MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4406525641 · doi:10.1111/cid.13440

Peri‐Implant <i>Epstein–Barr</i> Virus (+) Mucocutaneous Ulcer in an Immunocompetent Patient: Case Report and Review of the Literature

2025· review· en· W4406525641 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Irene Lafuente‐Ibáñez de Mendoza, Pablo Aguirre‐Echevarria, Tulio M. Silva, Francisco Javier Vallejo Aisa, Aitor Fernández de Larrinoa, José Manuel Aguirre Urízar

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical Implant Dentistry and Related Research · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicParvovirus B19 Infection Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMucocutaneous zoneMedicinePeriImplantDermatologyPeri-implantitisDentistryPathologySurgeryInternal medicineDisease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Epstein-Barr virus (+) mucocutaneous ulcer (EBVMCU) is an uncommon benign lymphoproliferative lesion that develops in immunocompromised patients. We present a special case of EBVMCU located in the peri-implant mucosa and we review the oral cases published to date. An 88-year-old man with no medical history of interest was attended in the dental clinic due to an ulcerated tumor located in the peri-implant mucosa. The lesion showed an atypical lymphoid proliferation, positive for CD3, CD20, CD30, PAX-5, and MUM1. Positive EBV and favorable patient evolution confirmed the final diagnosis of EBVMCU. Oral EBVMCU reports related to immunosenescence mainly develop in the gingiva of advanced age patients. Our case highlights the importance to perform a complete clinicopathological study of all peri-implant lesions. Although most peri-implant pathologies are inflammatory-reactive disorders, sometimes they can also correspond to other entities.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Case report · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.118
GPT teacher head0.496
Teacher spread0.378 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designCase report
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations3
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueClinical Implant Dentistry and Related ResearchSame topicParvovirus B19 Infection StudiesFrench-language works237,207