Correspondence
No. 9
ative drug.^' Patch tests and cutaneous biopsy can be useful.'* but negative results are never diagnostic' Only a provocation test with the suspected drug will provide certain proof about its role in FDE.'"' This test is safe if rationally performed.^-' We did not see polysensitivity to the oral provocation tests between piroxicam and other groups of NSAIDs in our patient. On reviewing the literature we have only found one report of a case of nonpigmentary FDE due to piroxieam.'' Our ease is the first report of all clinical and histopathologie features that implicate piroxieam as the proven eause of FDE. Belen de la Hoz, M.D. Caridad Soria, M.D. Juan Fraj. M.D. Eloy Losada. M.D. Antonio Ledo. M.D. Hospital Ramon y Cajal Madrid, Spain Drug Names piroxicam: Feldene tenoxieam: Tilcotil acetylsalicylie acid: Aluprin dipyrone: Not available in U.S. Nolotil in Europe phenylbutazone: Azolid dielofenac: Not available in U.S. Voltaren in Europe indomethacin: Indocid nefinamie acid: Lonstel naproxen: Anaprox tolmetin: Toleetin DS paracetamol: Tylenol References 1. Bigby M, Stern R. Cutaneous reactions to nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs. J Am Aead Dermatol. 1985:12:866-876. 2. Greaves MW. Pharmacology and signifieance of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs in the treatment of skin diseases. J Am Acad Dermatol. 1987;l6:75l-764. 3. Gerber D. Adverse reactions of piroxieam. Drug Intell Clin Pharm. 1987:21:707-710. 4. Korkij W, Soltani K. Fixed drug eruption. Arch Dermatol. 1984:120:520-524. 5. Sehgal VN, Gangwani OP. Fixed drug eruption: current eoncepts. IntJ Dermatol. 1987:26:67-74. 6. CommensC. Fixed drug eruption. Aust J Dermatol. 1983:24:18. 7. Gomez B. Sastre J, Azofra J, et al. Fixed drug eruption. Allergol Immunopathol (Madr.) 1985:13:87-91. 8. Alanko K. Stubb S, Reitamo S. Topical provocation of fixed drug eruption. BrJ Dermatol. 1987:116:561-567. 9. Valseeehi R, Cainelli T. Nonpigmenting fixed drug reaetion. J Am Aead Dermatol. 1989:21:1300. Directorship at New Yoric Skin and Cancer in 1947 To the Editor: In his article in the Inlernational Journal of Dermatologv,' Dr. Vincent Cipollaro refers to the time in 1947 when Dr. G. M. MaeKee was about to retire from the direetorship of the New York Skin and Cancer Hospital and the Department of Dermatology in the New York Postgraduate Medical School and Hospital. He repeats there a falsehood that had been bandied about by personal enemies of Dr. Marion B. Sulzberger in 1947. According to Dr. Cipollaro. Dr. MacKee at that time not only sold his private practice to Dr. Sulzberger but ". . . along went the prize of the George Miller MaeKee
673
Chair of Dermatology at New York University, and thus Sulzberger became Chairman of the Department. . ." The only correct part of that statement is that Dr. MaeKee sold his private practice to Dr. Sulzberger in 1947. The rest of the statement, however, always was and still is a blatant untruth. Dr. MaeKee had no power to appoint anyone as his own successor. This power was then, as it is today, in the hands of the appropriate medical school authorities. Also, the Skin and Cancer Hospital did not even become part of the New York University Medieal Center until a year later, in 1948. and the George Miller MacKee Chair in Dermatology at New York University did not even exist until 1956. Dr. Vincent Cipollaro's story smears the memory of Drs. MacKee and Sulzberger, two of the most outstanding figures in the history of American dermatology. It also smears New York University School of Medicine, a medieal sehool that perhaps has done more than any other in the United States to further dermatology. However, no matter how hard Dr. Cipollaro may try to revive untrue stories from 43 years ago, the reputations of Drs. MacKee and Sulzberger are firmly embedded in the history of American and world dermatology. Rudolf L. Baer. M.D. New York, NY Reference 1. Cipollaro VA. The influenee of George Miller McKee and Anthony C. Cipollaro on dermatologie training. Int J Dermatol. 