Development of bullous pemphigoid after change of dialysis membrane
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A 75-year-old Japanese man presented with pruritic blisters and macules on his trunk and extremities. He had been on hemodialysis for 4 years because of chronic renal failure, and in recent months, a polymethylmethacrylate membrane had been used for dialysis. After a change in dialysis membrane to a cellulose triacetate membrane, pruritic tense blisters developed on the extremities in combination with marked blood eosinophilia. Physical examination showed erythematous macules and tense blisters on the trunk and extremities. A biopsy specimen of an erythematous macule showed subepidermal vesicles and eosinophils that attached to the dermal-epidermal junction. Serum level of eosinophilic cationic protein was elevated. From clinical, histological, and immunological findings, a diagnosis of bullous pemphigoid was made. New blisters continued to erupt during the period in which the patient used the cellulose triacetate membrane dialyzer, and even after the use of clobetasol propionate. It resolved only after the patient came back to the use of a synthetic membrane dialyzer. We discontinued the use of clobetasol propionate, and neither bullous eruptions nor blood eosinophilia recurred. These observations suggest that cellulose membrane may be involved in the development of bullous pemphigoid through activation of eosinophils in the blood and the skin lesion, as in the present case.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 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".