Outcome domains reported by patients, caregivers, healthcare professionals and stakeholders for calcium pyrophosphate deposition (CPPD): A content analysis based on semi-structured qualitative interviews from the OMERACT CPPD working group

Core domain set for chronic and/or recurrent manifestations of calcium pyrophosphate deposition disease: OMERACT delphi survey to establish consensus

OBJECTIVE

To agree on important domains for the Outcome Measures in Rheumatology (OMERACT) core domain set for chronic and/or recurrent manifestations of calcium pyrophosphate deposition (CPPD) disease.

METHODS

Patient research partners (PRPs) and other participants (mainly clinicians and researchers) contributed to three rounds of a consensus survey using Delphi methodology. Consensus was defined if ≥70% of both patients and other participants scored the domain as 'critically important domain to include'. In a subsequent ranking exercise, all participants were asked to select and rank up to 10 of the domains reaching consensus.

RESULTS

Fifteen domains reached consensus as critically important. Within the Pathophysiological Manifestations area, these were joint pain, joint tenderness, joint swelling, acute CPP crystal arthritis flare, joint damage on imaging tests, joint calcification on imaging tests, and crystals in joint fluid. Within the Life Impact area, these were overall function, ability to complete daily tasks, ability to work, health related quality of life, patient global assessment response to treatment, patient global assessment of disease activity, physician global assessment of disease activity, and patient satisfaction with treatment. No domains within the Societal/Resource Use area reached consensus as critically important. In the ranking exercise, joint pain, joint tenderness, joint swelling, acute CPP crystal arthritis flare and overall function were most highly ranked.

CONCLUSION

This work has identified potential domains for the OMERACT core domain set for chronic and/or recurrent manifestations of CPPD disease. There was strong support for joint pain, joint tenderness, joint swelling, acute CPP crystal arthritis flare, overall function, and global assessments of disease activity as core domains.

Core domain set for studies of acute calcium pyrophosphate crystal arthritis: OMERACT delphi survey to establish consensus

OBJECTIVE

To identify potential domains for the Outcome Measures in Rheumatology (OMERACT) core domain set for studies of an individual flare of acute calcium pyrophosphate (CPP) crystal arthritis.

METHODS

Patient research partners (PRPs) and other participants (mainly clinicians and researchers) completed three rounds of survey using Delphi methodology. Consensus was defined as ≥ 70 % of both PRP and other participants groups rated the domain as a 'critically important domain to include'. In a subsequent ranking exercise, all participants were asked to rank and comment on up to 10 domains to include as core domains.

RESULTS

Fourteen domains reached consensus as critically important in the Delphi survey. In the Pathophysiological Manifestations area, the domains were joint pain, joint tenderness, joint swelling, joint inflammation on imaging tests and duration of acute CPP crystal arthritis flare. In the Life Impact area, the domains were overall function, ability to complete daily tasks, ability to work, health related quality of life, patient global assessment response to treatment, patient and physician global assessments of disease activity, and patient satisfaction with treatment. In the Societal/Resource Use area, use of rescue medications reached consensus. In the ranking exercise, joint pain, joint tenderness, joint swelling, overall function and ability to complete daily tasks ranked highest.

CONCLUSION

Joint pain, joint swelling, joint tenderness, duration of acute CPP crystal arthritis flare, overall function, ability to complete daily tasks, and patient global assessment of disease activity received the strongest support to be included in the OMERACT core domain set for studies of acute CPP crystal arthritis.

Patient-Reported Outcomes in Calcium Pyrophosphate Deposition Disease Compared to Gout and Osteoarthritis

OBJECTIVE

Calcium pyrophosphate deposition (CPPD) disease prevalence is similar to that of gout and osteoarthritis (OA), yet CPPD outcomes research greatly lags behind research in these other forms of arthritis. We compared validated patient-reported outcome measures in patients with CPPD vs gout and OA.

METHODS

Patients with CPPD were recruited from Brigham and Women's Hospital from 2018 to 2022. Presence of CPPD manifestations (acute calcium pyrophosphate [CPP] crystal arthritis, chronic CPP inflammatory arthritis, and/or OA with CPPD) was confirmed by medical record review. Baseline surveys included the Gout Assessment Questionnaire version 2.0, modified to ask about "pseudogout" rather than "gout"; Routine Assessment of Patient Index Data 3 (RAPID-3); and Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC). We compared responses in patients with CPPD against published gout and OA cohort studies.

RESULTS

Among 47 patients with CPPD, the mean age was 71.9 years and 51% were female. Sixty-eight percent had at least 1 episode of acute CPP crystal arthritis, 40% had chronic CPP inflammatory arthritis, and 62% had OA with CPPD. Pain visual analog scale scores during a flare were similar in CPPD (mean 6.8 [SD 1.9]) and gout (mean 6.7 [SD 2.6]; P = 0.78). Patients with CPPD reported significantly greater unmet treatment need than patients with gout (P = 0.04). RAPID-3 scores in CPPD (mean 8.1 [SD 5.6]) were lower than in gout (mean 12.1 [SD 6.2]; P < 0.01) and similar in OA (mean 6.8 [SD 6.1]; P = 0.30). Patients with CPPD had significantly worse WOMAC stiffness scores than patients with mild OA, and significantly better WOMAC function scores than patients with severe OA.

CONCLUSION

Patients with CPPD may experience pain comparable to that in gout and OA and reported substantial unmet treatment needs.

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.

