Follicular Lymphomas of Oral Region Treated by Rituximab Monotherapy: About Two Cases
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Lymphomas represent the second most common malignant lesions of the head and neck. Among them, follicular lymphomas (FLs) are the second most frequent B-cell non-Hodgkin's lymphomas. However, their incidence is rare in the oral cavity. We describe here two cases of FL with initial intra-oral presentation. The first patient was 81 years old and presented a palatal hyperplasia, covering the posterior edge of her dental removable prosthesis. After surgical excision of the lesion, the pathological diagnosis was an extra-nodal low-grade follicular lymphoma. Medical imaging assessment found a widespread but non-bulky involvement. The second patient was 38 years old and referred for asymptomatic swelling of the lower vestibule evolving for 4 months. Surgical exploration revealed a cheek lymphadenopathy infiltrated by a grade 3 FL; this patient did not have any other localization. Both patients were treated by a rituximab monotherapy with excellent response after 2 years of follow-up. Most of the time, FL affecting the oral cavity presenting as unspecific swelling, can mimic other frequent and benign oral lesions. In the absence of biopsy, both diagnosis and proper onco-hematological management may be delayed. The introduction of monoclonal antibody rituximab represents a major advance in the management of FL: it can be used as monotherapy or may be combined with chemo-immunotherapy according to histological grading, initial staging (extent, tumor mass or bulk), age and co-morbidities. These two observations show the importance of an early diagnosis regarding a chronic lesion in the oral cavity. Painless lymphadenopathy, asymptomatic swelling, aspecific mucosal lesions, or subprosthetic lesions should draw attention of any oral specialist.
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) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
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".