This article is only available in the PDF format. Download the PDF to view the article, as well as its associated figures and tables.
To the Editor.—
The paper by Peck et al on topical lomustine therapy for psoriasis, which appeared in the Archives (106:172, 1972), weakens the efforts of those working in the trying area of drug efficacy. This report emphasizes the current need for a cadre of experienced clinical pharmacologists.Though I have no experience with the nitrosoureas, it is a possibility, especially in view of Zackheim's paper in the same issue, that these agents might prove exceedingly beneficial for both psoriasis and mycosis fungoides.To begin with, Peck et al assert that the "double-blind" format was followed. Since lomustine provoked an irritant dermatitis so ferocious as to leave intense hyperpigmentation and telangiectasia, it would seem that the investigators were literally blind. All too often, nowadays, scientists are at pains to show that they have fulfilled the religious requirements of the order that happens to be dominant at the time. In this
Kligman AM. Comment on Topical Lomustine Therapy for Psoriasis. Arch Dermatol. 1973;108(2):273. doi:10.1001/archderm.1973.01620230065025