166 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 36134249)
1. Value assessment of medicinal products by the Italian Medicines Agency (AIFA) and French National Authority for Health (HAS): Similarities and discrepancies.
Xoxi E; Di Bidino R; Leone S; Aiello A; Prada M
Front Med Technol; 2022; 4():917151. PubMed ID: 36134249
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Do France, Germany, and Italy agree on the added therapeutic value of medicines?
Casilli G; Lidonnici D; Jommi C; De Nigris M; Genazzani AA
Int J Technol Assess Health Care; 2023 Aug; 39(1):e54. PubMed ID: 37580971
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. [EMA approval procedures and assessment of innovation by AIFA: a cross sectional analysis.].
Lasala R
Recenti Prog Med; 2021 Apr; 112(4):273-284. PubMed ID: 33877088
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. The Evolution of AIFA Registries to Support Managed Entry Agreements for Orphan Medicinal Products in Italy.
Xoxi E; Facey KM; Cicchetti A
Front Pharmacol; 2021; 12():699466. PubMed ID: 34456724
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Key drivers of innovativeness appraisal for medicines: the Italian experience after the adoption of the new ranking system.
Galeone C; Bruzzi P; Jommi C
BMJ Open; 2021 Jan; 11(1):e041259. PubMed ID: 33441356
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. [Innovative medicinal products: the new criteria of the Italian Medicines Agency.].
Mammarella F; Tafuri G
Recenti Prog Med; 2018 May; 109(5):261-262. PubMed ID: 29771247
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Using GRADE methodology to assess innovation of new medicinal products in Italy.
Fortinguerra F; Tafuri G; Trotta F; Addis A
Br J Clin Pharmacol; 2020 Jan; 86(1):93-105. PubMed ID: 31656055
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Leveraging EUnetHTA's conceptual framework to compare HTA decision drivers in France, Italy, and Germany from a manufacturer's point of view.
Giuliani G; Chassagnol F; Traub D; Gyldmark M; Hebborn A; Ducournau P; Ruof J
Health Econ Rev; 2018 Sep; 8(1):24. PubMed ID: 30242522
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. 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]
10. Skip pattern approach toward the early access of innovative anticancer drugs.
Apolone G; Ardizzoni A; Biondi A; Bortolami A; Cardone C; Ciniselli CM; Conte P; Crippa C; de Braud F; Duca M; Gori S; Gritti G; Inno A; Luksch R; Lussana F; Maio M; Pasello G; Perrone F; Rambaldi A; Rossi G; Signorelli D; Soverini G; Valente M; Verderio P; Buzzetti G
ESMO Open; 2021 Aug; 6(4):100227. PubMed ID: 34352703
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Appraisal of cancer drugs: a comparison of the French health technology assessment with value frameworks of two oncology societies.
Li J; Vivot A; Alter L; Durand-Zaleski I
Expert Rev Pharmacoecon Outcomes Res; 2020 Aug; 20(4):405-409. PubMed ID: 31240965
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. The Assessment of the Innovativeness of a New Medicine in Italy.
Fortinguerra F; Perna S; Marini R; Dell'Utri A; Trapanese M; Trotta F;
Front Med (Lausanne); 2021; 8():793640. PubMed ID: 34957163
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
13. A comparative analysis of two contrasting European approaches for rewarding the value added by drugs for cancer: England versus France.
Drummond M; de Pouvourville G; Jones E; Haig J; Saba G; Cawston H
Pharmacoeconomics; 2014 May; 32(5):509-20. PubMed ID: 24599784
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. MONITORING REGISTRIES AT ITALIAN MEDICINES AGENCY: FOSTERING ACCESS, GUARANTEEING SUSTAINABILITY.
Montilla S; Xoxi E; Russo P; Cicchetti A; Pani L
Int J Technol Assess Health Care; 2015 Jan; 31(4):210-3. PubMed ID: 26646859
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Medico-economic evaluation of health products in the context of the Social Security Financing Act for 2012.
Dervaux B; Baseilhac E; Fagon JY; ; Ameye V; Angot P; Audry A; Becquemont L; Borel T; Cazeneuve B; Courtois J; Detournay B; Favre P; Granger M; Josseran A; Lassale C; Louvet O; Pinson J; de Pouvourville G; Rochaix L; Rumeau-Pichon C; de Saab R; Schwarzinger M; Sun A
Therapie; 2013; 68(4):253-63. PubMed ID: 23981264
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Reimbursement of Orphan Drugs in Europe in Relation to the Type of Authorization by the European Medicines Agency and the Decision Making Based on Health Technology Assessment.
Malinowski KP; Kawalec P; Trabka W; Sowada C; Pilc A
Front Pharmacol; 2018; 9():1263. PubMed ID: 30483124
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
17. Access in all areas? a round up of developments in market access and health technology assessment: part 4.
Beattie A; Treharne C; Ramagopalan SV
J Comp Eff Res; 2024 Jun; 13(6):e240060. PubMed ID: 38647164
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Can requests for real-world evidence by the French HTA body be planned? An exhaustive retrospective case-control study of medicinal products appraisals from 2016 to 2021.
Fernandez J; Babin C; Thomassin C; Pelon F; Kelley S; Cochat P; Galbraith M; Berdaï D; Pariente A; Salvo F; Vanier A
Int J Technol Assess Health Care; 2024 May; 40(1):e33. PubMed ID: 38757153
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Access to orphan drugs despite poor quality of clinical evidence.
Dupont AG; Van Wilder PB
Br J Clin Pharmacol; 2011 Apr; 71(4):488-96. PubMed ID: 21395641
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Methods for the comparative evaluation of pharmaceuticals.
Zentner A; Velasco-Garrido M; Busse R
GMS Health Technol Assess; 2005 Nov; 1():Doc09. PubMed ID: 21289930
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
