Probable rheumatoid meningitis complicated by cryptococcal meningitis: A case report
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We report a case of rheumatoid meningitis complicated with cryptococcal meningitis in a 59-year-old female with rheumatoid arthritis. Migraine symptoms were followed by abnormal behavior, and the patient was admitted with fever and headache. On admission, her cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) contained 115 cells/μl, a protein content of 95 mg/dl, and a sugar level of 47 mg/dl; Her serum anti-cyclic citrullinated peptide (CCP) antibody value was high (174 U/ml), and a brain MRI showed enhanced gadolinium lesions in the cerebral/cerebellar pia mater and subarachnoid space, etc. Probable rheumatoid meningitis was clinically diagnosed, and a prednisolone (PSL) pulse was started. Several days later, a CSF culture test was positive for Cryptococcus neoformans, and the antigen titer was 128-fold. Liposomal-amphotericin B (L-AMB) was started for cryptococcal meningitis, combined with three PSL pulses for rheumatoid meningitis. After about 4 weeks, the number of CSF cells and anti-CCP antibodies decreased rapidly. At 2 months after the onset, the meningitis recurred. The MRI contrast lesions reappeared, and the CSF cells increased to 24/μl. Serum and CSF anti-CCP antibodies increased at the time of recurrence, but the cryptococcal antigen titer decreased. Thus, we concluded that the rheumatoid meningitis mainly involved the pathogenesis of both types of meningitis. The number of PSL pulses was limited to four. Post-perioral therapy was avoided. Methotrexate was continued for the rheumatoid meningitis, fluconazole was continued for the cryptococcal meningitis, and neither type of meningitis has recurred.
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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.008 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".