Issues in CPPD Nomenclature and Classification

Describing calcium pyrophosphate deposition: undoing the tower of Babel!

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

In 1977, McCarty astutely observed, 'The variety of names suggested for the condition associated with deposits of calcium pyrophosphate dihydrate crystals is exceeded only by the variations of its clinical presentation'. Fast forward to 2024, a standardized nomenclature for calcium pyrophosphate deposition (CPPD) is still lacking. This review aims to delineate the challenges in characterizing CPPD through nomenclature and imaging.

RECENT FINDINGS

Despite the effort of nomenclature standardization in 2011 by the EULAR, confusion persists in the literature and clinical practice, with pseudo-forms and obscure abbreviations. The Gout, Hyperuricemia and Crystal-Associated Disease Network (G-CAN) has launched a project to redefine CPPD nomenclature and formulate a user-friendly language for effective communication with patients and other stakeholders. Additionally, recent advancements in imaging, have shed light on various aspects of the disorder.

SUMMARY

Almost 60 years from the first description of a clinical manifestation related to calcium pyrophosphate crystals, a common language describing the disorder is still lacking. A redefined CPPD nomenclature, together with lay-friendly terminology, would significantly contribute to the uniformity of CPPD research, enhance public understanding and awareness and improve doctor-patient communication and therefore disease outcomes. Imaging can provide deep insights into CPPD elements, promoting comprehension of this disorder.

How can ultrasonography help in the management of CPPD? From diagnosis to clinical subset identification

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Clinical manifestations of calcium pyrophosphate deposition (CPPD) disease are quite heterogeneous, ranging from asymptomatic presentation to severe forms of arthritis. In recent years, imaging, particularly ultrasound (US) has gained a central role for the diagnosis of CPPD. However, many questions are still open. Aim of this review is to present how US could be a key tool in the diagnosis and assessment of CPPD and for the identification of subsets of the disease.

RECENT FINDINGS

awareness and research interest around CPPD is increasing in the recent years, as several international taskforces are working on the validation of outcome measures and classification criteria for CPPD, but many pieces of the puzzle are still missing. Recent studies demonstrated that CPPD is an underdiagnosed disease, frequently misdiagnosed as rheumatoid arthritis or polymyalgia rheumatica. US has been increasingly used in the past decade for the diagnosis of CPPD and US definitions have been validated by the OMERACT US working group in the recent years, making of US a valuable tool for diagnosis.

SUMMARY

The most challenging aspects of CPPD are the differential diagnosis with other form of arthritis of the elderly, and the classification of patients in clinical subsets. In this review, we will present the available data for the use of US in the diagnosis of CPPD and we will provide a mainly experienced-based approach to the potential role of the technique in differential diagnosis and phenotypization of patients.

Diagnosis and Treatment of Calcium Pyrophosphate Deposition (CPPD) Disease: A Review

Calcium Pyrophosphate Dihydrate (CPPD) crystal-related arthropathies are a common cause of acute and chronic arthritis caused by the deposition of calcium pyrophosphate crystals in joints and soft tissues, resulting in inflammation and joint damage. They present with a wide spectrum of clinical manifestations and often present challenges to diagnosis and management as they commonly affect older co-morbid patients. The challenges are compounded by a lack of a well-defined description of CPPD. However, an international expert-driven process is underway to develop CPPD classification criteria. Treatment is also problematic as unlike gout, there are no agents available that decrease the crystal burden. Treatment options have often been extrapolated from gout treatment pathways without having extensive trials or a solid evidence base. It is hoped the new CPPD classification guidelines will contribute to large multicentre studies, with well-defined patient cohorts, which will facilitate the production of high-quality evidence to guide the management of this condition. Here, we discuss the barriers and facilitators in diagnosing and treating CPPD-related arthropathy.

High prevalence of chondrocalcinosis and frequent comorbidity with calcium pyrophosphate deposition disease in patients with seronegative rheumatoid arthritis

Background

The crystal-induced calcium pyrophosphate deposition disease (CPPD) clinically appearing as pseudogout differs from the mere radiographic finding of chondrocalcinosis (CC) but may cause symptoms resembling rheumatoid arthritis (RA).

Objective

To study the prevalence of CPPD and CC in rheumatic diseases focusing on differences between seropositive and seronegative RA.

Patients and methods

In a retrospective study design, we analysed records and radiographs of consecutive new patients presenting to our centre between January 2017 and May 2020. 503 patients were identified based on expert diagnoses: 181 with CPPD, 262 with RA, 142 seropositive (54.2%) and 120 seronegative RA, gout (n=30) and polymyalgia rheumatica (n=30), mean symptom duration <1 year in almost all patients.

