[Skip to Content]
Access to paid content on this site is currently suspended due to excessive activity being detected from your IP address Please contact the publisher to request reinstatement.
[Skip to Content Landing]
July 1961

Pityriasis Rosea: An Etiologic Study

Author Affiliations


Department of Dermatology (Dr. Wright, Instructor; Dr. Ray O. Noojin, Chairman); Department of Microbiology (Dr. Francis, Associate Professor; Dr. T. F. Paine, Jr., Chairman), The University of Alabama Medical Center.

Arch Dermatol. 1961;84(1):87-89. doi:10.1001/archderm.1961.01580130093013

Since the initial description of pityriasis rosea as a separate clinical entity by Gibert in 1860,1 the causal relationship of an infectious agent has received occasional consideration. Attention has been directed toward the possible involvement of fungal or bacterial organisms,2-4 but to date the role of these micro-organisms in the etiology of the disease continues to remain obscure. Surprisingly few studies relating to viruses have been undertaken in this connection. Markham5 and, later, Felsher6 reported unsuccessful attempts to detect the presence of viral agents in materials from cases by inoculation of embryonated eggs. In view of the recent advances in techniques for the isolation of viral agents, it was considered worthwhile again to approach the problem through the use of tissue cultures. It is the purpose of this communication, therefore, to describe the results of studies undertaken with in vitro cell cultures prepared from human, simian,