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 *

103 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 20218471)

  • 1. Breast cancer breakthrough in gene profilings?
    Bateman C
    S Afr Med J; 2009 Nov; 99(11):780-2. PubMed ID: 20218471
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Economic analysis of gene expression profile data to guide adjuvant treatment in women with early-stage breast cancer.
    Cosler LE; Lyman GH
    Cancer Invest; 2009 Dec; 27(10):953-9. PubMed ID: 19909009
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Cost-benefit of the 21-gene breast cancer recurrence score assay for patients in Singapore.
    de Lima Lopes G; Chien R; Hornberger J
    Breast J; 2013; 19(2):220-1. PubMed ID: 23320386
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Gene expression profiling in women with lymph-node-positive breast cancer to select adjuvant chemotherapy treatment.
    Technol Eval Cent Assess Program Exec Summ; 2010 Nov; 25(1):1-4. PubMed ID: 21638937
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Using the 21-gene assay to guide adjuvant chemotherapy decision-making in early-stage breast cancer: a cost-effectiveness evaluation in the German setting.
    Blohmer JU; Rezai M; Kümmel S; Kühn T; Warm M; Friedrichs K; Benkow A; Valentine WJ; Eiermann W
    J Med Econ; 2013; 16(1):30-40. PubMed ID: 22966753
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Cost-effectiveness of 70-gene MammaPrint signature in node-negative breast cancer.
    Chen E; Tong KB; Malin JL
    Am J Manag Care; 2010 Dec; 16(12):e333-42. PubMed ID: 21291290
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Is the 21-gene recurrence score a cost-effective assay in endocrine-sensitive node-negative breast cancer?
    Lamond NW; Skedgel C; Younis T
    Expert Rev Pharmacoecon Outcomes Res; 2013 Apr; 13(2):243-50. PubMed ID: 23570435
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Economic issues involved in integrating genomic testing into clinical care: the case of genomic testing to guide decision-making about chemotherapy for breast cancer patients.
    Marino P; Siani C; Bertucci F; Roche H; Martin AL; Viens P; Seror V
    Breast Cancer Res Treat; 2011 Sep; 129(2):401-9. PubMed ID: 21061059
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Cost-effectiveness of extended adjuvant letrozole therapy after 5 years of adjuvant tamoxifen therapy in postmenopausal women with early-stage breast cancer.
    Delea TE; Karnon J; Smith RE; Johnston SR; Brandman J; Sung JC; Gross PE
    Am J Manag Care; 2006 Jul; 12(7):374-86. PubMed ID: 16834524
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Mammaprint™: a comprehensive review.
    Brandão M; Pondé N; Piccart-Gebhart M
    Future Oncol; 2019 Jan; 15(2):207-224. PubMed ID: 30156427
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Population-Based Study to Determine the Health System Costs of Using the 21-Gene Assay.
    Mittmann N; Earle CC; Cheng SY; Julian JA; Rahman F; Seung SJ; Levine MN
    J Clin Oncol; 2018 Jan; 36(3):238-243. PubMed ID: 29193984
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Cost effectiveness of gene expression profiling for early stage breast cancer: a decision-analytic model.
    Yang M; Rajan S; Issa AM
    Cancer; 2012 Oct; 118(20):5163-70. PubMed ID: 22359236
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Prospective cost-effectiveness analysis of genomic profiling in breast cancer.
    Retèl VP; Joore MA; Drukker CA; Bueno-de-Mesquita JM; Knauer M; van Tinteren H; Linn SC; van Harten WH
    Eur J Cancer; 2013 Dec; 49(18):3773-9. PubMed ID: 23992641
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Gene expression profiling of breast cancer to select women for adjuvant chemotherapy.
    Technol Eval Cent Assess Program Exec Summ; 2008 Apr; 22(13):1-8. PubMed ID: 18663816
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Cost-effectiveness of the 70-gene signature versus St. Gallen guidelines and Adjuvant Online for early breast cancer.
    Retèl VP; Joore MA; Knauer M; Linn SC; Hauptmann M; Harten WH
    Eur J Cancer; 2010 May; 46(8):1382-91. PubMed ID: 20359886
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Assessing therapeutically developed assays.
    Kolesar JM
    Manag Care; 2008 Jul; 17(7 Suppl 7):9-12; discussion 17-8. PubMed ID: 19097282
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Adjuvant anthracyclines and taxanes: quantifying the costs of therapeutic advances in breast cancer.
    Morris PG; Bach PB
    Onkologie; 2009 Sep; 32(8-9):464-6. PubMed ID: 19745589
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Cost-utility of the 21-gene recurrence score assay in node-negative and node-positive breast cancer.
    Lamond NW; Skedgel C; Rayson D; Lethbridge L; Younis T
    Breast Cancer Res Treat; 2012 Jun; 133(3):1115-23. PubMed ID: 22361999
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Management of metastatic breast cancer: are we prepared to cope with our own success?
    Jimeno A; Cortés-Funes H; Colomer R
    Br J Cancer; 2004 Dec; 91(12):2101; author reply 2102. PubMed ID: 15599385
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Economic and cost-effectiveness issues in breast cancer treatment.
    Hillner BE
    Semin Oncol; 1996 Feb; 23(1 Suppl 2):98-104. PubMed ID: 8614853
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 6.