207 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 33793342)
1. Primary Prophylaxis With Biosimilar Filgrastim for Patients at Intermediate Risk for Febrile Neutropenia: A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis.
Li E; Mezzio DJ; Campbell D; Campbell K; Lyman GH
JCO Oncol Pract; 2021 Aug; 17(8):e1235-e1245. PubMed ID: 33793342
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. 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]
3. 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]
4. 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]
5. 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]
6. Febrile neutropenia hospitalization due to pegfilgrastim on-body injector failure compared to single-injection pegfilgrastim and daily injections with reference and biosimilar filgrastim: US cost simulation for lung cancer and non-Hodgkin lymphoma.
McBride A; Krendyukov A; Mathieson N; Campbell K; Balu S; Natek M; MacDonald K; Abraham I
J Med Econ; 2020 Jan; 23(1):28-36. PubMed ID: 31433700
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
7. 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]
8. 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]
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. 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]
11. Cost-effectiveness analysis of pegfilgrastim in patients with non-small cell lung cancer receiving ramucirumab plus docetaxel in Japan.
Kondo Y; Tachi T; Sakakibara T; Kato J; Kato A; Mizuno T; Miyake Y; Teramachi H
Support Care Cancer; 2022 Aug; 30(8):6775-6783. PubMed ID: 35524869
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. 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]
13. Effectiveness of biosimilar filgrastim vs. original granulocyte colony-stimulating factors in febrile neutropenia prevention in breast cancer patients.
Puértolas I; Frutos Pérez-Surio A; Alcácera MA; Andrés R; Salvador MDT
Eur J Clin Pharmacol; 2018 Mar; 74(3):315-321. PubMed ID: 29152672
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. 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]
15. Therapeutic Use of Filgrastim for Established Febrile Neutropenia Is Cost Effective Among Patients With Solid Tumors and Lymphomas.
Wang XJ; Tong WX; Chan A
Clin Ther; 2017 Jun; 39(6):1161-1170. PubMed ID: 28554533
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Economic Analysis on Adoption of Biosimilar Granulocyte Colony-Stimulating Factors in Patients With Nonmyeloid Cancer at Risk of Febrile Neutropenia Within the Oncology Care Model Framework.
Wang W; Li E; Campbell K; McBride A; D'Amato S
JCO Oncol Pract; 2021 Aug; 17(8):e1139-e1149. PubMed ID: 33961490
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Comparison of effectiveness of biosimilar filgrastim (Nivestim™), reference Amgen filgrastim and pegfilgrastim in febrile neutropenia primary prevention in breast cancer patients treated with neo(adjuvant) TAC: a non-interventional cohort study.
Brito M; Esteves S; André R; Isidoro M; Moreira A
Support Care Cancer; 2016 Feb; 24(2):597-603. PubMed ID: 26111956
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Clinical Outcomes of Treatment with Filgrastim Versus a Filgrastim Biosimilar and Febrile Neutropenia-Associated Costs Among Patients with Nonmyeloid Cancer Undergoing Chemotherapy.
Schwartzberg LS; Lal LS; Balu S; Campbell K; Brekke L; DeLeon A; Elliott C; Korrer S
J Manag Care Spec Pharm; 2018 Oct; 24(10):976-984. PubMed ID: 29687743
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. [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]
20. 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]
[Next] [New Search]
