood count (FBC), liver function test (LFT), and urea electrolytes and creatinine (UE&C) during established treatment19, whereas the European consensus from the European Crohn’s and Colitis Organisation is to monitor with FBC and UE&C at three to six monthly intervals3, while the American Gastroenterology Association and the British Society of Gastroenterology recommend monitoring with UE&C periodically and annually respectively during established treatment1,2. This latter may be disadvantageous to patients treated with 5-ASA drugs due to their well-documented but uncommon myelotoxicity and hepatotoxicity.

Due to the rarity of cytopenia, hepatotoxicity and nephrotoxicity due to 5-ASA4–6,16, It would be beneficial to predict clinically significant renal, hepatic or myelotoxicity during established treatment to allow risk-stratified monitoring. This study developed and validated a prognostic model for clinically significant 5-ASA toxicity during established treatment.

## Methods

### Data source

Data from the Clinical Practice Research Datalink (CPRD) Aurum and Gold were used for model development and validation respectively 21,22. CPRD is an anonymised longitudinal database of electronic health records collected during routine clinical care in the NHS. With almost universal coverage of UK residents, participants that contributed data to the CPRD are representative of the UK population 21. CPRD Aurum and Gold complement each other in terms of coverage of general practices according to the use of different software for data capture. Some general practices that have contributed data to both databases were only included in the model development cohort.

### Approvals

ISAC of the MHRA (Reference: 20_000236R).

### Study design

Retrospective cohort study.

### Study period

1st January 2007 to 31st December 2019.

### Study population

Participants aged ≥18 years with a new diagnosis of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) newly prescribed 5-ASA by their GP for at-least six-months were eligible (Supplementary methods). Patients with severe liver, kidney or haematological diseases prior to first 5-ASA prescription were excluded as described previously23.

### Follow-up

Patients were followed-up from 180 days after their first GP prescription until the earliest of outcome, death, transfer out of practice, 90-days prescription gap, last data collection from practice, 31/12/2019 or five-years from the start of follow-up.

### Outcome

5-ASA-toxicity associated drug discontinuation was the outcome of interest. This was defined as a prescription gap of ≥90 days with either an abnormal blood-test result (either leucocyte count <3.5×109/L, or neutrophil count <1.6×109/L, or platelet count <140×109/L, or alanine transaminase and/or aspartate transaminase >100 IU/mL, or decline in kidney function, defined as either progression of chronic kidney disease (CKD) based on medical codes recorded by the GP, or >26 μmol/L increase in creatinine concentration, the threshold for consideration of acute kidney injury (AKI)24) or a diagnostic code for abnormal blood-test result within ±60 days of the last prescription date23,25.

A random sample of 5-ASA discontinuations with abnormal blood test results was drawn. Data for all diagnostic codes entered during primary-care consultations within ±60 days of the abnormal blood test result were extracted. A.A. screened the list to identify outcomes that could potentially be explained by an alternative condition or its treatment.

*Predictors* were selected based on clinical expertise and knowledge of the published literature (Table 1). Age, sex, body mass index (BMI), alcohol intake, and diabetes were included as they associate with drug induced liver injury (DILI) 26,27. CKD was included as it reduces 5-ASA clearance28. Statins, carbamazepine, valproate, paracetamol were included as their use is associated with 5-ASA toxicity relevant to this study28. Methotrexate, leflunomide, thiopurines were included as they can cause cytopenia, elevated liver enzymes and AKI. Either cytopenia (neutrophil count <2 x 109/l, or total leucocyte count <4 x 109/l, or platelet count <150 109/l) or elevated transaminase (ALT and/or AST >35 IU/l) during the first six months of primary care prescription were included as they predicted cytopenia and/or transaminitis in other studies 29,30.

View this table:
[Table 1:](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2023/12/18/2023.12.15.23299944/T1)

Table 1: 
Distribution of candidate predictors in development and validation cohorts

### Sample size

The incidence of toxicity from 5-ASA ranged between 1.2 and 1.7 per 1,000 person-years for interstitial nephritis5,6. To minimise model overfitting and ensure precise estimation of overall risk, the minimum sample size required for new model development was 2,590 participants (39 events) based on a maximum of 20 parameters, Cox-Snell R2 value of 0.12, estimated event rate of 0.005/person-year, a 5-year time horizon, and a mean follow-up period of 3 years using the formulae of Riley et al.,31. The sample size for external model validation was larger than the typically recommended minimum sample size of 200 events32.

### Statistical analysis

Multiple imputation handled missing data on BMI and alcohol intake using chained equations 33. We carried out 10 imputations in the development dataset and 5 imputations in the validation dataset - a pragmatic approach considering the large size of CPRD. The imputation model included all candidate predictors, baseline Nelson-Aalen cumulative hazard function and outcome variable.

