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 *

227 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 23322588)

  • 1. 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]  

  • 2. Methodological quality of economic evaluations of new pharmaceuticals in The Netherlands.
    Hoomans T; Severens JL; van der Roer N; Delwel GO
    Pharmacoeconomics; 2012 Mar; 30(3):219-27. PubMed ID: 22074610
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Are cancer drugs less likely to be recommended for listing by the Pharmaceutical Benefits Advisory Committee in Australia?
    Chim L; Kelly PJ; Salkeld G; Stockler MR
    Pharmacoeconomics; 2010; 28(6):463-75. PubMed ID: 20465315
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Health-related quality of life in oncology drug reimbursement submissions in Canada: A review of submissions to the pan-Canadian Oncology Drug Review.
    Raymakers AJN; Regier DA; Peacock SJ
    Cancer; 2020 Jan; 126(1):148-155. PubMed ID: 31544234
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. A rapid and systematic review of the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of topotecan for ovarian cancer.
    Forbes C; Shirran L; Bagnall AM; Duffy S; ter Riet G
    Health Technol Assess; 2001; 5(28):1-110. PubMed ID: 11701100
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. [Relevance of pharmacoeconomic analyses to price and reimbursement decisions in Austria].
    Führlinger S
    Wien Med Wochenschr; 2006 Dec; 156(23-24):612-8. PubMed ID: 17211765
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Unravelling drug reimbursement outcomes: a comparative study of the role of pharmacoeconomic evidence in Dutch and Swedish reimbursement decision making.
    Franken M; Nilsson F; Sandmann F; de Boer A; Koopmanschap M
    Pharmacoeconomics; 2013 Sep; 31(9):781-97. PubMed ID: 23839699
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. [Cost-effectiveness of new drugs impacts reimbursement decision making but room for improvement].
    Hoomans T; van der Roer N; Severens JL; Delwel GO
    Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd; 2010; 154():A958. PubMed ID: 20699045
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. 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]  

  • 10. The Relative Importance of Clinical, Economic, Patient Values and Feasibility Criteria in Cancer Drug Reimbursement in Canada: A Revealed Preferences Analysis of Recommendations of the Pan-Canadian Oncology Drug Review 2011-2017.
    Skedgel C; Wranik D; Hu M
    Pharmacoeconomics; 2018 Apr; 36(4):467-475. PubMed ID: 29353385
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Using pharmacoeconomic analysis to make drug insurance coverage decisions.
    Anis AH; Rahman T; Schechter MT
    Pharmacoeconomics; 1998 Jan; 13(1 Pt 2):119-26. PubMed ID: 10176146
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. National reimbursement listing determinants of new cancer drugs: a retrospective analysis of 58 cancer treatment appraisals in 2007-2016 in South Korea.
    Kim ES; Kim JA; Lee EK
    Expert Rev Pharmacoecon Outcomes Res; 2017 Aug; 17(4):401-409. PubMed ID: 28010146
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Problems with the interpretation of pharmacoeconomic analyses: a review of submissions to the Australian Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme.
    Hill SR; Mitchell AS; Henry DA
    JAMA; 2000 Apr; 283(16):2116-21. PubMed ID: 10791503
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. 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]  

  • 15. Do reassessments reduce the uncertainty of decision making? Reviewing reimbursement reports and economic evaluations of three expensive drugs over time.
    Sandmann FG; Franken MG; Steenhoek A; Koopmanschap MA
    Health Policy; 2013 Oct; 112(3):285-96. PubMed ID: 23628483
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. "Cost-effectiveness" estimates result in flawed decision-making in listing drugs for reimbursement.
    West R; Borden EK; Collet JP; Rawson NS; Tonks RS
    Can J Public Health; 2002; 93(6):421-5. PubMed ID: 12448863
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. How do cost-effectiveness analyses inform reimbursement decisions for oncology medicines in Canada? The example of sunitinib for first-line treatment of metastatic renal cell carcinoma.
    Chabot I; Rocchi A
    Value Health; 2010; 13(6):837-45. PubMed ID: 20561332
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Using effectiveness and cost-effectiveness to make drug coverage decisions: a comparison of Britain, Australia, and Canada.
    Clement FM; Harris A; Li JJ; Yong K; Lee KM; Manns BJ
    JAMA; 2009 Oct; 302(13):1437-43. PubMed ID: 19809025
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Is there an economic rationale for cancer drugs to have a separate reimbursement review process for resource allocation purposes?
    McDonald H; Charles C; Elit L; Gafni A
    Pharmacoeconomics; 2015 Mar; 33(3):235-41. PubMed ID: 25424496
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Assessment of pharmacoeconomic evaluations submitted for reimbursement in Korea.
    Yim EY; Lim SH; Oh MJ; Park HK; Gong JR; Park SE; Yi SY
    Value Health; 2012; 15(1 Suppl):S104-10. PubMed ID: 22265055
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 12.