Subcutaneous phaeohyphomycosis caused by<i>Lasiodiplodia theobromae</i>and successfully treated surgically
Bibliographic record
Abstract
While visiting Jamaica, a 50-year-old woman stumbled on an outdoor wooden staircase and sustained an injury to the right leg. The wound was cleaned topically and the patient was given antibacterial therapy. Five weeks later, in Canada, she presented with an ulcer at the injury site. An excisional biopsy showed copious broad, septate, melanized fungal filaments penetrating into tissue. Culture yielded a nonsporulating melanized mycelium. The isolate was strongly inhibited by cycloheximide and benomyl but grew at 37 degrees C. After 16 weeks cultivation on modified Leonian's agar at 25 degrees C, it developed pycnidia characteristic of Lasiodiplodia theobromae, a common tropical phytopathogen mainly known previously as a rare agent of keratitis and onychomycosis in humans. The patient was not given antifungal chemotherapy, and the ulcer, which had been broadly excised in the biopsy procedure, ultimately resolved after treatment with saline compresses. The six-month follow-up showed no sign of infection. This case, interpreted in light of previously reported cases, shows that on rare occasions L. theobromae is able to act as an agent of subcutaneous phaeohyphomycosis and that, when this occurs, debridement alone may be sufficient to eradicate it.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".