Format
Sort by
Items per page

Send to

Choose Destination

Links from PubMed

Items: 1 to 20 of 397

1.

Scenario drafting to anticipate future developments in technology assessment.

Retèl VP, Joore MA, Linn SC, Rutgers EJ, van Harten WH.

BMC Res Notes. 2012 Aug 16;5:442. doi: 10.1186/1756-0500-5-442.

2.

Surveillance of Barrett's oesophagus: exploring the uncertainty through systematic review, expert workshop and economic modelling.

Garside R, Pitt M, Somerville M, Stein K, Price A, Gilbert N.

Health Technol Assess. 2006 Mar;10(8):1-142, iii-iv. Review.

3.

Constructive Technology Assessment (CTA) as a tool in coverage with evidence development: the case of the 70-gene prognosis signature for breast cancer diagnostics.

Retèl VP, Bueno-de-Mesquita JM, Hummel MJ, van de Vijver MJ, Douma KF, Karsenberg K, van Dam FS, van Krimpen C, Bellot FE, Roumen RM, Linn SC, van Harten WH.

Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2009 Jan;25(1):73-83. doi: 10.1017/S0266462309090102.

PMID:
19126254
4.

Value of research and value of development in early assessments of new medical technologies.

Retèl VP, Grutters JP, van Harten WH, Joore MA.

Value Health. 2013 Jul-Aug;16(5):720-8. doi: 10.1016/j.jval.2013.04.013.

5.

Genomic profile of breast cancer: cost-effectiveness analysis from the Spanish National Healthcare System perspective.

Seguí MÁ, Crespo C, Cortés J, Lluch A, Brosa M, Becerra V, Chiavenna SM, Gracia A.

Expert Rev Pharmacoecon Outcomes Res. 2014 Dec;14(6):889-99. doi: 10.1586/14737167.2014.957185. Epub 2014 Sep 12.

PMID:
25213317
6.

The clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of cardiac resynchronisation (biventricular pacing) for heart failure: systematic review and economic model.

Fox M, Mealing S, Anderson R, Dean J, Stein K, Price A, Taylor RS.

Health Technol Assess. 2007 Nov;11(47):iii-iv, ix-248. Review.

7.

Topotecan, pegylated liposomal doxorubicin hydrochloride and paclitaxel for second-line or subsequent treatment of advanced ovarian cancer: a systematic review and economic evaluation.

Main C, Bojke L, Griffin S, Norman G, Barbieri M, Mather L, Stark D, Palmer S, Riemsma R.

Health Technol Assess. 2006 Mar;10(9):1-132. iii-iv. Review.

8.
9.

Head-to-head comparison of the 70-gene signature versus the 21-gene assay: cost-effectiveness and the effect of compliance.

Retèl VP, Joore MA, van Harten WH.

Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2012 Jan;131(2):627-36. doi: 10.1007/s10549-011-1769-7. Epub 2011 Sep 24.

PMID:
21947677
10.

The clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of gemcitabine for metastatic breast cancer: a systematic review and economic evaluation.

Takeda AL, Jones J, Loveman E, Tan SC, Clegg AJ.

Health Technol Assess. 2007 May;11(19):iii, ix-xi, 1-62. Review.

11.

A preliminary model-based assessment of the cost-utility of a screening programme for early age-related macular degeneration.

Karnon J, Czoski-Murray C, Smith K, Brand C, Chakravarthy U, Davis S, Bansback N, Beverley C, Bird A, Harding S, Chisholm I, Yang YC.

Health Technol Assess. 2008 Jun;12(27):iii-iv, ix-124.

12.

Prospective cost-effectiveness analysis of genomic profiling in breast cancer.

Retèl VP, Joore MA, Drukker CA, Bueno-de-Mesquita JM, Knauer M, van Tinteren H, Linn SC, van Harten WH.

Eur J Cancer. 2013 Dec;49(18):3773-9. doi: 10.1016/j.ejca.2013.08.001. Epub 2013 Aug 27.

PMID:
23992641
13.

Cost-effectiveness of alternative strategies for the initial medical management of non-ST elevation acute coronary syndrome: systematic review and decision-analytical modelling.

Robinson M, Palmer S, Sculpher M, Philips Z, Ginnelly L, Bowens A, Golder S, Alfakih K, Bakhai A, Packham C, Cooper N, Abrams K, Eastwood A, Pearman A, Flather M, Gray D, Hall A.

Health Technol Assess. 2005 Jul;9(27):iii-iv, ix-xi, 1-158. Review.

14.

Economic evaluation of intensive chemotherapy with prophylactic granulocyte colony-stimulating factor for patients with high-risk early breast cancer in Japan.

Ishiguro H, Kondo M, Hoshi SL, Takada M, Nakamura S, Teramukai S, Yanagihara K, Toi M.

Clin Ther. 2010 Feb;32(2):311-26. doi: 10.1016/j.clinthera.2010.01.029.

PMID:
20206789
15.

Rituximab for the first-line treatment of stage III-IV follicular lymphoma (review of Technology Appraisal No. 110): a systematic review and economic evaluation.

Papaioannou D, Rafia R, Rathbone J, Stevenson M, Buckley Woods H, Stevens J.

Health Technol Assess. 2012;16(37):1-253, iii-iv. Review.

16.

Cost-effectiveness of the 21-gene assay for guiding adjuvant chemotherapy decisions in early breast cancer.

Paulden M, Franek J, Pham B, Bedard PL, Trudeau M, Krahn M.

Value Health. 2013 Jul-Aug;16(5):729-39. doi: 10.1016/j.jval.2013.03.1625. Epub 2013 Jul 1.

17.

Economic analysis of gene expression profile data to guide adjuvant treatment in women with early-stage breast cancer.

Cosler LE, Lyman GH.

Cancer Invest. 2009 Dec;27(10):953-9. doi: 10.3109/07357900903275217. No abstract available.

PMID:
19909009
18.

Using the 21-gene assay to guide adjuvant chemotherapy decision-making in early-stage breast cancer: a cost-effectiveness evaluation in the German setting.

Blohmer JU, Rezai M, Kümmel S, Kühn T, Warm M, Friedrichs K, Benkow A, Valentine WJ, Eiermann W.

J Med Econ. 2013;16(1):30-40. doi: 10.3111/13696998.2012.722572. Epub 2012 Sep 11.

PMID:
22966753
19.

Expanding the criteria for BRCA mutation testing in breast cancer survivors.

Kwon JS, Gutierrez-Barrera AM, Young D, Sun CC, Daniels MS, Lu KH, Arun B.

J Clin Oncol. 2010 Sep 20;28(27):4214-20. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2010.28.0719. Epub 2010 Aug 23.

PMID:
20733129
20.

The clinical and cost-effectiveness of left ventricular assist devices for end-stage heart failure: a systematic review and economic evaluation.

Clegg AJ, Scott DA, Loveman E, Colquitt J, Hutchinson J, Royle P, Bryant J.

Health Technol Assess. 2005 Nov;9(45):1-132, iii-iv. Review.

Supplemental Content

Support Center