Use of Pioglitazone in Patients with Lichen Planopilaris
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Recent basic science research has revealed a decreased tissue expression of peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor (PPAR) γ in lichen planopilaris (LPP). Therefore, thiazolidinediones, being PPARγ agonists, could be used to treat LPP. METHODS: We followed 24 patients with LPP who were treated with oral pioglitazone hydrochloride. Improvement in LPP was defined as a decrease in or disappearance of symptoms and perifollicular erythema in the context of halted spread of old patches. RESULTS: Twenty of 24 patients were females. The average age was 52.5 years, and ages ranged from 22 to 70 years. Five of 24 patients have achieved remission; improvement was noted in half of the patients; there was no change in 3 patients; and 4 patients discontinued treatment due to side effects. Side effects were mild and included left calf pain, lightheadedness and nausea, dizziness, and hives. CONCLUSION: Use of thiazolidinediones might be a new promising venue of LPP treatment.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".