Population preference values for treatment outcomes in chronic lymphocytic leukaemia: a cross-sectional utility study.
about
Can administrative data be used to measure chemotherapy side effects?Utility elicitation study in the UK general public for late-stage chronic lymphocytic leukaemia.Cost-effectiveness of adding rituximab to fludarabine and cyclophosphamide for treatment of chronic lymphocytic leukemia in Ukraine.Patient preferences for chemotherapies used in breast cancer.Development of the multi-attribute Adolescent Health Utility Measure (AHUM).Population preference values for health states in relapsed or refractory B-precursor acute lymphoblastic leukemia in the United KingdomCost-effectiveness of pazopanib compared with sunitinib in metastatic renal cell carcinoma in CanadaEconomic evaluation of obinutuzumab in combination with chlorambucil in first-line treatment of patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia in Spain.Use of conjoint analysis to assess breast cancer patient preferences for chemotherapy side effects.Pharmacoeconomic analysis for pemetrexed as a maintenance therapy for NSCLC patients with patient assistance program in China.Impact of novel agents on patient-relevant outcomes in patients with previously untreated chronic lymphocytic leukemia who are not eligible for fludarabine-based therapy.The Clinical and Economic Impact of Inaccurate EGFR Mutation Tests in the Treatment of Metastatic Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer.Economic Burden of Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia in the Era of Oral Targeted Therapies in the United States.Brentuximab vedotin in relapsed/refractory Hodgkin lymphoma post-autologous stem cell transplant: a cost-effectiveness analysis in Scotland.Cost-effectiveness of vedolizumab compared with infliximab, adalimumab, and golimumab in patients with ulcerative colitis in the United Kingdom.Development of a transformation model to derive general population-based utility: Mapping the pruritus-visual analog scale (VAS) to the EQ-5D utility.Cost-effectiveness of adding carfilzomib to lenalidomide and dexamethasone in relapsed multiple myeloma from a US perspective.Cost-effectiveness of rituximab in addition to fludarabine and cyclophosphamide (R-FC) for the first-line treatment of chronic lymphocytic leukemia.Cost Effectiveness of Ofatumumab Plus Chlorambucil in First-Line Chronic Lymphocytic Leukaemia in Canada.Cost-effectiveness analysis of universal screening for carbapenemase-producing Enterobacteriaceae in hospital inpatients.Patient preferences for treating refractory overactive bladder in the UK.Using Genomic Information to Guide Ibrutinib Treatment Decisions in Chronic Lymphocytic Leukaemia: A Cost-Effectiveness AnalysisCost-effectiveness of vedolizumab compared with conventional therapy for ulcerative colitis patients in the UK.Health utilities in relation to treatment response and adverse events in relapsed/refractory Hodgkin lymphoma and systemic anaplastic large cell lymphoma.Cost-effectiveness Analysis of Nivolumab for Treatment of Platinum-Resistant Recurrent or Metastatic Squamous Cell Carcinoma of the Head and Neck.Cost-effectiveness of kinase inhibitors for hematologic malignancies: a systematic and critical review.Economic evaluation of arsenic trioxide