470 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 21692551)
1. 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]
2. 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]
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. 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]
5. 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]
6. 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]
7. 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]
8. 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]
9. 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]
10. 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]
11. Denosumab, raloxifene, romosozumab and teriparatide to prevent osteoporotic fragility fractures: a systematic review and economic evaluation.
Davis S; Simpson E; Hamilton J; James MM; Rawdin A; Wong R; Goka E; Gittoes N; Selby P
Health Technol Assess; 2020 Jun; 24(29):1-314. PubMed ID: 32588816
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. 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]
13. 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]
14. 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]
15. The cost effectiveness of bisphosphonates for the prevention and treatment of osteoporosis: a structured review of the literature.
Fleurence RL; Iglesias CP; Johnson JM
Pharmacoeconomics; 2007; 25(11):913-33. PubMed ID: 17960951
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. 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]
17. Denosumab for the prevention of osteoporotic fractures in post-menopausal women: a NICE single technology appraisal.
Scotland G; Waugh N; Royle P; McNamee P; Henderson R; Hollick R
Pharmacoeconomics; 2011 Nov; 29(11):951-61. PubMed ID: 21854080
[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. The impact of fewer hip fractures with risedronate versus alendronate in the first year of treatment: modeled German cost-effectiveness analysis.
Thompson M; Pasquale M; Grima D; Moehrke W; Kruse HP
Value Health; 2010; 13(1):46-54. PubMed ID: 19883401
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Cost-effectiveness of alendronate in the treatment of postmenopausal women in 9 European countries--an economic evaluation based on the fracture intervention trial.
Ström O; Borgström F; Sen SS; Boonen S; Haentjens P; Johnell O; Kanis JA
Osteoporos Int; 2007 Aug; 18(8):1047-61. PubMed ID: 17333449
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