Identifying Potential Classification Criteria for Calcium Pyrophosphate Deposition Disease: Item Generation and Item Reduction

OBJECTIVE

Classification criteria for calcium pyrophosphate deposition (CPPD) disease will facilitate clinical research on this common crystalline arthritis. Our objective was to report on the first 2 phases of a 4-phase process for developing CPPD classification criteria.

METHODS

CPPD classification criteria development is overseen by a 12-member steering committee. Item generation (phase I) included a scoping literature review of 5 literature databases and contributions from a 35-member combined expert committee and 2 patient research partners. Item reduction and refinement (phase II) involved a combined expert committee meeting, discussions among clinical, imaging, and laboratory advisory groups, and an item-rating exercise to assess the influence of individual items toward classification. The steering committee reviewed the modal rating score for each item (range -3 [strongly pushes away from CPPD] to +3 [strongly pushes toward CPPD]) to determine items to retain for future phases of criteria development.

RESULTS

Item generation yielded 420 items (312 from the literature, 108 from experts/patients). The advisory groups eliminated items that they agreed were unlikely to distinguish between CPPD and other forms of arthritis, yielding 127 items for the item-rating exercise. Fifty-six items, most of which had a modal rating of +/- 2 or 3, were retained for future phases. As numerous imaging items were rated +3, the steering committee recommended focusing on imaging of the knee and wrist and 1 additional affected joint for calcification suggestive of CPP crystal deposition.

CONCLUSION

A data- and expert-driven process is underway to develop CPPD classification criteria. Candidate items comprise clinical, imaging, and laboratory features.

Risk of cardiovascular events in patients having had acute calcium pyrophosphate crystal arthritis

OBJECTIVES

Calcium pyrophosphate deposition (CPPD) disease, broadly defined, has been associated with increased risk of cardiovascular (CV) events. We investigated risk of CV events in patients with acute CPP crystal arthritis, the acute manifestation of CPPD.

METHODS

Cohort study using Mass General Brigham electronic health record (EHR) data, 1991-2017. Patients with acute CPP crystal arthritis were identified using a published machine learning algorithm with positive predictive value 81%. Comparators were matched on year of EHR entry and index date of patients with acute CPP crystal arthritis (first positive synovial fluid CPP result or mention of 'pseudogout', or matched encounter). Major adverse cardiovascular event (MACE) was a composite of non-fatal CV event (myocardial infarction, acute coronary syndrome, coronary revascularisation, stroke) and death. We estimated incidence rates (IRs) and adjusted hazard ratios for MACE, non-fatal CV event and death, allowing for differential estimates during years 0-2 and 2-10. Sensitivity analyses included: (1) patients with acute CPP crystal arthritis diagnosed during outpatient visits, (2) patients with linked Medicare data, 2007-2016 and (3)patients matched on number of CV risk factors.

RESULTS

We matched 1200 acute CPP crystal arthritis patients to 3810 comparators. IR for MACE in years 0-2 was 91/1000 person-years (p-y) in acute CPP crystal arthritis and 59/1000 p-y in comparators. In years 2-10, IR for MACE was 58/1000 p-y in acute CPP crystal arthritis and 53/1000 p-y in comparators. Acute CPP crystal arthritis was significantly associated with increased risk for MACE in years 0-2 (HR 1.32, 95% CI 1.01 to 1.73) and non-fatal CV event in years 0-2 (HR 1.92, 95% CI 1.12 to 3.28) and years 2-10 (HR 2.18, 95% CI 1.27 to 3.75), but not death. Results of sensitivity analyses were similar to the primary analysis; in the outpatient-only analysis, risk of non-fatal CVE was significantly elevated in years 2-10 but not in years 0-2.

CONCLUSIONS

Acute CPP crystal arthritis was significantly associated with elevated short and long-term risk for non-fatal CV event.

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.

Towards development of core domain sets for short term and long term studies of calcium pyrophosphate crystal deposition (CPPD) disease: A framework paper by the OMERACT CPPD working group

INTRODUCTION

Although calcium pyrophosphate deposition (CPPD) is common, there are no published outcome domains or validated measurement instruments for CPPD studies. In this paper, we describe the framework for development of the Outcome Measures in Rheumatology (OMERACT) CPPD Core Domain Sets.

METHODS

The OMERACT CPPD working group performed a scoping literature review and qualitative interview study. Generated outcomes were presented at the 2020 OMERACT CPPD virtual Special Interest Group (SIG) meeting with discussion focused on whether different core domain sets should be developed for different calcium pyrophosphate deposition (CPPD) clinical presentations and how the future CPPD Core Domain Set may overlap with already established osteoarthritis (OA) domains. These discussions informed development of a future work plan for development of the OMERACT CPPD Core Domain Sets.

FINDINGS

Domains identified from a scoping review of 112 studies and a qualitative interview study of 36 people (28 patients with CPPD, 7 health care professionals, one stakeholder) were mapped to core areas of OMERACT Filter 2.1. The majority of SIG participants agreed there was need to develop separate core domain sets for "short term" and "long term" studies of CPPD. Although CPPD + OA is common and core domain sets for OA have been established, participants agreed that existing OA core domain sets should not influence the development of OMERACT core domain sets for CPPD. Prioritization exercises (using Delphi methodology) will consider 40 potential domains for short term studies of CPPD and 47 potential domains for long term studies of CPPD.

CONCLUSION

Separate OMERACT CPPD Core Domain Sets will be developed for "short term" studies for an individual flare of acute CPP crystal arthritis and for "long term" studies that may include participants with any clinical presentation of CPPD (acute CPP crystal arthritis, chronic CPP crystal inflammatory arthritis, and/or CPPD + OA).