397 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 23035625)
1. 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]
2. 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]
3. 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]
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. 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]
6. Cost-effectiveness of alternative treatments for women with osteoporosis in Canada.
Goeree R; Blackhouse G; Adachi J
Curr Med Res Opin; 2006 Jul; 22(7):1425-36. PubMed ID: 16834841
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Denosumab compared with risedronate in postmenopausal women suboptimally adherent to alendronate therapy: efficacy and safety results from a randomized open-label study.
Roux C; Hofbauer LC; Ho PR; Wark JD; Zillikens MC; Fahrleitner-Pammer A; Hawkins F; Micaelo M; Minisola S; Papaioannou N; Stone M; Ferreira I; Siddhanti S; Wagman RB; Brown JP
Bone; 2014 Jan; 58():48-54. PubMed ID: 24141036
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. 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]
9. 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]
10. 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]
11. 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]
12. 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]
13. Cost effectiveness and cost utility of risedronate for osteoporosis treatment and fracture prevention in women: a Swiss perspective.
Wasserfallen JB; Krieg MA; Greiner RA; Lamy O
J Med Econ; 2008; 11(3):499-523. PubMed ID: 19450101
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. 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]
15. Universal bone densitometry screening combined with alendronate therapy for those diagnosed with osteoporosis is highly cost-effective for elderly women.
Schousboe JT; Ensrud KE; Nyman JA; Melton LJ; Kane RL
J Am Geriatr Soc; 2005 Oct; 53(10):1697-704. PubMed ID: 16181168
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. 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]
17. 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]
18. 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]
19. Denosumab, a new pharmacotherapy option for postmenopausal osteoporosis.
Josse R; Khan A; Ngui D; Shapiro M
Curr Med Res Opin; 2013 Mar; 29(3):205-16. PubMed ID: 23297819
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Cost-effectiveness of denosumab vs zoledronic acid for prevention of skeletal-related events in patients with solid tumors and bone metastases in the United States.
Stopeck A; Rader M; Henry D; Danese M; Halperin M; Cong Z; Qian Y; Dansey R; Chung K
J Med Econ; 2012; 15(4):712-23. PubMed ID: 22409231
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
