Xanthoma of the Jaw Bones: Cases Series and Review of Literature
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Intraosseous xanthomas are rare benign lesions sometimes associated with excess lipid production. Xanthoma of the jaw bones (XJB) was first reported in 1964, and fewer than 50 cases have been reported in the English literature to date. The etiopathogenesis of XJB is highly suggestive of a reactive process or a metabolic condition. METHOD: Seven cases of XJBs were retrieved from the archives of 4 oral and maxillofacial pathology services. Clinical, radiographic and histopathologic features of all these cases were retrospectively analyzed. Immunohistochemical (IHC) stains for S100 and CD68 were performed. RESULTS: All seven cases involved the mandible. Patients' age ranged between 13 and 69 years with an evenly distributed female to male ratio. One patient had a medical history of hyperlipidemia, but the medical and dental histories of the others were unremarkable. For most cases, XJB was an incidental finding discovered during routine radiographic examination. Swelling and cortical expansion were noted in a few cases. Radiographically, cases typically presented as either well-defined multilocular or unilocular lesions, which were either radiolucent or mixed radiolucent/radiopaque. All the lesions were treated with surgical curettage and no recurrence was observed during subsequent follow-ups. Each of the seven cases exhibited sheets of foamy macrophages. The diagnosis is established by exclusion of entities with overlapping microscopic features and involved correlation with the clinical, histological, radiographic and IHC profiles. Immunohistochemically, all the cases expressed diffuse positivity for CD68 and were negative for S100. CONCLUSION: XJB is a rare lesion of unknown etiology, which may mimic other benign or reactive jaw lesions. Due to its rarity and the potential diagnostic challenges it presents, clinicians must remain vigilant and consider CXJ in their differential when assessing radiolucent jaw anomalies.
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) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.008 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".