### Model development

Fraction polynomial regression (first degree) analysis was used to model non-linear risk relationships with continuous predictors, but these were not better than the linear terms (p > 0.05), hence were not transformed. All candidate predictors and parameters were included in the Cox model and coefficients of each parameter estimated and combined using Rubin’s rule across the imputed datasets. The risk equation for predicting an individual’s risk of 5-ASA discontinuation with abnormal blood-test results by 5-years follow-up was formulated in the development data. The baseline survival function at *t=5 years*, a non-parametric estimate of survival function when all predictor values are set to zero, which is equivalent to the Kaplan-Meier product-limit estimate, was estimated along with the estimated regression coefficients (β) and the individual’s predictor values (X). This led to the equation for the predicted absolute risk over time 34:

Predicted risk = 1 – S(t=5)exp(Xβ) where S(t=5) is the baseline survival function at 5-years of follow-up and βX is the linear predictor, β1x1+ β2x2+ … + βpxp.

### Model internal validation and shrinkage

The performance of the model in terms of calibration was assessed by plotting agreement between predicted and observed outcomes. Internal validation was performed to correct performance estimates for optimism due to overfitting by bootstrapping with replacement 500 samples of the development data. The full model was fitted in each bootstrap sample and then its performance was quantified in the bootstrap sample (apparent performance) and the original sample (test model performance), and the optimism calculated (difference in test performance and apparent performance). A uniform shrinkage factor was estimated as the average of calibration slopes from the bootstrap samples. This process was repeated for all 10 imputed datasets, and the final uniform shrinkage calculated by averaging across the estimated shrinkage estimates from each imputation. Optimism-adjusted estimates of performance for the original model were then calculated, as the original apparent performance minus the optimism.

To account for overfitting, the original β coefficients were multiplied by the final uniform shrinkage factor and the baseline hazards re-estimated conditional on the shrunken β coefficients to ensure that overall calibration was maintained, producing a final model. The D statistic, a measure of discrimination, interpreted as a log hazard ratio (HR) 35,36, and R2, a measure of variation explained by the model were calculated.

### Model external validation

The final developed model equation was applied to the validation dataset, and calibration and discrimination were examined35,36. Calibration of 5-year risks was examined by plotting agreement between estimated risk from the model and observed outcome risks. In the calibration plot, predicted and observed risks were divided into 10 equally sized groups. Pseudo-observations were used to construct smooth calibration curves across all individuals via a running non-parametric smoother. Separate graphs were plotted for each imputation. Stata-MP version 16 was used for statistical analyses. This study was reported in line with the TRIPOD guidelines 37.

## Results

### Participants

Data for 14,109 and 7,523 participants that contributed 41,146 and 21,070 person-years follow-up were included in the development and validation cohorts, respectively (Figure S1 and S2). Over 97% participants were diagnosed with IBD alone, over 50% self-identified as male, and had similar lifestyle factors, comorbidities, and drug treatments (Table 1). Twelve candidate predictors (17 predictor parameters) were included in the model (Table 2).

View this table:
[Table 2:](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2023/12/18/2023.12.15.23299944/T2)

Table 2: 
Final model hazard ratios and β-coefficients before penalisation

### Model development

In the derivation dataset, 401 outcomes occurred in 2.8% patients (n=14,109) during follow-up at a rate (95% CI) of 9.75 (8.84 – 10.75) per 1,000 person-years. Outcome validation exercise in 167 outcomes revealed that only 10.2% outcomes (n=17) could potentially be explained by another contemporaneous illness or its treatments, with a positive predictive value of 89.8% (Table S1). Cytopenia, increase in serum creatinine, and elevated liver enzymes caused 5-ASA discontinuation in 185, 172, and 64 participants respectively (Figure S3). CKD-3, thiopurine co-prescription, hazardous alcohol use, ex-alcohol use and either cytopenia or elevated liver enzymes during first six months of 5-ASA prescription were strong predictors of drug discontinuation with adjusted hazard ratio (95% confidence interval (CI)) 2.31 (1.68,3.17), 2.09 (1.59,2.74), 1.85 (1.25,2.74), 1.53 (1.06,2.21) and 1.56 (1.18,2.16) respectively (Table 2). Before shrinkage, the calibration slope in the derivation data was 1.00 (95% CI 0.82-1.18). From the bootstrap, a uniform shrinkage factor of 0.83 was obtained and used to shrink predictor coefficients in the final model for optimism and after re-estimation, the final model’s cumulative baseline survival function (S) was 0.971 at 5-years of follow-up (Box 1).

### Model performance in the derivation cohort

Calibration plot of the final (i.e., after shrinkage) model at 5-years showed that the average model predictions matched the average observed outcome probabilities across 10 groups of patients, with confidence intervals overlapping the 45-degree line (perfect prediction line) (Figure 1). As most patients had low risk of outcome, most of the deciles clustered at the bottom left of the calibration plot (Figure S4). The smoothed calibration curve at 5-years showed alignment of observed risk to the predicted risk with wide confidence intervals at >0.1 risk probabilities (Figure 1, Figure S5). Royston *D* statistic (95% CI) was 0.75 (0.59,0.91) corresponding to HR 2.12 (1.80-2.48) when comparing the risk groups above and below the median of linear predictor. The optimism adjusted Royston *D* statistic was 0.60 corresponding to HR 1.82, obtained by exponentiating the D statistic (Table 3).

