Economic evaluation in nuclear medicine in oncology;Qualitätskriterien für Kosten-Nutzen-Analysen in der onkologischen Nuklearmedizin und Stand ihrer Realisierung

Zeitschrift fur Arztliche Fortbildung und Qualitatssicherung

Volumn 93, Issue 1, 1999, Pages 49-55

  Dietlein, Markus ^a   Scheidhauer, Klemens ^a   Lauterbach, Karl W ^b   Schicha, Harald ^b  

^a Klinik und Poliklinik fur Nuklearmedizin   (Germany)

^b UNIVERSITY OF COLOGNE   (Germany)

Author keywords

Bone scintigraphy; Economic evaluation; Health economics; Nuclear medicine; Positron emission tomography

Indexed keywords

DIAGNOSTIC AGENT; METHOXY ISOBUTYL ISONITRILE TECHNETIUM TC 99M;

ARTICLE; BREAST TUMOR; COMPUTER ASSISTED EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY; COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS; ECONOMICS; FEMALE; GERMANY; HUMAN; NUCLEAR MEDICINE; ONCOLOGY; SCINTISCANNING; SWITZERLAND; UNITED STATES;

BREAST NEOPLASMS; COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS; FEMALE; GERMANY; HUMANS; MEDICAL ONCOLOGY; NUCLEAR MEDICINE; SWITZERLAND; TECHNETIUM TC 99M SESTAMIBI; TOMOGRAPHY, EMISSION-COMPUTED; UNITED STATES;

EID: 0032610105     PISSN: 14317621     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (24)

1. Blackmore CC, Magid DJ (1997) Methodologic Evaluation of the radiology cost-effectiveness literature. Radiology 203: 87-91
2. Bos SD, Piers DA, Mensink HJ (1995) Routine bone scan and serum alkaline phosphatase for staging in patients with renal cell carcinoma is not cost-effective. Eur J Cancer 31A: 2422-2423
3. Drummond M, Cooke J et al (1997) Economic evaluation under managed competition: evidence from the U.K. Soc Sci Med 45: 583-595
4. Gambhir SS, Hoh CK, Phelps ME, Madar T, Maddahi J (1996) Decision tree sensitivity analysis for cost-effectiveness of FDG PET in the staging and management of non-small-cell lung carcinoma. J Nucl Med 37: 1428-1436
5. Gudgeon CA, Werner TD, Dent DM (1996) A re-evaluation of isotope screening for skeletal metastases in node-negative breast cancer. S Afr Med J 86: 166-169
6. Hainsworth JD (1995) Treating advanced cancer in an era of increasing cost consciousness. Arch Intern Med 155: 2035-2036
7. Hillner BE (1997) Decision analysis: MIBI imaging of nonpalpable breast abnormalities. J Nucl Med 38: 1772-1778
8. Jaakkimainen L, Goodwin PJ, Pater J, Warde P, Murray N, Rapp E (1990) Counting the costs of chemotherapy in a national cancer institute of canada randomized trial in non-small-cell lung cancer. J Clin Oncol 8: 1301-1309
9. Kwekkeboom DJ, Lamberts SWJ, Habbema JDF, Krenning EP (1996) Cost-effectiveness analysis of somatostatin receptor scintigraphy. J Nucl Med 37: 886-892
10. Levran Z, Gonzalez JA, Diokno AC, Jafri SZ, Steinen BW (1995) Are pelvic computed tomography, bone scan and pelvic lymphadenectomy necessary in the staging of prostatic cancer? Br J Urol 75: 778-781
11. Oesterling JE, Martin SK, Bergstralh EJ, Lowe FC (1993) The use of prostate-specific antigen in staging patients with newly diagnosed prostate cancer. JAMA 269: 57-60
12. Reske SN, Bares R, Bull U, Guhlmann A, Moser E, Wannenmacher MF (1996) Klinische Wertigkeit der Positronen-Emissions-Tomographie (PET) bei onkologischen Fragestellungen: Ergebnisse einer interdisziplinären Konsensuskonferenz. Nuklearmedizin 35: 42-52
13. Schapira DV, Jarrett AR (1995) The need to consider survival, outcome, and expense when evaluating and treating patients with unknown primary carcinoma. Arch Intern Med 155: 2050-2054
14. Scheidhauer K, Jungehülsing M, Pietrzyk U, Bruchbauer T, Dietlein M, Schicha H (1997) FDG-PET bei Metastasen im Kopf-Hals-Bereich und unbekannter Primärtumorlokalisation. Nuklearmedizin 36: A61
15. See WA, Fuller JR (1992) Staging of advanced bladder cancer. Urol Clin North Am 19: 663-683
16. Steinert HC, Hauser M, Allemann F, Engel H, Berthold T, von Schulthess GK, Weder W (1997) Non-small cell lung cancer: Nodal staging with FDG PET versus CT with correlative lymph node mapping and sampling. Radiology 202: 441-446
17. Steinert HC, Huch Böni RA, Buch A, Böni R, Berthold T, Marincek B, Burg G, von Schulthess GK (1995) Malignant melanoma: staging with whole-body positron emission tomography and 2-[F-18]-Fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose. Radiology 195: 703-709
18. Steinert HC, von Schulthess GK, Weder W (1998) Effektivität der Ganzkörper-PET mit FDG beim Staging des nichtkleinzelligen Bronchuskarzinoms bei 100 Patienten. Nuklearmedizin 37: A37
19. Steinert HC, Ullrich SP, Böni R, von Schulthess GK, Dummer R (1998) Kosteneffektivität beim Staging des malignen Melanoms: Vergleich Ganzkörper PET versus konventionelles Staging. Nuklearmedizin 37: A37
20. Thornbury JR (1994) Clinical efficacy of diagnostic imaging: love it or leave it. AJR 162: 1-8
21. Valk PE, Pounds TR, Tesar RD, Hopkins DM, Haseman MK (1996) Cost-effectiveness of PET imaging in clinical oncology. Nucl Med Biol 23: 737-743
22. Waxman AD (1997) A perspective on decision analysis modeling as it relates to sestamibi imaging of nonpalpable breast abnormalities. J Nucl Med 38: 1778-1780
23. Wille E (1997) Die Kosten-Nutzen-Analyse als Hilfsmittel zur Verbesserung von Effizienz und Effektivität im Gesundheitswesen. In: Arnold M, Lauterbach KW, Preuß K-J Managed Care. Beiträge zur Gesundheitsökonomie 31. Stuttgart: Schattauer
24. Yeh KA, Fortunato L, Ridge JA, Hoffman JP, Eisenberg BL, Sigurdson ER (1995) Routine bone scanning in patients with T1 and T2 breast cancer: a waste of money. Ann Surg Oncol 2: 319-324