The cutaneous form of pemphigus vulgaris of the pemphigus chancre type: clinical and therapeutic implications
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Pemphigus vulgaris can show non-textbook clinical peculiarities, "pearls". Case report: A middle-aged male presented with a single desquamating crust with impetiginisation in the parietal area of the scalp present for over 2 years. Clinicians initially suspected microbial causes of the disease, including folliculitis decalvans. The patient was prescribed oral itraconazole, and rifampicin with clindamycin without improvement. Since the H + E examination revealed unequivocal features of pemphigus vulgaris, the patient was referred for proper immunopathological diagnostics. Based on the clinical picture, H + E evaluation, direct immunofluorescence, which showed pemphigus IgG4 deposits, and multiparametric ELISA (increased level of anti-desmoglein 3 IgG antibodies), a cutaneous form of pemphigus vulgaris of the pemphigus chancre type was diagnosed. The patient received intralesional injections of betamethasone dipropionate/betamethasone phosphate and rituximab intravenously (total dose of 2 g) with significant improvement. Conclusions: This patient illustrates that appropriate treatment, in non-emergency cases, should be implemented only after diagnosing patients at the clinical-laboratory level.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 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".