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 *

453 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 27085587)

  • 1. Economic Analysis of Panitumumab Compared With Cetuximab in Patients With Wild-type KRAS Metastatic Colorectal Cancer That Progressed After Standard Chemotherapy.
    Graham CN; Maglinte GA; Schwartzberg LS; Price TJ; Knox HN; Hechmati G; Hjelmgren J; Barber B; Fakih MG
    Clin Ther; 2016 Jun; 38(6):1376-1391. PubMed ID: 27085587
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Final results and outcomes by prior bevacizumab exposure, skin toxicity, and hypomagnesaemia from ASPECCT: randomized phase 3 non-inferiority study of panitumumab versus cetuximab in chemorefractory wild-type KRAS exon 2 metastatic colorectal cancer.
    Price T; Kim TW; Li J; Cascinu S; Ruff P; Suresh AS; Thomas A; Tjulandin S; Guan X; Peeters M
    Eur J Cancer; 2016 Nov; 68():51-59. PubMed ID: 27716478
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Cost-minimization analysis of panitumumab compared with cetuximab for first-line treatment of patients with wild-type RAS metastatic colorectal cancer.
    Graham CN; Hechmati G; Fakih MG; Knox HN; Maglinte GA; Hjelmgren J; Barber B; Schwartzberg LS
    J Med Econ; 2015; 18(8):619-28. PubMed ID: 25822327
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. The clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of cetuximab (mono- or combination chemotherapy), bevacizumab (combination with non-oxaliplatin chemotherapy) and panitumumab (monotherapy) for the treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer after first-line chemotherapy (review of technology appraisal No.150 and part review of technology appraisal No. 118): a systematic review and economic model.
    Hoyle M; Crathorne L; Peters J; Jones-Hughes T; Cooper C; Napier M; Tappenden P; Hyde C
    Health Technol Assess; 2013 Apr; 17(14):1-237. PubMed ID: 23547747
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Economic analysis of bevacizumab, cetuximab, and panitumumab with fluoropyrimidine-based chemotherapy in the first-line treatment of KRAS wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC).
    Lawrence D; Maschio M; Leahy KJ; Yunger S; Easaw JC; Weinstein MC
    J Med Econ; 2013 Dec; 16(12):1387-98. PubMed ID: 24102083
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Panitumumab versus cetuximab in patients with chemotherapy-refractory wild-type KRAS exon 2 metastatic colorectal cancer (ASPECCT): a randomised, multicentre, open-label, non-inferiority phase 3 study.
    Price TJ; Peeters M; Kim TW; Li J; Cascinu S; Ruff P; Suresh AS; Thomas A; Tjulandin S; Zhang K; Murugappan S; Sidhu R
    Lancet Oncol; 2014 May; 15(6):569-79. PubMed ID: 24739896
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Cost-minimization analysis of biweekly dosing of cetuximab and FOLFIRI compared with panitumumab and FOLFOX for first-line treatment of patients with KRAS wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer in the United States.
    Gathirua-Mwangi WG; Sethi H; Afable MG; Bhattacharyya D; Khan T
    J Med Econ; 2021; 24(1):1164-1172. PubMed ID: 34529522
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Cost-effectiveness of cetuximab, cetuximab plus irinotecan, and panitumumab for third and further lines of treatment for KRAS wild-type patients with metastatic colorectal cancer.
    Hoyle M; Peters J; Crathorne L; Jones-Hughes T; Cooper C; Napier M; Hyde C
    Value Health; 2013; 16(2):288-96. PubMed ID: 23538180
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. The clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of cetuximab (review of technology appraisal no. 176) and panitumumab (partial review of technology appraisal no. 240) for previously untreated metastatic colorectal cancer: a systematic review and economic evaluation.
    Huxley N; Crathorne L; Varley-Campbell J; Tikhonova I; Snowsill T; Briscoe S; Peters J; Bond M; Napier M; Hoyle M
    Health Technol Assess; 2017 Jun; 21(38):1-294. PubMed ID: 28682222
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Prospective cost-effectiveness analysis of cetuximab in metastatic colorectal cancer: evaluation of National Cancer Institute of Canada Clinical Trials Group CO.17 trial.