![Figure 1:](http://medrxiv.org/https://www.medrxiv.org/content/medrxiv/early/2023/12/18/2023.12.15.23299944/F1.medium.gif)

[Figure 1:](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2023/12/18/2023.12.15.23299944/F1)

Figure 1: 
Calibration of a prognostic model for 5-ASA discontinuation with abnormal monitoring blood-test results at 5 years in the development cohort1.

1Data from a single imputed dataset was used; So(t=5) =0.971

View this table:
[Table 3:](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2023/12/18/2023.12.15.23299944/T3)

Table 3: 
Model diagnostics

### Model performance in the validation cohort

There were 243 outcomes in 3.2% (n=7,523) patients at a rate (95% CI) of 11.53 (10.17-13.08) per 1000 person-years in the validation cohort. The calibration slope (95% CI) across the five-year follow-up period was 0.90 (0.61-1.19). The calibration plot showed reasonable correspondence between observed and predicted risk at 5-years across the tenths of risk with confidence intervals crossing the perfect prediction line (Figure S6). Most groups clustered at the bottom left of the calibration plot owing to low risk of outcome for most patients (Figures S7). When individual risk was plotted, the smoothed calibration curve showed instability in the model predictions with a tendency to under-predict low risk by a small amount (Figure 2). Model performance was also tested at years 1, 2, 3 and 4 and showed a similar pattern (Figures S8-11). Model discrimination in the derivation and validation data was broadly similar (Table 3). The Royston D statistic in the validation data was 0.57 (0.37,0.77), corresponding to HR (95% CI) 1.77 (1.45-2.16). The R2 score was 0.07 (95% CI 0.03,0.12).

![Figure 2:](http://medrxiv.org/https://www.medrxiv.org/content/medrxiv/early/2023/12/18/2023.12.15.23299944/F2.medium.gif)

[Figure 2:](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2023/12/18/2023.12.15.23299944/F2)

Figure 2: 
Calibration of a prognostic model for 5-ASA discontinuation with abnormal monitoring blood-test results at 5 years in the validation cohort1.

1Data from a single imputed dataset was used; So(t=5) =0.971

### Worked examples

Ten anonymised patient profiles, one from the middle of each decile of predicted risk were selected from the development cohort (Table S2). The cumulative probability of outcome over five years ranged from 3.1% in the middle of the first group to 4.6% in the middle of the seventh group, and 8.6% in the middle of the 10th group.

## Discussion

This study developed and externally validated a prognostic model for 5-ASA discontinuation with abnormal monitoring blood test results. To the best of our knowledge this is the first such endeavour. The model was developed using a large real-world and nationally representative dataset that originated during routine care of patients and has high generalisability. It had good performance characteristics in an independent dataset. It predicted clinically relevant toxicity i.e., one that required 5-ASA treatment being stopped, indicating face validity. The prognostic factors were selected to include those that are readily available during routine consultations. This makes the model is easy to use.

5-ASAs were stopped for cytopenia, elevated creatinine and elevated liver enzymes suggesting that monitoring blood-tests should include FBC, UE&C, and LFT. Numerically more patients discontinued 5-ASA due to cytopenia than due to nephrotoxicity, with far fewer participants stopping treatment due to elevated liver enzymes. In another previous study, there were numerically greater number of blood-dyscrasias than AKI with relatively few instances of elevated liver enzymes4. Similarly, a French pharmacovigilance study in which spontaneously reported adverse events were included and causality assessment was performed reported numerically more cases with myelotoxicity (n=7) and either hepatitis or elevated liver enzymes (n=7) than renal insufficiency (n=2) over a one-year period16. 5-ASA drugs are believed to be less hepatotoxic than sulfasalazine, however, the cumulative occurrence of drug induced liver injury was similar in the mesalazine and sulfasalazine arms of a randomised controlled trial, with 2.6% of patients taking mesalazine experiencing liver injury20. In another study, the mean white blood cell count reduced significantly with 5-ASA treatment, while the mean levels of creatinine and liver enzymes remained unchanged15. Thus, the findings of our study are consistent with previous reports.

CKD-3, hazardous and prior-alcohol use were strong independent predictors of 5-ASA discontinuation with blood-test abnormalities. These are novel findings. Nevertheless, these are plausible predictors. Co-prescription of a thiopurine was a strong risk-factor for toxicity consistent with other studies38–40. Abnormal blood-test results during the first six months of therapy were strong independent predictors of discontinuing 5-ASA with abnormal monitoring blood-test results, like previous reports about other drugs23,41.

