https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5304-5585
References
- Danko D, Blay JY, Garrison LP. Challenges in the value assessment, pricing and funding of targeted combination therapies in oncology. Health Policy. 2019;123(12):1230–1236.
- Latimer N, Pollard D, Towse A, et al. Challenges in valuing and paying for combination regimens in oncology. Report of an international workshop convened by Bellberry. May 2020. [cited 2021 Feb 3]. Available from: https://bellberry.com.au/wp-content/uploads/Meeting-report-final-draft-May-2020.pdf]
- National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. Breast cancer (HER2 positive, metastatic) - pertuzumab (with trastuzumab and docetaxel): appraisal consultation document. London, UK: The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence; 2013.
- Fleeman N, Bagust A, Beale S, et al. Pertuzumab in combination with trastuzumab and docetaxel for the treatment of HER2 positive metastatic or locally recurrent unresectable breast cancer. LRiG: The University of Liverpool; 2013.
- National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. Guide to the methods of technology appraisal 2013 [cited 2021 Feb 3]. Available from: http://www.nice.org.uk/article/pmg9/chapter/foreword]
- National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence. Vinflunine for the treatment of advanced or metastatic transitional cell carcinoma of the urothelial tract: NICE technology appraisal guidance. 2013. London, UK: The National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence; p. 272.
- Davis S Assessing technologies that are not cost-effective at zero price. Report by the Decision Support Unit, July 2014
- National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence. Cetuximab for the treatment of recurrent and/or metastatic squamous cell cancer of the head and neck: NICE technology appraisal guidance 172. 2009. London, UK: The National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence; 2014.
- Towse A, Cole A, and Zamora B. The Debate on Indication-Based Pricing in the U.S. and Five Major European Countries. OHE Consulting Report. 2019. London: Office of Health Economics. Available at: https://www.ohe.org/publications/debate-indicationbased-pricing-us-and-five-major-european-countries, accessed 3rd February 2021
- Mestre-Ferrandiz J, Towse A, Dellamano R, et al. Seminar briefing 18: multi-indication pricing: pros, cons and applicability to the UK. 2015. London: Office of Health Economics. Available at: https://www.ohe.org/publications/multi-indication-pricing-pros-cons-and-applicability-uk, accessed 3rd February 2021
- Campillo-Artero C, Puig-Junoy J, Segú-Tolsa JL, et al. Price models for multi-indication drugs: a systematic review. Appl Health Econ Health Policy. 2020;18(1):47–56.
- Chandra A, Garthwaite C. The economics of indication-based drug pricing. N Engl J Med. 2017;377(2):103–106.
- Cole A, Towse A, Lorgelly P, Sullivan R. Economics of Innovative Payment Models Compared with Single Pricing of Pharmaceuticals. OHE Research Paper 18/04, 2018. London: Office of Health Economics. Available at: https://www.ohe.org/publications/economics-innovative-payment-models-compared-single-pricing-pharmaceuticals-0, accessed 3rd February 2021
- European Medicines Agency, Guideline on registry-based studies: draft. 2020Sept24, EMA/502388/2020. Available from https://www.ema.europa.eu/en/documents/scientific-guideline/guideline-registry-based-studies_en.pdf,accessed24/11/20
- Systemic Anti-Cancer Therapy (SACT) Dataset, National cancer registration and analysis service (NCRAS), operated by Public Health England. [cited 2020 Feb 3]. Available from: www.chemodataset.nhs.uk, accessed 27/20/2020