Linagliptin-Associated Alopecia and Bullous Pemphigoid
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Bullous pemphigoid is a chronic autoimmune blistering disease. Recently, several reports suggested dipeptidyl peptidase 4 (DPP-4) inhibitors, also known as gliptins, were a potential cause of drug-induced bullous pemphigoid but not of both bullous pemphigoid and alopecia areata together. Here we describe the case of a 68-year-old man with type 2 diabetes mellitus who developed new onset diffuse alopecia on the scalp with diffuse tense bullae over his body a few months after linagliptin was introduced for better control of his diabetes. DPP-4 inhibitors are not known to increase the risk of alopecia. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first report of linagliptin-associated alopecia areata and bullous pemphigoid, which may help demonstrate if there are any links between DPP-4 inhibitors and alopecia. LEARNING POINTS: This is the first report of linagliptin-associated alopecia areata and bullous pemphigoid (BP), which may help demonstrate a link between DPP-4 inhibitors and alopecia.Since the time of onset of BP after initiation of a DPP-4 inhibitor varies, a high index of suspicion is needed for diagnosis.Early diagnosis is essential as DPP-4 inhibitor withdrawal has a significant effect on disease remission.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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".