However, several limitations of this study ought to be considered. First, information about the date when 5-ASA was first prescribed from hospital was unavailable. This is not a serious issue as the model can be applied once the patient has completed six-months of 5-ASA treatment from primary-care after treatment initiation and initial stabilization in a hospital clinic, or approximately one year from first prescription in a healthcare system without shared care prescription. Second, we did not have information on the use of biologics as these are hospital prescribed. Third, data on disease activity are not recorded in the CPRD. Fourth, we could not consider ulcerative colitis and Crohn’s disease as separate prognostic factors as it is not possible to reliably differentiate between them in the CPRD. Fifth, the abnormal blood test could be due to a different illness. Although in our previous validation studies, only 5.4% of abnormal blood-test results could be explained by an alternative illness 25. Sixth, although the external validation dataset was distinct from the model development dataset, it also originated from UK. We recommend that our model be validated in a dataset from another country. Seventh, there were 9 (0.06%) patients in the highest three tenths of risk resulting in uncertainty regarding predictors for these groups. Eighth, we did not perform competing risk regression. However, this does not limit the validity of our findings as there were few deaths (26 [0.18%]) in the derivation and (10 [0.13%]) validation cohorts up to the 5-year follow-up.

In conclusion, we have developed and externally validated a prognostic model for 5-ASA discontinuation with abnormal monitoring blood test results that may be used to individualise monitoring using principles of shared decision making between the patient and the physician. These findings need to be considered by guideline writing groups to bring about sustained change in clinical practice.

## Author contributions

A Abhishek: the conception and design of the study, interpretation of data, drafting the article, revising article critically for important intellectual content, final approval of the version to be submitted.

Georgina Nakafero: the conception and design of the study, analysis and interpretation of data, assisted in drafting the article, revising article critically for important intellectual content, final approval of the version to be submitted.

Matthew J Grainge: the conception and design of the study, interpretation of data, revising article critically for important intellectual content, final approval of the version to be submitted.

Tim Card: the conception and design of the study, interpretation of data, revising article critically for important intellectual content, final approval of the version to be submitted.

Maarten W Taal: the conception and design of the study, interpretation of data, revising article critically for important intellectual content, final approval of the version to be submitted.

Guruprasad P Aithal: the conception and design of the study, interpretation of data, revising article critically for important intellectual content, final approval of the version to be submitted.

Christopher P Fox: the conception and design of the study, interpretation of data, revising article critically for important intellectual content, final approval of the version to be submitted.

Christian D Mallen: the conception and design of the study, interpretation of data, revising article critically for important intellectual content, final approval of the version to be submitted.

Matthew D Stevenson: the conception and design of the study, interpretation of data, revising article critically for important intellectual content, final approval of the version to be submitted.

Richard D Riley: the conception and design of the study, analysis and interpretation of data, revising article critically for important intellectual content, final approval of the version to be submitted.

**Conflict of interest statement:**

A.A. has received Institutional research grants from AstraZeneca and Oxford Immunotech; and personal fees from UpToDate (royalty), Springer (royalty), Cadilla Pharmaceuticals (lecture fees), NGM Bio (consulting), Limbic (consulting) and personal fees from Inflazome (consulting) unrelated to the work. GP Aithal has received consulting fees from Abbott, Albereo, Amryth, AstraZeneca, BenevolentAI, DNDI, GlaxoSmithKline, NuCANA, Pfizer, Roche Diagnostics, Servier Pharmaceuticals, W.L Gore & Associates paid to the University of Nottingham unrelated to the work. CPF has received Consultancy/Advisory board fees from Abbvie, GenMab, Incyte, Morphosys, Roche, Takeda, Ono, Kite/Gilead, BMS/Celgene, BTG/Veriton and departmental research funding from BeiGene unrelated to the work. The other authors have no conflict of interest to declare.

**Data availability statement:**

Data used in the study are from the Clinical Practice Research Datalink and cannot be shared due to licencing restrictions. Study protocol is available from [www.cprd.com](http://www.cprd.com).

Box 1: 
Equation to predict the risk of 5-ASA discontinuation after six months of primary care prescription and within the next 5-years.

Risk score = 1 – 0.971 exp(0.83βX), where βX=0.0016945* Age in years at first primary-care prescription + 0.0082816*female-sex + 0.0020271*body mass index - 0.0106059*low alcohol intake + 0.0982098*moderate alcohol intake + 0.6161676*hazardous alcohol intake + 0.4275329 *Ex-alcohol intake + 0.1917626*Psoriasis + 0.2380761*autoimmune rheumatic disease + 0.1383201*diabetes + 0.8360309*Chronic kidney disease stage-3 + 0.7359997*thiopurine + 0.6131115*methotrexate or leflunomide + 0.1890031*statins + 0.2554022*Carbamazepine/valproate + 0.231411*paracetamol + 0.4665026* At-least mild cytopenia or liver enzyme elevation within first six-months of primary-care prescription.

All variables are code 0, and 1 if absent or present respectively, except for BMI and age that are continuous variables. 0.971 is the baseline survival function at 5-years, 0.83 is the shrinkage factor and the other numbers are the estimated regression coefficients for the predictors, which indicate their mutually adjusted relative contribution to the outcome risk. Thiopurines included either azathioprine or 6-mercaptopurine. Autoimmune rheumatic diseases included rheumatoid arthritis, systemic lupus erythematosus, ankylosing spondylitis, reactive arthritis.

## Supporting information

supplementary material [[supplements/299944_file02.pdf]](pending:yes)

## Data Availability

Data used in the study are from the Clinical Practice Research Datalink and cannot be shared due to licensing restrictions. Study protocol is available from [www.cprd.com](https://www.cprd.com).