for treatment of newly diagnosed acute promyelocytic leukaemia in Canada.Economic evaluation of arsenic trioxide compared to all-trans retinoic acid + conventional chemotherapy for treatment of relapsed acute promyelocytic leukemia in Canada.Cost-effectiveness of adding rituximab to fludarabine and cyclophosphamide for the treatment of previously untreated chronic lymphocytic leukemia.Assessing utility values for treatment-related health states of acute myeloid leukemia in the United StatesCost-effectiveness of ibrutinib as first-line therapy for chronic lymphocytic leukemia in older adults without deletion 17pCost-effectiveness of ustekinumab in moderate to severe Crohn's disease in Sweden
P2860
Q30877306-3B6FEAF8-56A9-4B72-A585-A4FAD91ACB06Q33403077-11EE51FE-6BCC-41FE-BADA-8B94A65C723FQ36014978-86EEC2BA-EA7B-4085-9F46-32BD86466278Q36136363-E648C976-95CB-4BF5-BF3D-06FEA25DE399Q36281525-67DE7CDE-2D14-4E51-BEFC-5022FB3D2CA9Q36287149-16D10D37-45CB-4332-94F4-0407BABA405FQ37152908-4BF16BFB-5283-4719-AA7F-5931B5F11C98Q37284001-29A9D2A7-C252-49D6-BD09-07E149A0D92EQ37589074-09B112A1-2DAD-488A-8145-EF657DDE8C63Q38603487-FF3AB7C0-DF11-4676-A73A-45C302AC7306Q38673560-70CDAA18-74D2-49EF-87C8-1F0403D75AB6Q38705129-0CDFD128-0A7D-4A14-939A-CFFFAF7ED6F6Q38792651-2A8152B6-A617-4204-99DB-06E115EE7739Q38912382-84CC54B2-B0B7-43A9-808C-EE17EBDCBF26Q38921971-9DAD09EB-61DD-447F-9874-C592D3242F87Q38962798-978736C0-FAC9-4AD3-94DE-A48D8B672B7BQ39737036-3257E3F9-4DB4-4F59-8852-B40607E8D1E3Q40301879-55F801C2-EB6B-461F-AE7D-5B4B6E1EDA3CQ40374202-A067B3F5-3E8C-45AB-87F8-A5D69FE3739CQ40375426-56B96924-66E3-4427-B6A1-10EFE9187661Q40565062-AB4F914C-0889-4568-9CEC-A25760F774E7Q41310328-033D2570-466F-434F-BA74-439F525653C9Q42649795-5DBFC2F8-9F1A-46A7-BE41-C05115A2E8E7Q45913193-0E6DC90D-5023-44FB-BCB5-ABC9F2AE0D28Q46004078-9197388F-CE27-4588-91C4-F28A7A55FFFCQ47968789-03D324F1-3388-4C26-B661-30A08093E994Q51032738-15AF91EB-574B-445B-85B7-6287FC038D43Q51039141-CF1E3465-AEE5-4467-BE36-27029B532699Q54261595-06F88F4F-DA35-430B-AD55-7B3BE4DB2141Q58706473-35FE8084-A62F-4DAE-9F39-E0DFD113AAFCQ58790214-EFFFB354-6973-4D55-B985-2B2DCC8E958BQ58803120-5871E46D-9A04-4FD9-ABB4-187BF4C732C3
P2860
Population preference values for treatment outcomes in chronic lymphocytic leukaemia: a cross-sectional utility study.
description
2010 nî lūn-bûn
@nan
2010 թուականի Մայիսին հրատարակուած գիտական յօդուած
@hyw
2010 թվականի մայիսին հրատարակված գիտական հոդված
@hy
2010年の論文
@ja
2010年論文
@yue
2010年論文
@zh-hant
2010年論文
@zh-hk
2010年論文
@zh-mo
2010年論文
@zh-tw
2010年论文
@wuu
name
Population preference values f ...... cross-sectional utility study.
@ast
Population preference values f ...... cross-sectional utility study.
@en
type
label
Population preference values f ...... cross-sectional utility study.
@ast
Population preference values f ...... cross-sectional utility study.
@en
prefLabel
Population preference values f ...... cross-sectional utility study.
@ast
Population preference values f ...... cross-sectional utility study.
@en
P2093
P2860
P356
P1476
Population preference values f ...... cross-sectional utility study.
@en
P2093
Alison O'Toole
David Meiklejohn
Jessica L Grinspan
John Davies
Kathleen M Beusterien
Michael Leach
Steve Bramham-Jones
P2860
P2888
P356
10.1186/1477-7525-8-50
P577
2010-05-18T00:00:00Z
P5875
P6179
1017836267