Economic Aspects of Chemotherapy

References

• Drummond MF. Methods for the economic evaluation of health care programmes. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1997.
   Google Scholar
• Drummond MF, Bloom BS, Carrin G. Issues in the cross-na-tional assessment of health technologies. Int .1- Technol As-sessm Health Care 1992; 8: 671–82.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Covens A, Boucher S, Roche K, et al. Is paclitaxel and cisplatin a cost-effective first-line therapy for advanced ovarian carcinoma? Cancer 1996; 77: 2086–91.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Elit L, Gafnim A, Levine M. Economic and policy implica-tions of adopting paclitaxel as first-line therapy for advanced ovarian cancer: an Ontario perspective. J Clin Oncol 1997; 15: 632–9.
   Google Scholar
• McGuire W, Neugut AI, Arikian S, et al. Analysis of the cost-effectiveness of paclitaxel as alternative combination therapy for advanced ovarian cancer. J Clin Oncol 1997; 15: 640–5.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Messori A, Trippoli S, Becagli P. Pharmacoeconomic profile of paclitaxel as a first-line treatment for patients with ad-vanced cvarian carcinoma. A lifetime cost-effectivness analy-sis. Cancer 1996; 78: 2366–73.
   Google Scholar
• McGuire W, Hoskins WJ, Brady MF, et al. Cyclophos-phamide and cisplatin compared with placlitaxel and cisplatin in patients with stage III and stage IV ovarian cancer. N Engl J Med 1996; 334: 1–6.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Doyle C, Stockler M, Pintilie M. Resource implications of palliative chemotherapy for ovarian cancer. J Clin Oncol 1997; 15: 1000–7.
   Google Scholar
• Glimelius B, Hoffman K, Graf W, et al. Cost-effectiveness of palliative chemotherapy in advanced gastrointestinal cancer. Ann Oncol 1995; 6: 267–74.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Norum J, Angelsen V. Chemotherapy in gastric cancer: An economic evaluation of the FAM (5-fluorouracil, adriamycin, mitomycin C) versus ELF (etoposide, leucovorin, 5-fluorou-racil) regimens. J Chemother 1995; 7: 455–9.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Smith RD, Hall J, Gurney H. A cost-utility approach to the use of 5-fluorouracil and levamisole as adjuvant chemother-apy for Dukes' C colonic carcinoma. Med J Aust 1993; 158: 319–22.
   Google Scholar
• Norum J, Vonen B, Olsen JA. Adjuvant chemotherapy (5-fluorouracil and levamisole) in Dukes' B and C colorectal carcinoma. A cost-effectiveness analysis. Ann Oncol 1997; 8: 65–70.
   Google Scholar
• Moertel CG, Fleming TR, Macdonald JS. Levamisole and fluorouracil for adjuvant therapy of resected colon cancer. N Engl J Med 1990; 332: 352–8.
   Google Scholar
• Brown ML, Nayfield SG, Shibley LM. Adjuvant therapy for stage III colon cancer: economics returns to research and cost-effectiveness of treatment. J Natl Cancer Inst 1994; 86: 424–30.
   Google Scholar
• Cullinan SA, Moertel CG, Fleming TR. A comparison of three chemotherapeutic regimes in the treatment of advanced pancreatic and gastric carcinoma. Fluorouracil vs fluorouracil and doxorubicin vs fluorouracil, doxorubicin, and mitomycin. JAMA 1985; 253: 2061–7.
   Google Scholar
• Desch CE, Hillner BE, Smith TJ. Should the elderly receive chemotherapy for node-negative breast cancer? A cost-effec-tiveness analysis examining total and active life-expectancy outcomes. J Clin Oncol 1993; 11: 777–82.
   Google Scholar
• Hillner B, Smith T. Efficacy and cost effectiveness of adjuvant chemotherapy in women with node-negative breast cancer. N Engl J Med 1991; 324: 160–8.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bonadonna G, Valagussa P. Current status of adjuvant chemotherapy for breast cancer. Semin Oncol 1987; 14: 8–22.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Carter C, Allen C, Henson D. Relation of tumor size, lymph node status, and survival in 24740 breast cancer cases. Cancer 1989; 63: 181–7.
   Google Scholar
• Fisher B, Slack N, Katrych D. Ten year follow-up results of patients with carcinoma of the breast in a co-operative clinical trial evaluation surgical adjuvant chemotherapy. Surg Gy-necol Obstet 1975; 140: 528–34.
