Article information
Full text is only aviable in PDF
Further readings/Leituras adicionais
[NICE, 2007.]
NICE Technology Appraisal TA124. August 2007. Pemetrexed for the treatment of non-small-cell lung cancer. http://www.nice.org.uk/Guidance/TA124
[American, 2006.]
American Pharmaceutical Group criticizes NICE approach vs. Alimta: UK parliamentary Select Committee on Health documents: http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200607/cmselect/cmhealth/503/503we06.htm.
Bibliography/Bibliografia
[1.]
A. Araujo, et al.
An economic analysis of erlotinib, docetaxel, pemetrexed and best supportive care as second or third line treatment of non-small cell lung cancer.
Rev Port Pneumol, 14 (2008), pp. 803-827
[2.]
Peterson P, et al. Is pemetrexed more effective in patients with non-squamous histology? A retrospective analysis of a phase III trial of pemetrexed vs. docetaxel in previously treated patients with advanced nonsmall cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Abstract P#6521, The European Cancer Conference 2007 (ECCO 14). Eur J Cancer 2007;5 (Suppl 4):363.
[3.]
Drummond M, Sculpher M, Torrance G, et al. Methods for the economic evaluation of health care programmes. Oxford Medical Publications; Third edition, 200; 48-51, 121–124, 190–196.
[4.]
F. Song, et al.
Validity of indirect comparison for estimating efficacy of competing interventions: empirical evidence from published meta-analyses.
BMJ, 326 (2003), pp. 472
[5.]
A.M. Glenny, D.G. Altman, F. Song, C. Sakarovitch, J.J. Deeks, R. D’Amico, et al.
Indirect comparisons of competing interventions.
Health Technol Assess, 9 (2005),
[6.]
da Silva AE, et al. Orientações metodológicas para estudos de avaliação económica de medicamentos. INFARMED 1998 http://www.infarmed.pt/portal/page/portal/infarmed/medicamentos_uso_humano/avaliacao_economica_e_comparticipacao/medicamentos_uso_ambulatorio/avaliacao_de_comparticipacao/orien_metodologicas_eaem.pdf.
[7.]
European Product Assessment Report (EPAR) and Product Information: Alimta. CHMP 2008 http://www.emea.europa.eu/humandocs/Humans/EPAR/al imta/alimta.htm.
[8.]
European Product Assessment Report (EPAR) and Product Information: Tarceva. CHMP 2008 http://www.emea.europa.eu/humandocs/Humans/EPAR/tarceva/tarceva.htm.
[9.]
European Product Assessment Report (EPAR) and Product Information: Taxotere. CHMP 2008 http://www.emea.europa.eu/humandocs/Humans/EPAR/tax otere/taxotere.htm.
[10.]
N. Hanna, F.A. Shepherd, F.V. Fossela, et al.
Randomized phase III trial of pemetrexed versus docetaxel in patients with non-small-cell lung cancer previously treated with chemotherapy.
J Clin Oncol, 22 (2004), pp. 1589-1597
[11.]
NICE Technology Appraisal TA162. November 2008. Erlotinib for the treatment of non-small cell lung cancer. Pages 11-12 http://www.nice.org.uk/Guidance/TA162.
[12.]
F.A. Shepherd, J. Pereira, T. Ciuleanu, et al.
Erlotinib in previously treated non-small cell lung cancer.
N Engl J Med, 353 (2005), pp. 123-132
[13.]
F.A. Shepherd, et al.
Prospective randomized trial of docetaxel versus best supportive care in patients with non-small-cell lung cancer previously treated with platinum-based therapy.
Journal of Clinical Oncology, 18 (2000), pp. 2095-2103
[14.]
M. Drummond, M. Sculpher, G. Torrance, et al.
Methods for the economic evaluation of health care programmes.
Oxford Medical Publications; Third edition, (2005),
[15.]
J. Arellano, C. Leteneux, W. Kotowa, et al.
Letter to the Editor: A comparison of the estimated costs of erlotinib, docetaxel and pemetrexed for the second-line treatment of non-small cell lung cancer from the German healthcare perspective.
Journal of Medical Economics, 11 (2008), pp. 363-370
Copyright © 2009. Sociedade Portuguesa de Pneumologia
Recommended
articles
articles
Pulmonol. 2023;29:478-85
Open access
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Publish in
Pulmonology
Pulmonology
- Home
- All contents
- Publish your article
- About the journal
- Metrics
- Open access
Article options