Devastating neurologic consequences of localized scleroderma en coup de sabre of the scalp—2 case studies
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: En coup de sabre (ECDS) is a rare variant of localized scleroderma which can be associated with neurologic symptoms including seizures, focal neurologic deficit, and movement disorders. Little is known about the disease course in ECDS. We describe two patients with a history of localized scleroderma ECDS of the scalp who developed worsening neurologic symptoms coincidental in timing with extension of preexisting skin and skull lesions and evidence of inflammatory pathology on brain biopsy. Case Report: Our first patient was diagnosed with localized scleroderma ECDS at the age of 12. He re-presented at age 34 with progression of his skin lesions, new indentation of the occipital bones, and new neurologic symptoms of ataxia, cranial nerve IV palsy, and cognitive decline. MRI brain revealed multiple lesions that were hyperintense on T2-weighted images, the largest of which was in the left temporal lobe. Brain biopsy pathology was consistent with a lymphocytic inflammatory process. He was treated with pulse steroids and mycophenolate with stabilization of his symptoms and brain lesions on imaging. Our second patient was initially diagnosed with localized scleroderma ECDS at age 46. Concurrently, neuroimaging showed right frontal and temporal lesions that were hyperintense on T2-weighted images in the context of neurologic symptoms of vertigo and headache. At age 50, he developed worsening of existing skin lesions followed by new generalized tonic-clonic seizures and behavioral changes. MRI brain revealed worsening of his brain lesions, and ultimately brain biopsy confirmed focal perivascular lymphocytic reaction consistent with immune-mediated vasculitis. He was treated with pulse steroids and cyclophosphamide with improvement in his symptoms. Conclusion: Neurologic symptoms associated with localized scleroderma are a rare but well-documented association. These cases highlight the need to consider diffuse intracranial inflammatory pathology, rather than simply localized brain lesions, in ECDS, particularly in instances where skin lesions are progressive.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".