These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

510 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 19809025)

  • 21. The Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme and implications for paediatric prescribing.
    Sinha Y; Brien JA; Craig JC
    J Paediatr Child Health; 2009 Jun; 45(6):351-7. PubMed ID: 19490409
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. Assessment of the Quality of the Clinical Evidence in Submissions to the Australian Pharmaceutical Benefits Advisory Committee: Fit for Purpose?
    Wonder M; Dunlop S
    Value Health; 2015 Jun; 18(4):467-76. PubMed ID: 26091601
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. The role of economic evidence in Canadian oncology reimbursement decision-making: to lambda and beyond.
    Rocchi A; Menon D; Verma S; Miller E
    Value Health; 2008; 11(4):771-83. PubMed ID: 18179658
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. Are Australians able to access new medicines on the pharmaceutical benefits scheme in a more or less timely manner? An analysis of pharmaceutical benefits advisory committee recommendations, 1999-2003.
    Wonder MJ; Neville AM; Parsons R
    Value Health; 2006; 9(4):205-12. PubMed ID: 16903989
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. International comparison of comparative effectiveness research in five jurisdictions: insights for the US.
    Levy AR; Mitton C; Johnston KM; Harrigan B; Briggs AH
    Pharmacoeconomics; 2010; 28(10):813-30. PubMed ID: 20831289
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. Comparison of anticancer drug coverage decisions in the United States and United Kingdom: does the evidence support the rhetoric?
    Mason A; Drummond M; Ramsey S; Campbell J; Raisch D
    J Clin Oncol; 2010 Jul; 28(20):3234-8. PubMed ID: 20498408
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. Comparing patient access to pharmaceuticals in the UK and US.
    Cohen J; Cairns C; Paquette C; Faden L
    Appl Health Econ Health Policy; 2006; 5(3):177-87. PubMed ID: 17132032
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. A comparative study of drug listing recommendations and the decision-making process in Australia, the Netherlands, Sweden, and the UK.
    Salas-Vega S; Bertling A; Mossialos E
    Health Policy; 2016 Oct; 120(10):1104-1114. PubMed ID: 27665497
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. A Time-Trend Economic Analysis of Cancer Drug Trials.
    Cressman S; Browman GP; Hoch JS; Kovacic L; Peacock SJ
    Oncologist; 2015 Jul; 20(7):729-36. PubMed ID: 26032135
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. Delays in access to affordable medicines: putting policy into perspective.
    Pearce A; van Gool K; Haywood P; Haas M
    Aust Health Rev; 2012 Nov; 36(4):412-8. PubMed ID: 23062753
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. Relationship between financial impact and coverage of drugs in Australia.
    Mauskopf J; Chirila C; Masaquel C; Boye KS; Bowman L; Birt J; Grainger D
    Int J Technol Assess Health Care; 2013 Jan; 29(1):92-100. PubMed ID: 23217275
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. The Common Drug Review: a NICE start for Canada?
    McMahon M; Morgan S; Mitton C
    Health Policy; 2006 Aug; 77(3):339-51. PubMed ID: 16214257
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. Continental Divide? The attitudes of US and Canadian oncologists on the costs, cost-effectiveness, and health policies associated with new cancer drugs.
    Berry SR; Bell CM; Ubel PA; Evans WK; Nadler E; Strevel EL; Neumann PJ
    J Clin Oncol; 2010 Sep; 28(27):4149-53. PubMed ID: 20697077
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. The evaluation and use of economic evidence to inform cancer drug reimbursement decisions in Canada.
    Yong JH; Beca J; Hoch JS
    Pharmacoeconomics; 2013 Mar; 31(3):229-36. PubMed ID: 23322588
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. Balancing early access with uncertainties in evidence for drugs authorized by prospective case series - systematic review of reimbursement decisions.
    Wallerstedt SM; Henriksson M
    Br J Clin Pharmacol; 2018 Jun; 84(6):1146-1155. PubMed ID: 29381234
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. How should cost-effectiveness analysis be used in health technology coverage decisions? Evidence from the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence approach.
    Williams I; Bryan S; McIver S
    J Health Serv Res Policy; 2007 Apr; 12(2):73-9. PubMed ID: 17407655
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. European perspective on the costs and cost-effectiveness of cancer therapies.
    Drummond MF; Mason AR
    J Clin Oncol; 2007 Jan; 25(2):191-5. PubMed ID: 17210939
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. Procedures and methods of benefit assessments for medicines in Germany.
    Bekkering GE; Kleijnen J
    Eur J Health Econ; 2008 Nov; 9 Suppl 1():5-29. PubMed ID: 18987905
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. Paying for costly pharmaceuticals: regulation of new drugs in Australia, England and New Zealand.
    Raftery JP
    Med J Aust; 2008 Jan; 188(1):26-8. PubMed ID: 18205559
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. Governments Need Better Guidance to Maximise Value for Money: The Case of Australia's Pharmaceutical Benefits Advisory Committee.
    Carter D; Vogan A; Haji Ali Afzali H
    Appl Health Econ Health Policy; 2016 Aug; 14(4):401-407. PubMed ID: 26818196
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 26.