BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

499 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 24028444)

  • 1. 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]  

  • 2. 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]  

  • 3. 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]  

  • 4. 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]  

  • 5. 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]  

  • 6. 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]  

  • 7. 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]  

  • 8. 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]  

  • 9. 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]  

  • 10. Cost-effectiveness of granulocyte colony-stimulating factors (G-CSFs) for the prevention of febrile neutropenia (FN) in patients with cancer.
    Aapro MS; Chaplin S; Cornes P; Howe S; Link H; Koptelova N; Mehl A; Di Palma M; Schroader BK; Terkola R
    Support Care Cancer; 2023 Sep; 31(10):581. PubMed ID: 37728795
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Bendamustine-rituximab: a cost-utility analysis in first-line treatment of indolent non-Hodgkin's lymphoma in England and Wales.
    Dewilde S; Woods B; Castaigne JG; Parker C; Dunlop W
    J Med Econ; 2014 Feb; 17(2):111-24. PubMed ID: 24308372
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. 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]  

  • 13. 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]  

  • 14. 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]  

  • 15. Cost-effectiveness of febrile neutropenia prevention with primary versus secondary G-CSF prophylaxis for adjuvant chemotherapy in breast cancer: a systematic review.
    Younis T; Rayson D; Jovanovic S; Skedgel C
    Breast Cancer Res Treat; 2016 Oct; 159(3):425-32. PubMed ID: 27572552
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. [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]  

  • 17. [Cost-effectiveness of primary prophylaxis with PEG-rhG-CSF in early-stage breast cancer patients receiving chemotherapy in China].
    Xia W; Wang SS; Hu H; Zhao FL; Xu F; Hong RX; Jiang KK; Yuan ZY; Shi YX; Zhao K; Huang JJ; Xue C; Bi XW; Lu QY; An X; Zhang JM
    Zhonghua Zhong Liu Za Zhi; 2020 Oct; 42(10):861-867. PubMed ID: 33113628
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Retrospective analysis of relative dose intensity in patients with non-Hodgkin lymphoma receiving CHOP-based chemotherapy and pegfilgrastim.
    Balducci L; Mo M; Abella E; Saven A
    Am J Clin Oncol; 2014 Dec; 37(6):603-10. PubMed ID: 25350463
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. 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]  

  • 20. Cost effectiveness of primary pegfilgrastim prophylaxis in patients with breast cancer at risk of febrile neutropenia.
    Aarts MJ; Grutters JP; Peters FP; Mandigers CM; Dercksen MW; Stouthard JM; Nortier HJ; van Laarhoven HW; van Warmerdam LJ; van de Wouw AJ; Jacobs EM; Mattijssen V; van der Rijt CC; Smilde TJ; van der Velden AW; Temizkan M; Batman E; Muller EW; van Gastel SM; Joore MA; Borm GF; Tjan-Heijnen VC
    J Clin Oncol; 2013 Dec; 31(34):4283-9. PubMed ID: 24166522
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 25.