Retrospective Review of Folliculitis Decalvans in 23 Patients with Course and Treatment Analysis of Long-standing Cases
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: To date, there is no standard treatment of folliculitis decalvans (FD), a rare type of cicatricial alopecia. OBJECTIVE AND METHODS: The records of 23 patients with FD (1998-2012) were retrospectively analyzed, with added data review on the course and treatment of long-standing cases. RESULTS: Initial management consisted mostly of intralesional triamcinolone acetonide, clobetasol lotion, and either cephalexin, minocycline, doxycycline, or tetracycline. Alternatives consisted of rifampicin, clindamycin, ciprofloxacin, and isotretinoin. Remission was achieved in weeks to months in more than half of the cases, with low occurrence of relapse. The poor responders had a protracted course of temporary improvement and multiple relapses. CONCLUSION: The majority of patients showed improvement and subsequent remission with oral antibiotics. In some patients, it took years of slow taper before the antibiotic could be discontinued. Only a few patients had recalcitrant disease, with minimal response to their initial and alternative medications.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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 teacher head, 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".