Chamith S Rajapakse1, Carter Lindborg2, Haitao Wang3, Benjamin T Newman4, Elizabeth A Kobe4, Gregory Chang5, Eileen M Shore6, Frederick S Kaplan7, Robert J Pignolo8. 1. Department of Radiology, University of Pennsylvania, 3400 Spruce Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19104; Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19104. Electronic address: chamith@mail.med.upenn.edu. 2. Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19104; Department of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19104. 3. Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19104; Department of Genetics, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19104. 4. Department of Radiology, University of Pennsylvania, 3400 Spruce Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19104. 5. The Center for Research in FOP and Related Disorders, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19104. 6. Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19104; Department of Genetics, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19104; Department of Radiology, NYU Langone Medical Center, New York, New York. 7. Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19104; Department of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19104; Department of Genetics, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19104. 8. Division of Geriatric Medicine & Gerontology, Mayo Clinic College of Medicine, Rochester, Minnesota.
Abstract
RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES: Severe progressive multifocal heterotopic ossification (HO) is a rare occurrence seen predominantly in patients who have fibrodysplasia ossificans progressiva (FOP) and is difficult to quantitate owing to patient-, disease-, logistical-, and radiation-related issues. The purpose of this study was to develop and validate a scoring system based on plain radiographs for quantitative assessment of HO lesions in patients with FOP. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Institutional review board approval was obtained from the University of Pennsylvania, and all data comply with Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act regulations. The University of Pennsylvania Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee approved the use of mice in this study. First, we used a mouse model of FOP-like HO to validate a semiquantitative analog scale for estimating relative heterotopic bone volume. Second, we used this validated scale to estimate the relative amount of HO from a retrospective analysis of plain radiographs from 63 patients with classic FOP. Finally, the scale was applied to a retrospective analysis of computed tomographic images from three patients with FOP. RESULTS: In the FOP-mouse model, the observed rating on the analog scale is highly correlated to heterotopic bone volumes measured by microcomputed tomography (R2 = 0.89). The scoring system that was applied to radiographs of patients with FOP captured the clinical range of HO typically present at all axial and appendicular sites. Analysis of computed tomographic scans of patients with FOP found that observed radiograph ratings were highly correlated with HO volume (R2 = 0.80). CONCLUSIONS: The scoring system described here could enable practical, quantitative assessment of HO in clinical trials to evaluate new treatment modalities, especially for FOP. The development of the six-point analog scale described here provides and validates a much-needed, reproducible, and quantifiable method for describing and assessing HO in patients with FOP. This scale has the potential to be a key descriptor that can inform patients with FOP and clinicians about disease progression and response of HO lesions to interventions and treatments.
RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES: Severe progressive multifocal heterotopic ossification (HO) is a rare occurrence seen predominantly in patients who have fibrodysplasia ossificans progressiva (FOP) and is difficult to quantitate owing to patient-, disease-, logistical-, and radiation-related issues. The purpose of this study was to develop and validate a scoring system based on plain radiographs for quantitative assessment of HO lesions in patients with FOP. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Institutional review board approval was obtained from the University of Pennsylvania, and all data comply with Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act regulations. The University of Pennsylvania Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee approved the use of mice in this study. First, we used a mouse model of FOP-like HO to validate a semiquantitative analog scale for estimating relative heterotopic bone volume. Second, we used this validated scale to estimate the relative amount of HO from a retrospective analysis of plain radiographs from 63 patients with classic FOP. Finally, the scale was applied to a retrospective analysis of computed tomographic images from three patients with FOP. RESULTS: In the FOP-mouse model, the observed rating on the analog scale is highly correlated to heterotopic bone volumes measured by microcomputed tomography (R2 = 0.89). The scoring system that was applied to radiographs of patients with FOP captured the clinical range of HO typically present at all axial and appendicular sites. Analysis of computed tomographic scans of patients with FOP found that observed radiograph ratings were highly correlated with HO volume (R2 = 0.80). CONCLUSIONS: The scoring system described here could enable practical, quantitative assessment of HO in clinical trials to evaluate new treatment modalities, especially for FOP. The development of the six-point analog scale described here provides and validates a much-needed, reproducible, and quantifiable method for describing and assessing HO in patients with FOP. This scale has the potential to be a key descriptor that can inform patients with FOP and clinicians about disease progression and response of HO lesions to interventions and treatments.
Authors: Eileen M Shore; Meiqi Xu; George J Feldman; David A Fenstermacher; Tae-Joon Cho; In Ho Choi; J Michael Connor; Patricia Delai; David L Glaser; Martine LeMerrer; Rolf Morhart; John G Rogers; Roger Smith; James T Triffitt; J Andoni Urtizberea; Michael Zasloff; Matthew A Brown; Frederick S Kaplan Journal: Nat Genet Date: 2006-04-23 Impact factor: 38.330
Authors: Lixin Kan; Vitali Y Lounev; Robert J Pignolo; Lishu Duan; Yijie Liu; Stuart R Stock; Tammy L McGuire; Bao Lu; Norma P Gerard; Eileen M Shore; Frederick S Kaplan; John A Kessler Journal: J Cell Biochem Date: 2011-10 Impact factor: 4.429
Authors: Sarah J Hatsell; Vincent Idone; Dana M Alessi Wolken; Lily Huang; Hyon J Kim; Lili Wang; Xialing Wen; Kalyan C Nannuru; Johanna Jimenez; Liqin Xie; Nanditha Das; Genevieve Makhoul; Rostislav Chernomorsky; David D'Ambrosio; Richard A Corpina; Christopher J Schoenherr; Kieran Feeley; Paul B Yu; George D Yancopoulos; Andrew J Murphy; Aris N Economides Journal: Sci Transl Med Date: 2015-09-02 Impact factor: 17.956
Authors: Frederick S Kaplan; Martine Le Merrer; David L Glaser; Robert J Pignolo; Robert E Goldsby; Joseph A Kitterman; Jay Groppe; Eileen M Shore Journal: Best Pract Res Clin Rheumatol Date: 2008-03 Impact factor: 4.098
Authors: R Cameron Brownley; Shailesh Agarwal; Shawn Loder; Oluwatobi Eboda; John Li; Joshua Peterson; Charles Hwang; Christopher Breuler; Vesa Kaartinen; Bin Zhou; Yuji Mishina; Benjamin Levi Journal: PLoS One Date: 2015-11-06 Impact factor: 3.240