1990:29:151-152. Dr. Cipoiiaro Repiies To the Editor: I regret that Dr. Baer objeets to my version of how the directorship of dermatology at the New York Skin and Cancer Hospital passed from Dr. George Miller MaeKee to Dr. Marion Sulzberger. I had no intention of ofiending Drs. Baer, Mackee, or Sulzberger and I agree completely with Dr. Baer that the reputations and achievements of these two legends of dermatology are forever (and deservedly) embedded in the history of dermatology. Likewise. 1 had no intention of causing a eontroversy. but the need to reply to Dr. Baer's concerns makes it necessary for me to defend my historieal report that I believed to be a simple fact of history as told to me by my late uncle and other respected and distinguished members of the dermatologic community, both living and dead. I erroneously did not realize that my report would in any way be offensive to anyone since the principals are all long since deceased. My report is based upon my late uncle's personal eommunications to me that MaeKee offered him the directorship along with the purchase of his private practice for $50,000. My uncle said that he could not, at that time, afibrd to pay MaeKee this amount of money so he forfeited the practice and the directorship to Dr. Sulzberger. Based upon these personal communications by my uncle and others who have supported his story, I believe the facts to be correct as reported and to be a true and factual part of the history of American dermatology. I must concede that my report would have been kinder and perhaps more accurate if I had stated that "after Cipollaro rejeeted MacKee's offer the practice was sold to Dr. Sulzberger who subsequently was oflered and aeeepted the directorship of the Skin and Cancer Hospital." If my comments were insensitive to the feelings of many of Dr. Marion Sulzberger's friends, then 1 beg forgiveness sinee 1 would like to believe that many of these people are my friends also. Indeed. Dr. Sulzberger himself had the kindness of escorting me to the ehair when I was elected Chairman of the Section of Dermatology of the
No. 9
ative drug.^' Patch tests and cutaneous biopsy can be useful.'* but negative results are never diagnostic' Only a provocation test with the suspected drug will provide certain proof about its role in FDE.'"' This test is safe if rationally performed.^-' We did not see polysensitivity to the oral provocation tests between piroxicam and other groups of NSAIDs in our patient. On reviewing the literature we have only found one report of a case of nonpigmentary FDE due to piroxieam.'' Our ease is the first report of all clinical and histopathologie features that implicate piroxieam as the proven eause of FDE. Belen de la Hoz, M.D. Caridad Soria, M.D. Juan Fraj. M.D. Eloy Losada. M.D. Antonio Ledo. M.D. Hospital Ramon y Cajal Madrid, Spain Drug Names piroxicam: Feldene tenoxieam: Tilcotil acetylsalicylie acid: Aluprin dipyrone: Not available in U.S. Nolotil in Europe phenylbutazone: Azolid dielofenac: Not available in U.S. Voltaren in Europe indomethacin: Indocid nefinamie acid: Lonstel naproxen: Anaprox tolmetin: Toleetin DS paracetamol: Tylenol References 1. Bigby M, Stern R. Cutaneous reactions to nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs. J Am Aead Dermatol. 1985:12:866-876. 2. Greaves MW. Pharmacology and signifieance of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs in the treatment of skin diseases. J Am Acad Dermatol. 1987;l6:75l-764. 3. Gerber D. Adverse reactions of piroxieam. Drug Intell Clin Pharm. 1987:21:707-710. 4. Korkij W, Soltani K. Fixed drug eruption. Arch Dermatol. 1984:120:520-524. 5. Sehgal VN, Gangwani OP. Fixed drug eruption: current eoncepts. IntJ Dermatol. 1987:26:67-74. 6. CommensC. Fixed drug eruption. Aust J Dermatol. 1983:24:18. 7. Gomez B. Sastre J, Azofra J, et al. Fixed drug eruption. Allergol Immunopathol (Madr.) 1985:13:87-91. 8. Alanko K. Stubb S, Reitamo S. Topical provocation of fixed drug eruption. BrJ Dermatol. 1987:116:561-567. 9. Valseeehi R, Cainelli T. Nonpigmenting fixed drug reaetion. J Am Aead Dermatol. 