Results

The majority of patients had only one rheumatological diagnosis (86.9%). Most patients with CPPD (92.6%) had radiographic CC, primarily in the wrists. The prevalence of CC was higher in seronegative (32.3%) than in seropositive RA (16.6%), respectively (p<0.001). Patients with CPPD were older (p<0.001) and had acute attacks more frequently than patients with RA (p<0.001), who had symmetric arthritis more often (p=0.007). The distribution pattern of osteoarthritic changes in radiographs of hands and wrists differs between patients with RA and CPPD. CC was present in more than one joint in 73.3% of patients with CPPD, 9.6% with seropositive and 18.7% with seronegative RA.

Discussion

CPPD and CC were more frequent in seronegative versus seropositive RA. Symmetry of arthritis and acuteness of attacks differentiated best between CPPD and RA but localisation of joint involvement did not. Co-occurrence of both diseases was frequently observed.

Review: Outcome measures in calcium pyrophosphate deposition

This review highlights outcomes for patients with calcium pyrophosphate deposition (CPPD) reported in prior studies and underscores challenges to assessing outcomes of this condition. Prior clinical studies of interventions for CPPD focused on joint damage and calcification on imaging tests, joint pain, swelling, and inflammatory biomarkers. Qualitative interviews with patients with CPPD and healthcare providers additionally identified flares, overall function, and use of analgesic medications as important outcomes. Imaging evidence of joint damage and calcification is likely to be outcomes in future clinical studies of CPPD, though reliability and sensitivity to change in CPPD require further testing for several imaging modalities. Challenges to outcome measurement in CPPD include questions of attribution of signs and symptoms to CPPD versus co-existing forms of arthritis, lack of therapies to prevent or dissolve calcium pyrophosphate crystal deposition, absence of validated patient- or physician-reported CPPD outcome measures, and scarcity of large cohorts in which to study outcomes of different clinical presentations of CPPD.

A critical review of the available evidence on the diagnosis and clinical features of CPPD: do we really need imaging?

Imaging has been playing an important role in the pathogenetic and clinical characterisation of many rheumatic diseases, especially in the most recent years with the advent of many new, highly technological and promising techniques. Calcium pyrophosphate deposition disease (CPPD) benefited also from these new techniques, most of which can readily identify calcium crystals. Nowadays, imaging is used mainly to identify crystals in joints but given the complexity of CPPD, imaging should be used with an "holistic" approach in order to gain insights in the pathogenesis, spectrum of clinical manifestations and natural history of the disease. Furthermore, overlap or association of CPPD with other prevalent diseases of the elderly makes the differential diagnosis challenging. In this review, we provide a critical review of the current knowledge on the use of imaging both for the identification of crystals and for its application in clinical practice as an aid for determining the impact of the disease on patients.Key Points• CPPD is a complex disease with a wide spectrum of clinical manifestations and understanding of pathogenetic mechanisms and clinical phenotypes is essential for correct characterisation• Imaging has made important advances regarding identification of CPPD in recent years, and new, more sophisticated techniques are under investigation• Imaging has the potential to improve our knowledge on pathogenesis and clinical phenotypes of CPPD• Imaging techniques have to be tested thoroughly for reliability, discrimination and sensitivity to change before they can be implemented in clinical trials.

Tacrolimus induced pseudogout following allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplant

INTRODUCTION

Crystalline arthritis (CA), characterized by acute joint pain and erythema secondary to calcium pyrophosphate deposition (CPPD, or pseudogout) or monosodium urate crystals (gout), is a potentially underreported complication following allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplant (alloHCT). Graft-versus-host disease prophylaxis with calcineurin inhibitors (CNIs) causes hypomagnesemia and hyperuricemia, resulting in CA. CA related to tacrolimus has yet to be characterized following alloHCT.

CASE REPORT

We retrospectively reviewed records of 450 consecutive patients undergoing alloHCT and identified 15 (3.3% incidence) who developed CA on tacrolimus. Large joints were involved in 10 (66.7%) patients, all patients had recent hypomagnesemia, and no patient had hyperuricemia, suggesting CPPD was the most likely etiology.Management and outcome: Eleven (73.3%) patients received systemic corticosteroids; 6 as initial therapy and 5 added to or substituted for colchicine in the setting of slow or inadequate response. The median duration of corticosteroid therapy was 6 days, however 2 patients (13.3%) required prolonged maintenance due to recurrence. Eleven (73.3%) patients received colchicine; 9 as initial therapy and 2 added to or substituted for corticosteroids in the setting of slow or inadequate response. The median duration of colchicine therapy was 18 days. The median time to symptom resolution was 21 days.

DISCUSSION

Patients on tacrolimus following alloHCT presenting with acute joint pain and erythema should be evaluated for CPPD. Hypomagnesemia secondary to CNIs is likely the precipitating factor for CPPD in this population. Patients can effectively be managed with systemic corticosteroids and/or colchicine, however prolonged duration of treatment and even maintenance may be necessary. Based on the Naranjo Algorithm, CPPD secondary to tacrolimus induced hypomagnesemia is a possible adverse drug event, with a score of 3-4.