   Google Scholar
• Hillner BE, Smith TJ. A model of chemotherapy in node-neg-ative breast cancer. Monogr Natl Cancer Inst 1992; 11: 143–9.
   Google Scholar
• Rosen PR, Groshen S, Saigo PE. A long-term follow-up study of survival in stage I (T1NOMO) and stage II (T1N1M0) breast carcinoma. J Clin Oncol 1989; 7: 355–66.
   Google Scholar
• Early Breast Cancer Trialists Collaborative Group (EBCTCG). Systemic treatment of early breast cancer by hormonal, cytotoxic, or immune therapy. Lancet 1992; 339: 71–85.
   Google Scholar
• Hillner B, Smith T, Desch C. Assessing the cost effectiveness of adjuvant therapies in early breast cancer using a decision analysis model. Breast Cancer Res Treatm 1993; 25: 97–105.
   Google Scholar
• Smith TJ, Hillner BE. The efficacy and cost-effectiveness of adjuvant therapy of early breast cancer in premenopausal women. J Clin Oncol 1993; 11: 771–6.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Karlsson G, Johannesson M. The decision rules of cost-effec-tiveness analysis. PharmacoEconomics 1996; 9: 113–20.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hillner B. In: Senn H-J, et al., eds. Financial costs, benefits and patient risk preferences in node-negative breast cancer: insights from a decision analysis model in adjuvant therapy of breast cancer IV. Springer-Verlag: Berlin, 1993.
   Google Scholar
• Smith TJ, Hillner BE, Desch CE. Efficacy and cost-effective-ness of cancer treatment: rational allocation of resources based on decision analysis. J Natl Cancer Inst 1993; 85: 1460–74.
   Google Scholar
• Smith TJ, Hillner BE. Decision analysis: a practical example. Oncology (Huntingt) 1995; 9 (Suppl 11): 37–45.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Launois R, Reboul-Marty J, Henry B. A cost-utility analysis of second-line chemotherapy in metastatic breast cancer. Pharmaco Economics 1996; 10: 504–21.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brown RE, Hutton J. Cost-utility model comparing docetaxel and pacetaxel in advanced breast cancer patients. Anti-Cancer Drugs 1998; 9: 899–907.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hutton J, Brown R, Borowitz M. A new decision model for cost-effectiveness comparisons of chemotherapy in recurrent metastatic breast cancer. Pharmaco Economics 1996; 9 (Suppl 2): 9–22.
   Google Scholar
• Rubens RD. Key issues in the treatment of advanced breast cancer. Pharmaco Economics 1996; 9 (Suppl 2): 1–7.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Peters WP, Ross M, Vredenburgh JJ. The use of intensive clinic support to permit outpatient autologous bone marrow transplantation for breast cancer. Semin Oncol 1994; 21 (Suppl 7): 25–31.
   Google Scholar
• Hillner B, Smith T, Desch C. Efficacy and cost-effectiveness of autologous bone marrow transplantation in metastatic breast cancer, estimates using decision analysis while awating clinical results. JAMA 1992; 267: 2055–61.
   Google Scholar
• Kennedy W, Reinharz D, Tessier G. Cost utility of chemotherapy and best supportive care in non-small cell lung cancer. Pharmaco Economics 1995; 8: 316–23.
   Google Scholar
• Rapp E, Pater JL, Willan A. Chemotherapy can prolong survival in patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer: report of a Canadian multicenter randomized trial. J Clin Oncol 1988; 6: 633–41.
   Google Scholar
• Jaakkimainen L, Goodwin PJ, Pater J. Counting the costs of chemotherapy in a National Cancer Institute of Canada randomized trial in non-small cell lung cancer. J Clin Oncol 1990; 8: 1301–9.
   Google Scholar
• Earle CC, Evans WK. A Comparison of the costs of pacli-taxel and best supportive care in stage IV non-small-cell lung cancer. Cancer Prevention & Control 1997; 1: 282–8.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Evans W. An estimate of the cost-effectiveness of gemcitabine in stage W non-small lung cancer. Semin Oncol 1996; 23 (Suppl 10): 82–9.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Evans WK. Cost-effectiveness of gemcitabine in stage IV non-small cell lung cancen an estimate using the population health model lung cancer module. Sem Oncol 1997; 24 (Suppl 7): 56–63.