1989:21:1300. Directorship at New Yoric Skin and Cancer in 1947 To the Editor: In his article in the Inlernational Journal of Dermatologv,' Dr. Vincent Cipollaro refers to the time in 1947 when Dr. G. M. MaeKee was about to retire from the direetorship of the New York Skin and Cancer Hospital and the Department of Dermatology in the New York Postgraduate Medical School and Hospital. He repeats there a falsehood that had been bandied about by personal enemies of Dr. Marion B. Sulzberger in 1947. According to Dr. Cipollaro. Dr. MacKee at that time not only sold his private practice to Dr. Sulzberger but ". . . along went the prize of the George Miller MaeKee
673
Chair of Dermatology at New York University, and thus Sulzberger became Chairman of the Department. . ." The only correct part of that statement is that Dr. MaeKee sold his private practice to Dr. Sulzberger in 1947. The rest of the statement, however, always was and still is a blatant untruth. Dr. MaeKee had no power to appoint anyone as his own successor. This power was then, as it is today, in the hands of the appropriate medical school authorities. Also, the Skin and Cancer Hospital did not even become part of the New York University Medieal Center until a year later, in 1948. and the George Miller MacKee Chair in Dermatology at New York University did not even exist until 1956. Dr. Vincent Cipollaro's story smears the memory of Drs. MacKee and Sulzberger, two of the most outstanding figures in the history of American dermatology. It also smears New York University School of Medicine, a medieal sehool that perhaps has done more than any other in the United States to further dermatology. However, no matter how hard Dr. Cipollaro may try to revive untrue stories from 43 years ago, the reputations of Drs. MacKee and Sulzberger are firmly embedded in the history of American and world dermatology. Rudolf L. Baer. M.D. New York, NY Reference 1. Cipollaro VA. The influenee of George Miller McKee and Anthony C. Cipollaro on dermatologie training. Int J Dermatol. 1990:29:151-152. Dr. Cipoiiaro Repiies To the Editor: I regret that Dr. Baer objeets to my version of how the directorship of dermatology at the New York Skin and Cancer Hospital passed from Dr. George Miller MaeKee to Dr. Marion Sulzberger. I had no intention of ofiending Drs. Baer, Mackee, or Sulzberger and I agree completely with Dr. Baer that the reputations and achievements of these two legends of dermatology are forever (and deservedly) embedded in the history of dermatology. Likewise. 1 had no intention of causing a eontroversy. but the need to reply to Dr. Baer's concerns makes it necessary for me to defend my historieal report that I believed to be a simple fact of history as told to me by my late uncle and other respected and distinguished members of the dermatologic community, both living and dead. I erroneously did not realize that my report would in any way be offensive to anyone since the principals are all long since deceased. My report is based upon my late uncle's personal eommunications to me that MaeKee offered him the directorship along with the purchase of his private practice for $50,000. My uncle said that he could not, at that time, afibrd to pay MaeKee this amount of money so he forfeited the practice and the directorship to Dr. Sulzberger. Based upon these personal communications by my uncle and others who have supported his story, I believe the facts to be correct as reported and to be a true and factual part of the history of American dermatology. I must concede that my report would have been kinder and perhaps more accurate if I had stated that "after Cipollaro rejeeted MacKee's offer the practice was sold to Dr. Sulzberger who subsequently was oflered and aeeepted the directorship of the Skin and Cancer Hospital." If my comments were insensitive to the feelings of many of Dr. Marion Sulzberger's friends, then 1 beg forgiveness sinee 1 would like to believe that many of these people are my friends also. Indeed. Dr. Sulzberger himself had the kindness of escorting me to the ehair when I was elected Chairman of the Section of Dermatology of the
