This Article  • Full text  • PDF  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Citing articles on ISI (2)  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Related article  • Similar articles in this journal  Topic Collections  • Medical Ethics  • Psoriasis  • Drug Therapy  • Drug Therapy, Other  • Alert me on articles by topic

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

Six-page glossy advertisements for AMEVIVE (alefacept) have become nearly ubiquitous in dermatology journals—including the Archives of Dermatology—since the drug’s approval in early 2003.¹ I believe that the ads are problematic.

First, the ads focus on a formulation of AMEVIVE that no longer exists. Only intramuscular (IM) AMEVIVE has been available since October 3, 2003, when poor demand for intravenous (IV) AMEVIVE prompted the manufacturer (Biogen, Inc; now Biogen Idec, Inc [as of November 2003], Cambridge, Mass) to discontinue it.² Nevertheless, effectiveness data featured in bar graphs prominently displayed on the third page of each ad reflect clinical-trial experience with IV—not IM—AMEVIVE (Figure, A). Data from IV and IM trials are similar, but not identical. In the Figure, compare A with B, which presents bar graphs that I constructed using data from IM trials. (Interestingly, these results were not presented in published reports of the IM AMEVIVE . . . [Full Text of this Article]

AUTHOR INFORMATION
Kenneth A. Katz, MD, MSc

RELATED ARTICLE

AMEVIVE’s Advertisements: Problematic?—Reply
Barry Ticho and Thorsten Eickenhorst
Arch Dermatol. 2005;141(12):1604.
EXTRACT | FULL TEXT