## Funding

This research was funded by National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) grant NIHR130580. The funders had no role in conducting and/or reporting this study.

View this table:
[Table4](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2023/12/18/2023.12.15.23299944/T4)

## Footnotes

*   A Abhishek: abhishek.abhishek{at}nottingham.ac.uk Georgina Nakafero: georgina.nakafero{at}nottingham.ac.uk Matthew J Grainge: matthew.grainge{at}nottingham.ac.uk Tim Card: tim.card{at}nottingham.ac.uk Maarten W Taal: mdzmt{at}exmail.nottingham.ac.uk Guruprasad P Aithal: guru.aithal{at}nottingham.ac.uk Christopher P Fox: Christopher.Fox2{at}nuh.nhs.uk Christian D Mallen: c.d.mallen{at}keele.ac.uk Matthew D Stevenson: m.d.stevenson{at}sheffield.ac.uk Richard D Riley: r.d.riley{at}bham.ac.uk

*   Received December 15, 2023.
*   Revision received December 15, 2023.
*   Accepted December 18, 2023.


*   © 2023, Posted by Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory

This pre-print is available under a Creative Commons License (Attribution 4.0 International), CC BY 4.0, as described at [http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/](http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/)

## References

1.  1.Lamb CA, Kennedy NA, Raine T, et al. British Society of Gastroenterology consensus guidelines on the management of inflammatory bowel disease in adults. Gut 2019;68(Suppl 3):s1–s106.
    
    [Abstract/FREE Full Text](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/ijlink/YTozOntzOjQ6InBhdGgiO3M6MTQ6Ii9sb29rdXAvaWpsaW5rIjtzOjU6InF1ZXJ5IjthOjQ6e3M6ODoibGlua1R5cGUiO3M6NDoiQUJTVCI7czoxMToiam91cm5hbENvZGUiO3M6NjoiZ3V0am5sIjtzOjU6InJlc2lkIjtzOjEzOiI2OC9TdXBwbF8zL3MxIjtzOjQ6ImF0b20iO3M6NTA6Ii9tZWRyeGl2L2Vhcmx5LzIwMjMvMTIvMTgvMjAyMy4xMi4xNS4yMzI5OTk0NC5hdG9tIjt9czo4OiJmcmFnbWVudCI7czowOiIiO30=) 

2.  2.Ko CW, Singh S, Feuerstein JD, et al. AGA Clinical Practice Guidelines on the Management of Mild-to-Moderate Ulcerative Colitis. Gastroenterology 2019;156(3):748–64.
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1053/j.gastro.2018.12.009&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=http://www.n&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2023%2F12%2F18%2F2023.12.15.23299944.atom) 

3.  3.Dignass A, Van Assche G, Lindsay JO, et al. The second European evidence-based Consensus on the diagnosis and management of Crohn’s disease: Current management. J Crohns Colitis 2010;4(1):28–62.
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1016/j.crohns.2009.12.002&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=21122489&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2023%2F12%2F18%2F2023.12.15.23299944.atom) 
    
    [Web of Science](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=000275649100003&link_type=ISI) 

4.  4.Ransford RA, Langman MJ. Sulphasalazine and mesalazine: serious adverse reactions re-evaluated on the basis of suspected adverse reaction reports to the Committee on Safety of Medicines. Gut 2002;51(4):536–9.
    
    [Abstract/FREE Full Text](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/ijlink/YTozOntzOjQ6InBhdGgiO3M6MTQ6Ii9sb29rdXAvaWpsaW5rIjtzOjU6InF1ZXJ5IjthOjQ6e3M6ODoibGlua1R5cGUiO3M6NDoiQUJTVCI7czoxMToiam91cm5hbENvZGUiO3M6NjoiZ3V0am5sIjtzOjU6InJlc2lkIjtzOjg6IjUxLzQvNTM2IjtzOjQ6ImF0b20iO3M6NTA6Ii9tZWRyeGl2L2Vhcmx5LzIwMjMvMTIvMTgvMjAyMy4xMi4xNS4yMzI5OTk0NC5hdG9tIjt9czo4OiJmcmFnbWVudCI7czowOiIiO30=) 

5.  5.Van Staa TP, Travis S, Leufkens HG, et al. 5-aminosalicylic acids and the risk of renal disease: a large British epidemiologic study. Gastroenterology 2004;126(7):1733–9.
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1053/j.gastro.2004.03.016&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=15188168&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2023%2F12%2F18%2F2023.12.15.23299944.atom) 
    
    [Web of Science](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=000221888300017&link_type=ISI) 

6.  6.Logan RF, van Staa TP. Sulphasalazine and mesalazine: serious adverse reactions re-evaluated on the basis of suspected adverse reaction reports to the Committee on Safety of Medicines. Gut 2003;52(10):1530; author reply 30-1.
    
