BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

578 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 23873405)

  • 1. Cost-effectiveness of filgrastim and pegfilgrastim as primary prophylaxis against febrile neutropenia in lymphoma patients.
    Lathia N; Isogai PK; De Angelis C; Smith TJ; Cheung M; Mittmann N; Hoch JS; Walker S
    J Natl Cancer Inst; 2013 Aug; 105(15):1078-85. PubMed ID: 23873405
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Primary vs secondary prophylaxis with pegfilgrastim for the reduction of febrile neutropenia risk in patients receiving chemotherapy for non-Hodgkin's lymphoma: cost-effectiveness analyses.
    Hill G; Barron R; Fust K; Skornicki ME; Taylor DC; Weinstein MC; Lyman GH
    J Med Econ; 2014 Jan; 17(1):32-42. PubMed ID: 24028444
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Cost effectiveness of pegfilgrastim versus filgrastim after high-dose chemotherapy and autologous stem cell transplantation in patients with lymphoma and myeloma: an economic evaluation of the PALM Trial.
    Perrier L; Lefranc A; Pérol D; Quittet P; Schmidt-Tanguy A; Siani C; de Peretti C; Favier B; Biron P; Moreau P; Bay JO; Lissandre S; Jardin F; Espinouse D; Sebban C
    Appl Health Econ Health Policy; 2013 Apr; 11(2):129-38. PubMed ID: 23435861
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Prophylaxis Treatment Strategies to Reduce the Incidence of Febrile Neutropenia in Patients with Early-Stage Breast Cancer or Non-Hodgkin Lymphoma.
    Fust K; Li X; Maschio M; Villa G; Parthan A; Barron R; Weinstein MC; Somers L; Hoefkens C; Lyman GH
    Pharmacoeconomics; 2017 Apr; 35(4):425-438. PubMed ID: 27928760
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. [Pegfilgrastim vs filgrastim in primary prophylaxis of febrile neutropenia in patients with breast cancer after chemotherapy: a cost-effectiveness analysis for Germany].
    Sehouli J; Goertz A; Steinle T; Dubois R; Plesnila-Frank C; Lalla A; von Minckwitz G
    Dtsch Med Wochenschr; 2010 Mar; 135(9):385-9. PubMed ID: 20180162
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Cost-utility analysis of primary prophylaxis versus secondary prophylaxis with granulocyte colony-stimulating factor in elderly patients with diffuse aggressive lymphoma receiving curative-intent chemotherapy.
    Chan KK; Siu E; Krahn MD; Imrie K; Alibhai SM
    J Clin Oncol; 2012 Apr; 30(10):1064-71. PubMed ID: 22393098
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Cost-effectiveness of pegfilgrastim versus filgrastim primary prophylaxis in women with early-stage breast cancer receiving chemotherapy in the United States.
    Lyman GH; Lalla A; Barron RL; Dubois RW
    Clin Ther; 2009 May; 31(5):1092-104. PubMed ID: 19539110
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Cost-effectiveness of prophylaxis treatment strategies for febrile neutropenia in patients with recurrent ovarian cancer.
    Fust K; Li X; Maschio M; Barron R; Weinstein MC; Parthan A; Walli-Attaei M; Chandler DB; Lyman GH
    Gynecol Oncol; 2014 Jun; 133(3):446-53. PubMed ID: 24657302
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. A randomised phase II study of the efficacy, safety and cost-effectiveness of pegfilgrastim and filgrastim after autologous stem cell transplant for lymphoma and myeloma (PALM study).
    Sebban C; Lefranc A; Perrier L; Moreau P; Espinouse D; Schmidt A; Kammoun L; Ghesquieres H; Ferlay C; Bay JO; Lissandre S; Pérol D; Michallet M; Quittet P
    Eur J Cancer; 2012 Mar; 48(5):713-20. PubMed ID: 22248711
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Cost-effectiveness of pegfilgrastim versus six days of filgrastim for preventing febrile neutropenia in breast cancer patients.
    Danova M; Chiroli S; Rosti G; Doan QV
    Tumori; 2009; 95(2):219-26. PubMed ID: 19579869
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Routine Primary Prophylaxis for Febrile Neutropenia with Biosimilar Granulocyte Colony-Stimulating Factor (Nivestim) or Pegfilgrastim Is Cost Effective in Non-Hodgkin Lymphoma Patients undergoing Curative-Intent R-CHOP Chemotherapy.
    Wang XJ; Tang T; Farid M; Quek R; Tao M; Lim ST; Wee HL; Chan A
    PLoS One; 2016; 11(2):e0148901. PubMed ID: 26871584
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. The economic value of primary prophylaxis using pegfilgrastim compared with filgrastim in patients with breast cancer in the UK.
    Liu Z; Doan QV; Malin J; Leonard R
    Appl Health Econ Health Policy; 2009; 7(3):193-205. PubMed ID: 19799473
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Cost-effectiveness of pegfilgrastim versus 6-day filgrastim primary prophylaxis in patients with non-Hodgkin's lymphoma receiving CHOP-21 in United States.
    Lyman G; Lalla A; Barron R; Dubois RW
    Curr Med Res Opin; 2009 Feb; 25(2):401-11. PubMed ID: 19192985
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Comparative effectiveness of colony-stimulating factors for febrile neutropenia: a retrospective study.
    Tan H; Tomic K; Hurley D; Daniel G; Barron R; Malin J
    Curr Med Res Opin; 2011 Jan; 27(1):79-86. PubMed ID: 21091127
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Cost-effectiveness of primary versus secondary prophylaxis with pegfilgrastim in women with early-stage breast cancer receiving chemotherapy.
    Ramsey SD; Liu Z; Boer R; Sullivan SD; Malin J; Doan QV; Dubois RW; Lyman GH
    Value Health; 2009; 12(2):217-25. PubMed ID: 18673353
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Pegfilgrastim prophylaxis is associated with a lower risk of hospitalization of cancer patients than filgrastim prophylaxis: a retrospective United States claims analysis of granulocyte colony-stimulating factors (G-CSF).
    Naeim A; Henk HJ; Becker L; Chia V; Badre S; Li X; Deeter R
    BMC Cancer; 2013 Jan; 13():11. PubMed ID: 23298389
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Cost-effectiveness of prophylactic granulocyte colony-stimulating factor for febrile neutropenia in breast cancer patients receiving FEC-D.
    Lee EK; Wong WW; Trudeau ME; Chan KK
    Breast Cancer Res Treat; 2015 Feb; 150(1):169-80. PubMed ID: 25694355
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Comparative effectiveness of filgrastim, pegfilgrastim, and sargramostim as prophylaxis against hospitalization for neutropenic complications in patients with cancer receiving chemotherapy.
    Weycker D; Malin J; Barron R; Edelsberg J; Kartashov A; Oster G
    Am J Clin Oncol; 2012 Jun; 35(3):267-74. PubMed ID: 21378538
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Risk of hospitalization for neutropenic complications of chemotherapy in patients with primary solid tumors receiving pegfilgrastim or filgrastim prophylaxis: a retrospective cohort study.
    Weycker D; Malin J; Kim J; Barron R; Edelsberg J; Kartashov A; Oster G
    Clin Ther; 2009 May; 31(5):1069-81. PubMed ID: 19539108
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Cost-effectiveness of pegfilgrastim versus filgrastim for prevention of chemotherapy-induced febrile neutropenia in patients with lymphoma: a systematic review.
    Gebremariam GT; Fentie AM; Beyene K; Sander B; Gebretekle GB
    BMC Health Serv Res; 2022 Dec; 22(1):1600. PubMed ID: 36585648
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 29.