149 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 25424496)
1. 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]
2. 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]
3. Evaluation of the Clinical Benefit of Cancer Drugs Submitted for Reimbursement Recommendation Decisions in Canada.
Meyers DE; Jenei K; Chisamore TM; Gyawali B
JAMA Intern Med; 2021 Apr; 181(4):499-508. PubMed ID: 33616606
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. 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]
5. 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]
6. 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]
7. Conditional approval of cancer drugs in Canada: accountability and impact on public funding.
Andersen SK; Penner N; Chambers A; Trudeau ME; Chan KKW; Cheung MC
Curr Oncol; 2019 Feb; 26(1):e100-e105. PubMed ID: 30853815
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Examining the association between oncology drug clinical benefit and the time to public reimbursement.
Thomson S; Everest L; Witzke N; Jiao T; Delos Santos S; Nguyen V; Cheung MC; Chan KKW
Cancer Med; 2022 Jan; 11(2):380-391. PubMed ID: 34850587
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. 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]
10. 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]
11. 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]
12. Challenges in striving to simultaneously achieve multiple resource allocation goals: the pan-Canadian Oncology Drug Review (pCODR) example.
McDonald H; Charles C; Elit L; Gafni A
J Mark Access Health Policy; 2016; 4():. PubMed ID: 27489586
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Predictors for reimbursement of oncology drugs in Belgium between 2002 and 2013.
Pauwels K; Huys I; De Nys K; Casteels M; Simoens S
Expert Rev Pharmacoecon Outcomes Res; 2015; 15(5):859-68. PubMed ID: 25978862
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Finding legitimacy for the role of budget impact in drug reimbursement decisions.
Niezen MG; de Bont A; Busschbach JJ; Cohen JP; Stolk EA
Int J Technol Assess Health Care; 2009 Jan; 25(1):49-55. PubMed ID: 19126251
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. New Cancer Drug Approvals From the Perspective of a Universal Healthcare System: Analyses of the Pan-Canadian Oncology Drug Review Recommendations.
Niraula S; Nugent Z
J Natl Compr Canc Netw; 2018 Dec; 16(12):1460-1466. PubMed ID: 30545993
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
16. Drug attributes associated with the selection of drugs for reimbursement: a pilot stated preferences experiment with Canadian stakeholders.
Wranik WD; Skedgel C; Hu M
Expert Rev Pharmacoecon Outcomes Res; 2019 Feb; 19(1):59-69. PubMed ID: 30169973
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Same drugs, valued differently? Comparing comparators and methods used in reimbursement recommendations in Australia, Canada, and Korea.
Bae G; Bae EY; Bae S
Health Policy; 2015 May; 119(5):577-87. PubMed ID: 25666339
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. 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]
19. The ESMO-Magnitude of Clinical Benefit Scale for novel oncology drugs: correspondence with three years of reimbursement decisions in Israel.
Hammerman A; Greenberg-Dotan S; Feldhamer I; Birnbaum Y; Cherny NI
Expert Rev Pharmacoecon Outcomes Res; 2018 Feb; 18(1):119-122. PubMed ID: 28617621
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Eliciting societal preferences of reimbursement decision criteria for anti cancer drugs in South Korea.
Kwon SH; Park SK; Byun JH; Lee EK
Expert Rev Pharmacoecon Outcomes Res; 2017 Aug; 17(4):411-419. PubMed ID: 28019130
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