    [FREE Full Text](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/ijlink/YTozOntzOjQ6InBhdGgiO3M6MTQ6Ii9sb29rdXAvaWpsaW5rIjtzOjU6InF1ZXJ5IjthOjQ6e3M6ODoibGlua1R5cGUiO3M6NDoiRlVMTCI7czoxMToiam91cm5hbENvZGUiO3M6NjoiZ3V0am5sIjtzOjU6InJlc2lkIjtzOjEwOiI1Mi8xMC8xNTMwIjtzOjQ6ImF0b20iO3M6NTA6Ii9tZWRyeGl2L2Vhcmx5LzIwMjMvMTIvMTgvMjAyMy4xMi4xNS4yMzI5OTk0NC5hdG9tIjt9czo4OiJmcmFnbWVudCI7czowOiIiO30=) 

7.  7.Muller AF, Stevens PE, McIntyre AS, et al. Experience of 5-aminosalicylate nephrotoxicity in the United Kingdom. Aliment Pharmacol Ther 2005;21(10):1217–24.
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1111/j.1365-2036.2005.02462.x&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=15882242&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2023%2F12%2F18%2F2023.12.15.23299944.atom) 

8.  8.Moss JG, Parry CM, Holt RCL, et al. 5-ASA induced interstitial nephritis in patients with inflammatory bowel disease: a systematic review. Eur J Med Res 2022;27(1):61.
    
    

9.  9.Heap GA, So K, Weedon M, et al. Clinical Features and HLA Association of 5-Aminosalicylate (5-ASA)-induced Nephrotoxicity in Inflammatory Bowel Disease. J Crohns Colitis 2016;10(2):149–58.
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1093/ecco-jcc/jjv219&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=26619893&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2023%2F12%2F18%2F2023.12.15.23299944.atom) 

10. 10.Farrell RJ, Peppercorn MA, Fine SN, et al. Mesalamine-associated thrombocytopenia. Am J Gastroenterol 1999;94(8):2304–6.
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1111/j.1572-0241.1999.01324.x&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10445572&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2023%2F12%2F18%2F2023.12.15.23299944.atom) 

11. 11.Frattini F, Crestani S, Vescovi PP, et al. Pure white cell aplasia induced by mesalazine in a patient with ulcerative colitis. Hematology 2013;18(3):181–2.
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=http://www.n&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2023%2F12%2F18%2F2023.12.15.23299944.atom) 
    
    [Web of Science](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=000319330900011&link_type=ISI) 

12. 12.Turunen U, Elomaa I, Anttila VJ, et al. Mesalazine tolerance in patients with inflammatory bowel disease and previous intolerance or allergy to sulphasalazine or sulphonamides. Scand J Gastroenterol 1987;22(7):798–802.
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=2890198&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2023%2F12%2F18%2F2023.12.15.23299944.atom) 

13. 13.Deltenre P, Berson A, Marcellin P, et al. Mesalazine (5-aminosalicylic acid) induced chronic hepatitis. Gut 1999;44(6):886–8.
    
    [Abstract/FREE Full Text](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/ijlink/YTozOntzOjQ6InBhdGgiO3M6MTQ6Ii9sb29rdXAvaWpsaW5rIjtzOjU6InF1ZXJ5IjthOjQ6e3M6ODoibGlua1R5cGUiO3M6NDoiQUJTVCI7czoxMToiam91cm5hbENvZGUiO3M6NjoiZ3V0am5sIjtzOjU6InJlc2lkIjtzOjg6IjQ0LzYvODg2IjtzOjQ6ImF0b20iO3M6NTA6Ii9tZWRyeGl2L2Vhcmx5LzIwMjMvMTIvMTgvMjAyMy4xMi4xNS4yMzI5OTk0NC5hdG9tIjt9czo4OiJmcmFnbWVudCI7czowOiIiO30=) 

14. 14.Braun M, Fraser GM, Kunin M, et al. Mesalamine-Induced Granulomatous Hepatitis. Official journal of the American College of Gastroenterology *| ACG* 1999;94(7):1973–74.
    
    

15. 15.Masuda H, Takahashi Y, Nishida Y, et al. Comparison of the effect of mesalazine and sulfasalazine on laboratory parameters: a retrospective observational study. Eur J Clin Pharmacol 2012;68(11):1549–55.
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=22546896&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2023%2F12%2F18%2F2023.12.15.23299944.atom) 

16. 16.Marteau P, Nelet F, Le Lu M, et al. Adverse events in patients treated with 5-aminosalicyclic acid: 1993-1994 pharmacovigilance report for Pentasa in France. Aliment Pharmacol Ther 1996;10(6):949–56.
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1046/j.1365-2036.1996.92264000.x&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=8971293&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2023%2F12%2F18%2F2023.12.15.23299944.atom) 
    
    [Web of Science](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=A1996VY91300016&link_type=ISI) 

17. 17.Corrigan G, Stevens PE. Review article: interstitial nephritis associated with the use of mesalazine in inflammatory bowel disease. Aliment Pharmacol Ther 2000;14(1):1–6.
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10632639&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2023%2F12%2F18%2F2023.12.15.23299944.atom) 

18. 18.Gisbert JP, González-Lama Y, Maté J. 5-Aminosalicylates and renal function in inflammatory bowel disease: a systematic review. Inflamm Bowel Dis 2007;13(5):629–38.
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1002/ibd.20099&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=17243140&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2023%2F12%2F18%2F2023.12.15.23299944.atom) 
    
    [Web of Science](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=000246170600015&link_type=ISI) 

19. 19.limited. TpU. Summary of Product Characteristics of Mesalazine 2023 [Available from: [https://www.medicines.org.uk/emc/product/2827/smpc/print](https://www.medicines.org.uk/emc/product/2827/smpc/print) accessed 18th June 2021 2023.
    