   Google Scholar
• Evans WK, Will BP, Berthelot J-M, Earle CC. Cost of combined modality interventions for stage III non-small lung cancer. J Clin Oncol 1997; 15: 3038–48.
   Google Scholar
• Evans WK. A comparison with standard chemotherapy and best supportive care. cost-effectiveness of vinorelbine alone or vinorelbine plus cisplatin for stage IV NSCLC. Oncology 1998; 12 (Suppl 4): 18–26.
   Google Scholar
• Smith TJ, Hillner BE, Neighbors DM. Economic evaluation of a randomized clinical trial comparing vinorelbine, vinorel-bine plus cisplatin, and vindesine plus cisplatin for non-small cell lung cancer. J Clin Oncol 1995; 13: 2166–73.
   Google Scholar
• Le Chevalier T, Brisgand D, Douillard JY. Randomized study of vinorelbine and cisplatine versus vindesine and cisplatin versus vinorelbine alone in advanced non-small cell lung cancer: Results of a European multicenter trial including 612 patients. J Clin Oncol 1994; 12: 360–7.
   Google Scholar
• Hillner BE, Smith TJ. Overview of economic analysis of Le Chevalier Vinorelbine Study. Oncology 1998; 12 (Suppl): 14–7.
   Google Scholar
• Ragnarson Tennvall G, Fernberg J-0. Economic evaluation of gemcitabine single agent therapy compared with standard treatment in stage BIB and IV non-small cell lung cancer. Medical Oncol 1998; 15: 129–36.
   Google Scholar
• Copley-Merriman C, Martin C, Johnson N. Economic value of gemcitabine in non-small cell lung cancer. Semin Oncol 1996; 23 (Suppl 10): 90–8.
   Google Scholar
• Williamson SK, Crowley JJ, Livingston RB. Phase II trial and cost analysis of fazarabine in advanced non-small cell car-cinoma of the lung: a Southwest Oncology Group study. Invest New Drugs 1995; 13: 67–71.
   Google Scholar
• Uyl-de Groot CA, Hagenbeek A, Verdonck LF. Cost-effec-tiveness of ABMT in comparison with CHOP chemotherapy in patients with intermediate- and high-grade malignant non-Hodgkin's lymphoma (NHL). Bone Marrow Transplant 1995; 16: 463–70.
   Google Scholar
• Uyl-de Groot CA, Okhuijsen SY, Hagenbeek A. The costs of introducing BMT in the treatment of lymphoma and acute leukaemia patients in the Netherlands. Bone Marrow Trans-plant 1995; 15: 605–10.
   Google Scholar
• Messori A, Bonistalli L, Costantini M, et al. Cost-effective-ness of autologous bone marrow transplantation in patients with relapsed non-Hodgkin's lymphoma. Bone Marrow Transplantation 1997; 19: 275–81.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Philip T, Guglielmi C, Hagenbeek A. Autologuous bone marrow transplantation as compared with salvage chemother-apy in relapses of chemotherapy-sensitive non-Hodgkin's lymphoma. N Engl J Med 1995; 333: 1540–5.
   Google Scholar
• Bennett CL, Armitage JL, Armitage GO. Costs of care and outcomes for high-dose therapy and autologous transplanta-tion for lymphoid malignancies: results from the University of Nebraska 1987 through 1991. J Clin Oncol 1995; 13: 969–73.
   Google Scholar
• Norum J, Angelsen V, Wist E. Treatment costs in Hodgkin's disease: a cost-utility analysis. Eur J Cancer 1996; 32A: 1510–7.
   Google Scholar
• Desch CE, Lasala MR, Smith TJ. The optimal timing of autologous bone marrow transplantation in Hodgkin's dis-ease patients after a chemotherapy relapse. J Clin Oncol 1992; 10: 200–9.
   Google Scholar
• Ragnarson Tennvall G, Persson U, Nilsson B. The economic cost of acute myeloid leukemia in Sweden. Int J Technol Assessm Health Care 1994; 10: 683–94.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Stalfelt A, Brodin H. Costs over time in conventional treat-ment of acute myeloid leukaemia in Sweden. In: Stalfelt A, ed. Botad-till vilket pris? En studie over livskvalitet och kostnad vid konventionell behandling av akut myeloisk leukemi. Uppsala: Uppsala universitet, 1994.