    Mittmann N; Au HJ; Tu D; O'Callaghan CJ; Isogai PK; Karapetis CS; Zalcberg JR; Evans WK; Moore MJ; Siddiqui J; Findlay B; Colwell B; Simes J; Gibbs P; Links M; Tebbutt NC; Jonker DJ; ;
    J Natl Cancer Inst; 2009 Sep; 101(17):1182-92. PubMed ID: 19666851
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Cost-effectiveness of cetuximab and panitumumab for chemotherapy-refractory metastatic colorectal cancer.
    Carvalho AC; Leal F; Sasse AD
    PLoS One; 2017; 12(4):e0175409. PubMed ID: 28403233
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Comparative net cost impact of the utilization of panitumumab versus cetuximab for the treatment of patients with metastatic colorectal cancer in Canada.
    Pettigrew M; Kavan P; Surprenant L; Lim HJ
    J Med Econ; 2016; 19(2):135-47. PubMed ID: 26442575
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Economic Analysis of First-Line Treatment with Cetuximab or Panitumumab for RAS Wild-Type Metastatic Colorectal Cancer in England.
    Tikhonova IA; Huxley N; Snowsill T; Crathorne L; Varley-Campbell J; Napier M; Hoyle M
    Pharmacoeconomics; 2018 Jul; 36(7):837-851. PubMed ID: 29498000
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Cost-minimization analysis of the treatment of patients with metastatic colorectal cancer in Greece.
    Fragoulakis V; Papagiannopoulou V; Kourlaba G; Maniadakis N; Fountzilas G
    Clin Ther; 2012 Oct; 34(10):2132-42. PubMed ID: 23063374
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. KRAS Testing for Anti-EGFR Therapy in Advanced Colorectal Cancer: An Evidence-Based and Economic Analysis.
    Medical Advisory Secretariat
    Ont Health Technol Assess Ser; 2010; 10(25):1-49. PubMed ID: 23074403
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Cost-effectiveness analysis of panitumumab plus mFOLFOX6 compared with bevacizumab plus mFOLFOX6 for first-line treatment of patients with wild-type RAS metastatic colorectal cancer.
    Graham CN; Hechmati G; Hjelmgren J; de Liège F; Lanier J; Knox H; Barber B
    Eur J Cancer; 2014 Nov; 50(16):2791-801. PubMed ID: 25219451
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Cost-effectiveness analysis of KRAS testing and cetuximab as last-line therapy for colorectal cancer.
    Shiroiwa T; Motoo Y; Tsutani K
    Mol Diagn Ther; 2010 Dec; 14(6):375-84. PubMed ID: 21275455
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. A within-trial cost-effectiveness analysis of panitumumab compared with bevacizumab in the first-line treatment of patients with wild-type RAS metastatic colorectal cancer in the US.
    Graham CN; Christodoulopoulou A; Knox HN; Sabatelli L; Hechmati G; Garawin T; Strickler JH
    J Med Econ; 2018 Nov; 21(11):1075-1083. PubMed ID: 30091652
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Cost-effectiveness of KRAS testing in metastatic colorectal cancer patients in the United States and Germany.
    Vijayaraghavan A; Efrusy MB; Göke B; Kirchner T; Santas CC; Goldberg RM
    Int J Cancer; 2012 Jul; 131(2):438-45. PubMed ID: 21898389
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Cost-effectiveness analysis in the Spanish setting of the PEAK trial of panitumumab plus mFOLFOX6 compared with bevacizumab plus mFOLFOX6 for first-line treatment of patients with wild-type RAS metastatic colorectal cancer.
    Rivera F; Valladares M; Gea S; López-Martínez N
    J Med Econ; 2017 Jun; 20(6):574-584. PubMed ID: 28107090
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 23.