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 *

203 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 25075196)

  • 1. Oncology drug health technology assessment recommendations: Canadian versus UK experiences.
    Chabot I; Rocchi A
    Clinicoecon Outcomes Res; 2014; 6():357-67. PubMed ID: 25075196
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Appraisals by Health Technology Assessment Agencies of Economic Evaluations Submitted as Part of Reimbursement Dossiers for Oncology Treatments: Evidence from Canada, the UK, and Australia.
    Ball G; Levine MAH; Thabane L; Tarride JE
    Curr Oncol; 2022 Oct; 29(10):7624-7636. PubMed ID: 36290879
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Comparative Assessment of Reimbursement Recommendations by NICE and HAS for Oncology New Medicines Indicated for the Treatment of Solid Tumors from 2015 to 2021.
    Trouiller JB; Laramée P
    Med Decis Making; 2023; 43(7-8):961-972. PubMed ID: 37480275
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Health Technology Assessment (HTA) Case Studies: Factors Influencing Divergent HTA Reimbursement Recommendations in Australia, Canada, England, and Scotland.
    Allen N; Walker SR; Liberti L; Salek S
    Value Health; 2017 Mar; 20(3):320-328. PubMed ID: 28292476
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Real-world evidence in lung and hematologic oncology health technology appraisals: a review of six assessment agencies.
    Harricharan S; Curran E; Lin HM; Walton L; Gurjar K; Nguyen K; Forsythe A
    Future Oncol; 2023 Mar; 19(8):603-616. PubMed ID: 37083358
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Closing the Gaps to Timely Patient Access: Perspectives on Conditional Funding Models.
    Glennie J; Villalba E; Wheatley-Price P
    Curr Oncol; 2022 Feb; 29(2):981-988. PubMed ID: 35200582
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Activities of the pan-Canadian Pharmaceutical Alliance: An Observational Analysis.
    Rocchi A; Mills F
    J Popul Ther Clin Pharmacol; 2018 Aug; 25(2):e12-e22. PubMed ID: 30725539
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Value assessment in oncology drugs: funding of drugs for metastatic breast cancer in Canada.
    Lemieux J; Audet S
    Curr Oncol; 2018 Jun; 25(Suppl 1):S161-S170. PubMed ID: 29910659
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Associations between uncertainties identified by the European Medicines Agency and national decision making on reimbursement by HTA agencies.
    Bloem LT; Vreman RA; Peeters NWL; Hoekman J; van der Elst ME; Leufkens HGM; Klungel OH; Goettsch WG; Mantel-Teeuwisse AK
    Clin Transl Sci; 2021 Jul; 14(4):1566-1577. PubMed ID: 33786991
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Early access for innovative oncology medicines: a different story in each nation.
    Cowling T; Nayakarathna R; Wills AL; Tankala D; Paul Roc N; Barakat S
    J Med Econ; 2023; 26(1):944-953. PubMed ID: 37466223
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Can Standard Health Technology Assessment Approaches Help Guide the Price of Orphan Drugs in Canada? A Review of Submissions to the Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies in Health Common Drug Review.
    Balijepalli C; Gullapalli L; Druyts E; Yan K; Desai K; Barakat S; Locklin J
    Clinicoecon Outcomes Res; 2020; 12():445-457. PubMed ID: 32922050
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Common drug review recommendations for orphan drugs in Canada: basis of recommendations and comparison with similar reviews in Quebec, Australia, Scotland and New Zealand.
    McCormick JI; Berescu LD; Tadros N
    Orphanet J Rare Dis; 2018 Jan; 13(1):27. PubMed ID: 29382371
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Do different clinical evidence bases lead to discordant health-technology assessment decisions? An in-depth case series across three jurisdictions.
    Spinner DS; Birt J; Walter JW; Bowman L; Mauskopf J; Drummond MF; Copley-Merriman C
    Clinicoecon Outcomes Res; 2013; 5():69-85. PubMed ID: 23403392
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. INSIGHTS FROM THE FRONT LINES: A COLLECTION OF STORIES OF HTA IMPACT FROM INAHTA MEMBER AGENCIES.
    Schuller T; Söderholm Werkö S
    Int J Technol Assess Health Care; 2017 Jan; 33(4):409-410. PubMed ID: 29241477
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Association Between the Use of Surrogate Measures in Pivotal Trials and Health Technology Assessment Decisions: A Retrospective Analysis of NICE and CADTH Reviews of Cancer Drugs.
    Pinto A; Naci H; Neez E; Mossialos E
    Value Health; 2020 Mar; 23(3):319-327. PubMed ID: 32197727
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Health Technology Assessment Process for Oncology Drugs: Impact of CADTH Changes on Public Payer Reimbursement Recommendations.
    Binder L; Ghadban M; Sit C; Barnard K
    Curr Oncol; 2022 Mar; 29(3):1514-1526. PubMed ID: 35323327
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Do Reimbursement Recommendations by the Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technology in Health Translate Into Coverage Decisions for Orphan Drugs in the Canadian Province of Ontario?
    Fontrier AM; Kanavos P
    Value Health; 2023 Jul; 26(7):1011-1021. PubMed ID: 36889379
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. The correlation between HTA recommendations and reimbursement status of orphan drugs in Europe.
    Kawalec P; Sagan A; Pilc A
    Orphanet J Rare Dis; 2016 Sep; 11(1):122. PubMed ID: 27600717
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. The Role of Noncomparative Evidence in Health Technology Assessment Decisions.
    Griffiths EA; Macaulay R; Vadlamudi NK; Uddin J; Samuels ER
    Value Health; 2017 Dec; 20(10):1245-1251. PubMed ID: 29241883
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Canadian Contraception Consensus (Part 2 of 4).
    Black A; Guilbert E; ; Costescu D; Dunn S; Fisher W; Kives S; Mirosh M; Norman WV; Pymar H; Reid R; Roy G; Varto H; Waddington A; Wagner MS; Whelan AM; ; Ferguson C; Fortin C; Kielly M; Mansouri S; Todd N
    J Obstet Gynaecol Can; 2015 Nov; 37(11):1033-9. PubMed ID: 26629725
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 11.