    

20. 20.Rachmilewitz D. Coated mesalazine (5-aminosalicylic acid) versus sulphasalazine in the treatment of active ulcerative colitis: a randomised trial. Bmj 1989;298(6666):82–6.
    
    [Abstract/FREE Full Text](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/ijlink/YTozOntzOjQ6InBhdGgiO3M6MTQ6Ii9sb29rdXAvaWpsaW5rIjtzOjU6InF1ZXJ5IjthOjQ6e3M6ODoibGlua1R5cGUiO3M6NDoiQUJTVCI7czoxMToiam91cm5hbENvZGUiO3M6MzoiYm1qIjtzOjU6InJlc2lkIjtzOjExOiIyOTgvNjY2Ni84MiI7czo0OiJhdG9tIjtzOjUwOiIvbWVkcnhpdi9lYXJseS8yMDIzLzEyLzE4LzIwMjMuMTIuMTUuMjMyOTk5NDQuYXRvbSI7fXM6ODoiZnJhZ21lbnQiO3M6MDoiIjt9) 

21. 21.Herrett E, Gallagher AM, Bhaskaran K, et al. Data Resource Profile: Clinical Practice Research Datalink (CPRD). International journal of epidemiology 2015;44(3):827–36.
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1093/ije/dyv098&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=26050254&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2023%2F12%2F18%2F2023.12.15.23299944.atom) 

22. 22.Wolf A, Dedman D, Campbell J, et al. Data resource profile: Clinical Practice Research Datalink (CPRD) Aurum. International journal of epidemiology 2019;48(6):1740–40g.
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1093/ije/dyz034&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=http://www.n&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2023%2F12%2F18%2F2023.12.15.23299944.atom) 

23. 23.Nakafero G, Grainge MJ, Williams HC, et al. Risk stratified monitoring for methotrexate toxicity in immune mediated inflammatory diseases: prognostic model development and validation using primary care data from the UK. Bmj 2023;381:e074678.
    
    [Abstract/FREE Full Text](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/ijlink/YTozOntzOjQ6InBhdGgiO3M6MTQ6Ii9sb29rdXAvaWpsaW5rIjtzOjU6InF1ZXJ5IjthOjQ6e3M6ODoibGlua1R5cGUiO3M6NDoiQUJTVCI7czoxMToiam91cm5hbENvZGUiO3M6MzoiYm1qIjtzOjU6InJlc2lkIjtzOjE5OiIzODEvbWF5MzBfNy9lMDc0Njc4IjtzOjQ6ImF0b20iO3M6NTA6Ii9tZWRyeGl2L2Vhcmx5LzIwMjMvMTIvMTgvMjAyMy4xMi4xNS4yMzI5OTk0NC5hdG9tIjt9czo4OiJmcmFnbWVudCI7czowOiIiO30=) 

24. 24.Khwaja A. KDIGO clinical practice guidelines for acute kidney injury. Nephron Clin Pract 2012;120(4):c179–84.
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1159/000339789&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=22890468&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2023%2F12%2F18%2F2023.12.15.23299944.atom) 

25. 25.Nakafero G, Grainge MJ, Card T, et al. What is the incidence of methotrexate or leflunomide discontinuation related to cytopenia, liver enzyme elevation or kidney function decline? Rheumatology 2021;60(12):5785–94.
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1093/rheumatology/keab254&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=33725120&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2023%2F12%2F18%2F2023.12.15.23299944.atom) 

26. 26.Chalasani N, Björnsson E. Risk factors for idiosyncratic drug-induced liver injury. Gastroenterology 2010;138(7):2246–59.
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1053/j.gastro.2010.04.001&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=20394749&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2023%2F12%2F18%2F2023.12.15.23299944.atom) 

27. 27.Safy-Khan M, de Hair MJH, Welsing PMJ, et al. Current Smoking Negatively Affects the Response to Methotrexate in Rheumatoid Arthritis in a Dose-responsive Way, Independently of Concomitant Prednisone Use. J Rheumatol 2021;48(10):1504–07.
    
