Format
Sort by

Send to

Choose Destination

Links from PubMed

Items: 1 to 20 of 98

1.

The efficacy of PET staging for small-cell lung cancer: a systematic review and cost analysis in the Australian setting.

Ruben JD, Ball DL.

J Thorac Oncol. 2012 Jun;7(6):1015-20. doi: 10.1097/JTO.0b013e31824fe90a. Review.

2.

Positron emission tomography with selected mediastinoscopy compared to routine mediastinoscopy offers cost and clinical outcome benefits for pre-operative staging of non-small cell lung cancer.

Yap KK, Yap KS, Byrne AJ, Berlangieri SU, Poon A, Mitchell P, Knight SR, Clarke PC, Harris A, Tauro A, Rowe CC, Scott AM.

Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2005 Sep;32(9):1033-40. Epub 2005 May 5.

PMID:
15875178
3.

Efficacy of positron emission tomography staging for small-cell lung cancer: a systematic review and cost analysis in the Australian setting.

Faivre-Finn C, Lorigan P.

J Thorac Oncol. 2012 Oct;7(10):e25; author reply e26. doi: 10.1097/JTO.0b013e318265a7c6. No abstract available.

4.

Cost-effectiveness of FDG-PET for staging non-small cell lung cancer: a decision analysis.

Scott WJ, Shepherd J, Gambhir SS.

Ann Thorac Surg. 1998 Dec;66(6):1876-83; discussion 1883-5.

PMID:
9930463
5.

Systematic review of the cost-effectiveness of positron-emission tomography in staging of non--small-cell lung cancer and management of solitary pulmonary nodules.

Cao JQ, Rodrigues GB, Louie AV, Zaric GS.

Clin Lung Cancer. 2012 May;13(3):161-70. doi: 10.1016/j.cllc.2011.09.002. Epub 2011 Dec 1. Review.

PMID:
22133290
6.

Staging non-small lung cancer with positron emission tomography: diagnostic value, impact on patient management, and cost-effectiveness.

Nosotti M, Castellani M, Longari V, Chella B, Baisi A, Rosso L, Santambrogio L.

Int Surg. 2008 Sep-Oct;93(5):278-83.

PMID:
19943430
7.
8.

18FDG-PET-CT in the follow-up of non-small cell lung cancer patients after radical radiotherapy with or without chemotherapy: an economic evaluation.

van Loon J, Grutters JP, Wanders R, Boersma L, Dingemans AM, Bootsma G, Geraedts W, Pitz C, Simons J, Brans B, Snoep G, Hochstenbag M, Lambin P, De Ruysscher D.

Eur J Cancer. 2010 Jan;46(1):110-9. doi: 10.1016/j.ejca.2009.10.028. Epub .

PMID:
19944595
9.

Positron emission tomography (PET) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) for the assessment of axillary lymph node metastases in early breast cancer: systematic review and economic evaluation.

Cooper KL, Meng Y, Harnan S, Ward SE, Fitzgerald P, Papaioannou D, Wyld L, Ingram C, Wilkinson ID, Lorenz E.

Health Technol Assess. 2011 Jan;15(4):iii-iv, 1-134. doi: 10.3310/hta15040. Review.

10.

Is FDG PET/CT cost-effective for pre-operation staging of potentially operative non-small cell lung cancer? - From Chinese healthcare system perspective.

Wang YT, Huang G.

Eur J Radiol. 2012 Aug;81(8):e903-9. doi: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2012.05.006. Epub 2012 Jun 13.

PMID:
22698711
11.

Cost-effectiveness of FDG-PET in staging non-small cell lung cancer: the PLUS study.

Verboom P, van Tinteren H, Hoekstra OS, Smit EF, van den Bergh JH, Schreurs AJ, Stallaert RA, van Velthoven PC, Comans EF, Diepenhorst FW, van Mourik JC, Postmus PE, Boers M, Grijseels EW, Teule GJ, Uyl-de Groot CA; PLUS study group.

Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2003 Nov;30(11):1444-9. Epub 2003 May 29.

PMID:
14579081
12.
13.

A systematic review of PET and PET/CT in oncology: a way to personalize cancer treatment in a cost-effective manner?

Langer A.

BMC Health Serv Res. 2010 Oct 8;10:283. doi: 10.1186/1472-6963-10-283. Review.

14.

Economic analyses on the use of positron emission tomography for the work-up of solitary pulmonary nodules and for staging patients with non-small-cell-lung-cancer in Italy.

Gugiatti A, Grimaldi A, Rossetti C, Lucignani G, De Marchis D, Borgonovi E, Fazio F.

Q J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2004 Mar;48(1):49-61.

15.

Budget impact from the incorporation of positron emission tomography - computed tomography for staging lung cancers.

Biz AN, Caetano R.

Rev Saude Publica. 2015;49:57. doi: 10.1590/S0034-8910.2015049005447. Epub 2015 Aug 11. English, Portuguese.

16.

Should mediastinoscopy actually be incorporated into the FDG PET strategy for patients with non-small cell lung carcinoma?

Hayashi K, Abe K, Yano F, Watanabe S, Iwasaki Y, Kosuda S.

Ann Nucl Med. 2005 Jul;19(5):393-8.

PMID:
16164196
17.

Positron emission tomography/computerised tomography imaging in detecting and managing recurrent cervical cancer: systematic review of evidence, elicitation of subjective probabilities and economic modelling.

Meads C, Auguste P, Davenport C, MaƂysiak S, Sundar S, Kowalska M, Zapalska A, Guest P, Thangaratinam S, Martin-Hirsch P, Borowiack E, Barton P, Roberts T, Khan K.

Health Technol Assess. 2013 Mar;17(12):1-323. doi: 10.3310/hta17120. Review.

18.

Systematic review and modelling of the cost-effectiveness of cardiac magnetic resonance imaging compared with current existing testing pathways in ischaemic cardiomyopathy.

Campbell F, Thokala P, Uttley LC, Sutton A, Sutton AJ, Al-Mohammad A, Thomas SM.

Health Technol Assess. 2014 Sep;18(59):1-120. doi: 10.3310/hta18590. Review.

19.

An economic evaluation of positron emission tomography (PET) and positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT) for the diagnosis of breast cancer recurrence.

Auguste P, Barton P, Hyde C, Roberts TE.

Health Technol Assess. 2011 Apr;15(18):iii-iv, 1-54. doi: 10.3310/hta15180. Review.

20.
Items per page

Supplemental Content

Write to the Help Desk