Lupus miliaris disseminatus faciei treated with 1,565 nm nonablative fractionated laser resurfacing: A case report
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Lupus miliaris disseminatus faciei (LMDF) is a rare granulomatous disease. It presents as red-brown papules on the face that can resolve with scarring. LMDF is often resistant to treatment. OBJECTIVE: Nonablative fractionated lasers have been used effectively to treat granulomatous disorders; however, there is little data on the treatment of LMDF with lasers. Our objective was to test a novel non-ablative fractionated laser for the treatment of recalcitrant LMDF. RESULTS: A 24-year-old man had a one-year history of LMDF. He had been treated with various topical therapies, oral medications, and laser devices with no improvement and continued progression. We utilized a non-sequential scanning 1,565 nm nonablative fractionated laser to treat this patient. After only one treatment he had significant improvement. He has been subsequently treated five times in the past 6 months and has continued to improve. CONCLUSION: The novel 1,565 nm nonablative fractionated laser may be a useful tool in the treatment of granulomatous conditions such as LMDF.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".