Olanzapine May Be an Effective Adjunctive Therapy in the Management of <i>Acne Excoriée</i> : A Case Report
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The self-inflicted dermatoses such as acne excorieé and neurotic excoriations are often chronic, recurring, and resistant to standard dermatologic therapies. OBJECTIVE: We present a 28-year-old woman with longstanding acne excorieé, whose acne started at age 14 years and was followed by acne excorieé at age 16 years. The patient reported that her acne and self-excoriative behavior were exacerbated by psychological stress. The previously treatment-resistant acne excorieé responded favorably to treatment with the atypical antipsychotic agent olanzapine. METHODS: The patient was started on olanzapine 2.5 mg at bedtime. RESULTS: After 4 weeks of therapy with olanzapine she reported a significant decline in her self-excoriative behavior which was associated with an improvement in her acne excorieé. The patient used the olanzapine 2.5 mg for 6 months, during which time she also entered psychotherapy in order to deal with some psychosocial stressors that were exacerbating her self-excoriative behavior. The patient has not experienced a recurrence in her self-excoriative behavior or acne excorieé for 4 months after discontinuing the olanzapine. CONCLUSION: Olanzapine may prove to be a useful adjunctive therapy in some self-induced dermatoses including acne excorieé.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| 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".