This Article  • References  • Full text PDF  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Citation map  • Citing articles on Web of Science (13)  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in this journal  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

Stephen I. Katz, MD, PhD

Arch Dermatol. 1982;118(10):809-812.

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text PDF and any section headings.

Until introduction of the sulfonamides, arsenic, in the form of potassium arsenite (Fowler's) solution or as an arsenic trioxide and black pepper preparation (Asiatic pills), had been the major and most effective form of therapy for dermatitis herpetiformis. Unfortunately, more than 25% of patients given arsenic experienced arsenical keratoses, pigmentation, or other manifestations of arsenism.¹ Many other forms of therapy had been tried, including x-rays, UV light, autohemotherapy, intravenous sodium cacodylate, sedatives, cowpox vaccinations, and even autogenous vaccines from the stool (from Streptococcus viridans and nonhemolytic Escherichia coli), each without much benefit. Thus, when Costello² reported the effective use of sulfapyridine therapy in a patient with dermatitis herpetiformis, which he believed was caused by a bacterial allergy, it was enthusiastically accepted. Other sulfonamides (primarily sulfanilamide) had been tried, with only variable success. For years after the introduction of sulfapyridine until today, many believed that it was the pyridine . . . [Full Text PDF of this Article]

Author Affiliations
From the Dermatology Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md.

Footnotes
Reprint requests for commentary to Dermatology Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD 20205 (Dr Katz).

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter     What's this?