   Google Scholar
• Berman E, Heller G, Santorsa J. Results of a randomized trial comparing idarubicin and cytosine arabinoside with daunorubicin and cytosine arabinoside in adult patients with newly diagnosed acute myelogenous leukemia. Blood 1991; 77: 125–9.
   Google Scholar
• Pashko S, Jacobs J, Santorsa J. The cost-effectiveness of idarubicin/cytosine arabinoside versus daunorubicin/cytosine arabinoside in the treatment of adults with acute myeloid leukemia. Clin Ther 1991; 13: 353–60.
   Google Scholar
• Marie JP, Wdowik T, Bisserbe S. Cost of complete remission induction in acute myeloblastic leukemia: evaluation of the cost-effectiveness of a new drug. Leukemia 1992; 6: 720–2.
   Google Scholar
• Dufoir T, Saux MC, Terraza B. Comparative cost of allo-geneic or autologous bone marrow transplantation and chemotherapy in patients with acute myeloid leukaemia in first remission. Bone Marrow Transplant 1992; 10: 323–9.
   Google Scholar
• Barr R, Furlong W, Henwood J. Economic evaluation of allogeneic bone marrow transplantation: A rudementary model to generate estimates for the timely formulation of clinical policy. J Clin Oncol 1996; 14: 1413–20.
   Google Scholar
• Reese J, Gray R, Wheatley K. Dose intensification in acute myeloid leukemia: greater effectiveness at lower cost. Princi-pal report of the Medical Research Council's AML9 study. Br J Haematol 1996; 94: 89–98.
   Google Scholar
• O'Brien BJ, Rusthoven J, Rocchi A. Impact of chemotherapy-associated nausea and vomiting on patients' functional status and on costs: survey of five Canadian centres. Can Med Assoc J 1993; 149: 296–302.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cunningham D, Gore M, Davidson N. The real costs of emesis - an economic analysis of ondansetron vs. metoclo-pramide in controlling emesis in patients receiving chemother-apy for cancer. Eur J Cancer 1993; 29A: 303–6.
   Google Scholar
• Zbrozek AS, Cantor SB, Cardenas MP. Pharmacoeconomic analysis of ondansetron versus metoclopramide for cisplatin-induced nausea and vomiting: see comments: Am J Hosp Pharm 1994; 51: 1555–63.
   Google Scholar
• Ballatori E, Roila F, Berto P. Cost and cost-effectiveness analysis of ondansetron versus metoclopramide regimens. A hospital perspective from Italy. Pharmaco Economics 1994; 5: 227–37.
   Google Scholar
• Tanneberger S, Lelli G, Martoni A. The antiemetic efficacy and the cost-benefit ratio of ondansetron calculated with a new approach to health technology assessment (real cost-benefit index). J Chemother 1992; 4: 326–31.
   Google Scholar
• Johnson N, Bosanquet N. Cost effectiveness of 5-hydrox-ytryptamine3 receptor antagonists: a retrospective compari-son of ondansetron and granisetron. Anti-Cancer Drugs 1995; 6: 243–9.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• SBU (Swedish Council on Technology Assessment in Health Care). Moderately increased blood pressure 1994, Stockholm. (in Swedish).
   Google Scholar
• Jonsson B, Johannesson M, Kjekshus J. Cost-effectiveness of cholesterol lowering. Results from the Scandinavian simvas-tatin survival study (4S). Eur Heart J 1996; 17: 1001–7.
   Google Scholar
• Mark DB, Hlatky MA, Califf RM. Cost effectiveness of thrombolytic therapy with tissue plasminogen activators as compared with streptokinase for acute myocardial infarction. N Engl J Med 1995; 332: 1418–24.
   Google Scholar
• Kaplan RM, Bush TW. Health-related quality of life mea-surement for evaluation of research and policy analysis. Health Psychol 1982; 1: 61–80.
   Google Scholar
• Zethraeus N, Johannesson M, Henriksson P. The impact of hormone replacement therapy on quality of life and willing-ness to pay. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1997; 104: 1191–5.
   Google Scholar
• Persson U, Vigelius C. Revidering av vägverkets olyckskost-nader - en uppräkning till 1997 Ars priser. Lund: Lunds tekniska högskola, 1997: 1995.
   Google Scholar
• Gold M, Siegel JE, Russel LB, et al. Cost-effectiveness in health and medicine. New York: Oxford University Press, 1996.
   Google Scholar