MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4415823068 · doi:10.3390/jof11110789

Aggressive Purpureocillium lilacinum Kerato-Endophthalmitis in a Diabetic Contact Lens Wearer Culminating in Enucleation: A Case Report and Review of the Literature

2025· article· en· W4415823068 on OpenAlexaff
Sara E Calendino, Jennifer Kenna, Hetal Patel, Jenny Vereecken, Fatimah AlMutawa, Jeffrey Fuller, Sameer Elsayed, Johan Delport, Ruchika Bagga

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Fungi · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOcular Infections and Treatments
Canadian institutionsLondon Health Sciences CentreWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsContact lensAmphotericin BAntifungalKeratitisFungal keratitisDiabetes mellitusMycosis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction: Purpureocillium lilacinum (formerly Paecilomyces lilacinus) is an emerging, saprophytic fungus known to cause severe, treatment-refractory ocular infections. It is notoriously clinically resistant to several common antifungal agents, including amphotericin B. Risk factors for Purpureocillium lilacinum (P. lilacinum) keratitis include contact lens wear, ocular trauma, and local or systemic immunosuppression. Case Presentation: We describe the clinical course of a 70-year-old male with type 2 diabetes mellitus and a history of long-term soft contact lens use who presented with a right corneal ulcer. Despite initial treatment with topical voriconazole, the infection progressed over two months to involve the entire globe, resulting in intractable endophthalmitis. Microbiological analysis of corneal scrapings identified P. lilacinum, confirmed by MALDI-TOF mass spectrometry and ITS sequencing. Despite the addition of systemic voriconazole, the patient’s condition deteriorated, leading to a painful blind right eye which ultimately needed enucleation. Conclusions: This case highlights the aggressive potential of P. lilacinum in a host with multiple risk factors. It underscores the critical need for a high index of suspicion, rapid and accurate mycological diagnosis, and immediate, aggressive management. The therapeutic challenges, including intrinsic and emerging antifungal resistance, often necessitate early surgical intervention to prevent catastrophic outcomes.

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: Case report
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0050.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0030.002
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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.282
Teacher spread0.275 · 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
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of FungiSame topicOcular Infections and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207