284 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 20936401)
1. Cost-effectiveness of Denosumab for the treatment of postmenopausal osteoporosis.
Jönsson B; Ström O; Eisman JA; Papaioannou A; Siris ES; Tosteson A; Kanis JA
Osteoporos Int; 2011 Mar; 22(3):967-82. PubMed ID: 20936401
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Intervention thresholds for denosumab in the UK using a FRAX®-based cost-effectiveness analysis.
Ström O; Jönsson B; Kanis JA
Osteoporos Int; 2013 Apr; 24(4):1491-502. PubMed ID: 23224141
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Cost effectiveness of denosumab versus oral bisphosphonates for postmenopausal osteoporosis in the US.
Parthan A; Kruse M; Yurgin N; Huang J; Viswanathan HN; Taylor D
Appl Health Econ Health Policy; 2013 Oct; 11(5):485-97. PubMed ID: 23868102
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Cost-effectiveness of denosumab in the treatment of postmenopausal osteoporosis in Canada.
Chau D; Becker DL; Coombes ME; Ioannidis G; Adachi JD; Goeree R
J Med Econ; 2012; 15 Suppl 1():3-14. PubMed ID: 23035625
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Cost-effectiveness of strontium ranelate versus risedronate in the treatment of postmenopausal osteoporotic women aged over 75 years.
Hiligsmann M; Bruyère O; Reginster JY
Bone; 2010 Feb; 46(2):440-6. PubMed ID: 19716940
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Cost effectiveness of denosumab compared with oral bisphosphonates in the treatment of post-menopausal osteoporotic women in Belgium.
Hiligsmann M; Reginster JY
Pharmacoeconomics; 2011 Oct; 29(10):895-911. PubMed ID: 21692551
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Potential cost-effectiveness of denosumab for the treatment of postmenopausal osteoporotic women.
Hiligsmann M; Reginster JY
Bone; 2010 Jul; 47(1):34-40. PubMed ID: 20303422
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Cost-effectiveness of gastro-resistant risedronate tablets for the treatment of postmenopausal women with osteoporosis in France.
Hiligsmann M; Reginster JY
Osteoporos Int; 2019 Mar; 30(3):649-658. PubMed ID: 30701342
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. A systematic review and economic evaluation of alendronate, etidronate, risedronate, raloxifene and teriparatide for the prevention and treatment of postmenopausal osteoporosis.
Stevenson M; Jones ML; De Nigris E; Brewer N; Davis S; Oakley J
Health Technol Assess; 2005 Jun; 9(22):1-160. PubMed ID: 15929857
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Denosumab: a cost-effective alternative for older men with osteoporosis from a Swedish payer perspective.
Parthan A; Kruse M; Agodoa I; Silverman S; Orwoll E
Bone; 2014 Feb; 59():105-13. PubMed ID: 24231131
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Greater first year effectiveness drives favorable cost-effectiveness of brand risedronate versus generic or brand alendronate: modeled Canadian analysis.
Grima DT; Papaioannou A; Thompson MF; Pasquale MK; Adachi JD
Osteoporos Int; 2008 May; 19(5):687-97. PubMed ID: 18008100
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Cost-effectiveness of denosumab versus oral alendronate for elderly osteoporotic women in Japan.
Mori T; Crandall CJ; Ganz DA
Osteoporos Int; 2017 May; 28(5):1733-1744. PubMed ID: 28210776
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Cost-effectiveness analysis of drugs for osteoporosis treatment in elderly Japanese women at high risk of fragility fractures: comparison of denosumab and weekly alendronate.
Yoshizawa T; Nishino T; Okubo I; Yamazaki M
Arch Osteoporos; 2018 Aug; 13(1):94. PubMed ID: 30159632
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Cost-effectiveness of denosumab for high-risk postmenopausal women with osteoporosis in Thailand.
Pongchaiyakul C; Nanagara R; Songpatanasilp T; Unnanuntana A
J Med Econ; 2020 Jul; 23(7):776-785. PubMed ID: 32063082
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
15. An economic evaluation of strontium ranelate in the treatment of osteoporosis in a Swedish setting: based on the results of the SOTI and TROPOS trials.
Borgström F; Jönsson B; Ström O; Kanis JA
Osteoporos Int; 2006 Dec; 17(12):1781-93. PubMed ID: 17009083
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Cost-utility of long-term strontium ranelate treatment for postmenopausal osteoporotic women.
Hiligsmann M; Bruyère O; Reginster JY
Osteoporos Int; 2010 Jan; 21(1):157-65. PubMed ID: 19350339
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Therapies for treatment of osteoporosis in US women: cost-effectiveness and budget impact considerations.
Tosteson AN; Burge RT; Marshall DA; Lindsay R
Am J Manag Care; 2008 Sep; 14(9):605-15. PubMed ID: 18778176
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. CLINICAL EVALUATION OF COST EFFICACY OF DRUGS FOR TREATMENT OF OSTEOPOROSIS: A META-ANALYSIS.
Albert SG; Reddy S
Endocr Pract; 2017 Jul; 23(7):841-856. PubMed ID: 28448754
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Health-economic comparison of three recommended drugs for the treatment of osteoporosis.
Brecht JG; Kruse HP; Möhrke W; Oestreich A; Huppertz E
Int J Clin Pharmacol Res; 2004; 24(1):1-10. PubMed ID: 15575171
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. The cost-effectiveness of strontium ranelate in the UK for the management of osteoporosis.
Borgström F; Ström O; Coelho J; Johansson H; Oden A; McCloskey E; Kanis JA
Osteoporos Int; 2010 Feb; 21(2):339-49. PubMed ID: 19513577
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