    [Abstract/FREE Full Text](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/ijlink/YTozOntzOjQ6InBhdGgiO3M6MTQ6Ii9sb29rdXAvaWpsaW5rIjtzOjU6InF1ZXJ5IjthOjQ6e3M6ODoibGlua1R5cGUiO3M6NDoiQUJTVCI7czoxMToiam91cm5hbENvZGUiO3M6NjoianJoZXVtIjtzOjU6InJlc2lkIjtzOjEwOiI0OC8xMC8xNTA0IjtzOjQ6ImF0b20iO3M6NTA6Ii9tZWRyeGl2L2Vhcmx5LzIwMjMvMTIvMTgvMjAyMy4xMi4xNS4yMzI5OTk0NC5hdG9tIjt9czo4OiJmcmFnbWVudCI7czowOiIiO30=) 

28. 28.Committee JF. British National Formulary. [85]. London: BMJ Group and Pharmaceutical Press; [2023].
    
    

29. 29.Meijer B, Wilhelm AJ, Mulder CJJ, et al. Pharmacology of Thiopurine Therapy in Inflammatory Bowel Disease and Complete Blood Cell Count Outcomes: A 5-Year Database Study. Ther Drug Monit 2017;39(4):399–405.
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1097/FTD.0000000000000414&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=28489727&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2023%2F12%2F18%2F2023.12.15.23299944.atom) 

30. 30.Dirven L, Klarenbeek NB, van den Broek M, et al. Risk of alanine transferase (ALT) elevation in patients with rheumatoid arthritis treated with methotrexate in a DAS-steered strategy. Clin Rheumatol 2013;32(5):585–90.
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1007/s10067-012-2136-8&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=23224330&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2023%2F12%2F18%2F2023.12.15.23299944.atom) 

31. 31.Riley RD, Ensor J, Snell KIE, et al. Calculating the sample size required for developing a clinical prediction model. BMJ 2020;368:m441.
    
    

32. 32.Riley RD, Debray TPA, Collins GS, et al. Minimum sample size for external validation of a clinical prediction model with a binary outcome. Statistics in Medicine 2021;40(19):4230–51.
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1002/sim.9025&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=http://www.n&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2023%2F12%2F18%2F2023.12.15.23299944.atom) 

33. 33.Schafer JL. Multiple imputation: a primer. Stat Methods Med Res 1999;8(1):3–15.
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1177/096228029900800102&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10347857&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2023%2F12%2F18%2F2023.12.15.23299944.atom) 
    
    [Web of Science](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=000083699900002&link_type=ISI) 

34. 34.Steyerberg EW. Clinical Prediction Models : A Practical Approach to Development, Validation, and Updating. Cham, SWITZERLAND: Springer International Publishing AG 2019.
    
    

35. 35.Royston P, Altman DG. External validation of a Cox prognostic model: principles and methods. BMC Medical Research Methodology 2013;13(1):33.
    
    

36. 36.Cox DR. Note on Grouping. Journal of the American Statistical Association 1957;52(280):543–47.
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.2307/2281704&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [Web of Science](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=A1957WX09100013&link_type=ISI) 

37. 37.Moons KG, Altman DG, Reitsma JB, et al. Transparent Reporting of a multivariable prediction model for Individual Prognosis or Diagnosis (TRIPOD): explanation and elaboration. Annals of internal medicine 2015;162(1):W1–73.
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.7326/M14-0698&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=25560730&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2023%2F12%2F18%2F2023.12.15.23299944.atom) 

38. 38.AlAskar D, AlSardi M, Al Sulais E, et al. Risk of neutropenia in inflammatory bowel disease patients treated with TNF inhibitors: A single-center, retrospective cohort study. Saudi J Gastroenterol 2020;26(4):210–5.
    
    

39. 39.Lowry PW, Franklin CL, Weaver AL, et al. Leucopenia resulting from a drug interaction between azathioprine or 6-mercaptopurine and mesalamine, sulphasalazine, or balsalazide. Gut 2001;49(5):656–64.
    
    [Abstract/FREE Full Text](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/ijlink/YTozOntzOjQ6InBhdGgiO3M6MTQ6Ii9sb29rdXAvaWpsaW5rIjtzOjU6InF1ZXJ5IjthOjQ6e3M6ODoibGlua1R5cGUiO3M6NDoiQUJTVCI7czoxMToiam91cm5hbENvZGUiO3M6NjoiZ3V0am5sIjtzOjU6InJlc2lkIjtzOjg6IjQ5LzUvNjU2IjtzOjQ6ImF0b20iO3M6NTA6Ii9tZWRyeGl2L2Vhcmx5LzIwMjMvMTIvMTgvMjAyMy4xMi4xNS4yMzI5OTk0NC5hdG9tIjt9czo4OiJmcmFnbWVudCI7czowOiIiO30=) 

40. 40.Mayberry H, Moshkovska T, Mayberry JF. Co-prescribing azathiopurine or 6-mercaptopurine and 5-aminosalicylate compounds in ulcerative colitis. Inflamm Bowel Dis 2009;15(2):190–2.
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=18839420&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2023%2F12%2F18%2F2023.12.15.23299944.atom) 

41. 41.Nakafero G, Grainge MJ, Card T, et al. Development and validation of a prognostic model for leflunomide discontinuation with abnormal blood tests during long-term treatment: cohort study using data from the Clinical Practice Research Datalink Gold and Aurum. Rheumatology (Oxford*)* 2022;61(7):2783–91.
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1093/rheumatology/keab790&link_type=DOI)