A systematic review of PET and PET/CT in oncology: A way to personalize cancer treatment in a cost-effective manner?

BMC Health Services Research

Volumn 10, Issue , 2010, Pages

  Langer, Astrid ^a,b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MUNICH   (Germany)

^b INSTITUTE OF EPIDEMIOLOGY   (Germany)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

COMPUTER ASSISTED TOMOGRAPHY; COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS; DIAGNOSTIC IMAGING; ECONOMICS; FACTUAL DATABASE; FEMALE; GERMANY; HEALTH CARE COST; HEALTH ECONOMICS; HUMAN; MALE; NEOPLASM; PATIENT CARE PLANNING; PATIENT SELECTION; PERSONALIZED MEDICINE; POSITRON EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY; RADIOGRAPHY; RETROSPECTIVE STUDY; REVIEW; SCINTISCANNING;

COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS; DATABASES, FACTUAL; DIAGNOSTIC IMAGING; ECONOMICS, MEDICAL; FEMALE; GERMANY; HEALTH CARE COSTS; HUMANS; INDIVIDUALIZED MEDICINE; MALE; NEOPLASMS; PATIENT CARE PLANNING; PATIENT SELECTION; POSITRON-EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY; RETROSPECTIVE STUDIES; TOMOGRAPHY, X-RAY COMPUTED;

EID: 77957580459     PISSN: None     EISSN: 14726963     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1186/1472-6963-10-283     Document Type: Article

References (104)

1. A positron-emission transaxial tomograph for nuclear imaging (PETT). MM Ter-Pogossian ME Phelps EJ Hoffman NA Mullani, Radiology 1975 114 1 89 98 1208874
2. Economic Evaluation of PET and PET/CT in Oncology: Evidence and Methodologic Approaches. AK Buck K Herrmann T Stargardt T Dechow BJ Krause J Schreyögg, J Nucl Med 2010 51 3 401 412 10.2967/jnumed.108.059584 20150250
3. Comparative accuracy: assessing new tests against existing diagnostic pathways. PM Bossuyt L Irwig J Craig P Glasziou, BMJ 2006 332 7549 1089 1092 10.1136/bmj.332.7549.1089 16675820
4. Overview of the clinical effectiveness of positron emission tomography imaging in selected cancers. K Facey I Bradbury G Laking E Payne, Health Technol Assess 2007 11 44 ii iv xi-267 17999839
5. Recommendations on the use of 18F-FDG PET in oncology. JW Fletcher B Djulbegovic HP Soares BA Siegel VJ Lowe GH Lyman RE Coleman R Wahl JC Paschold N Avril, et al. J Nucl Med 2008 49 3 480 508 10.2967/jnumed.107.047787 18287273
6. HTA Tomographie par Emission de Positrons en Belgique. I Cleemput G Dargent J Poelmans C Camberlin A Van den Bruel D Ramaekers, Bruxelles: Centre Fédéral d'Expertise des Soins de Santé (KCE) 2005 22B
7. [Economic evaluations of positron-emission tomography]. A Müller D Stratmann-Schöne T Klose R Leidl, Baden-Baden: Nomos Verlagsgesellschaft 2000 20
8. How to perform a comprehensive search for FDG-PET literature. GS Mijnhout L Hooft MW van Tulder WL Deville GJ Teule OS Hoekstra, Eur J Nucl Med 2000 27 1 91 97 10.1007/PL00006669 10654153
9. Guidelines for authors and peer reviewers of economic submissions to the BMJ. The BMJ Economic Evaluation Working Party. MF Drummond TO Jefferson, BMJ 1996 313 7052 275 283 8704542
10. Chapter 5, Systematic reviews of economic evaluations. In Systematic Reviews: CRD's guidance for undertaking reviews in health care. Centre for Reviews and Dissemination, York: University of York 2009 199 218
11. Review of guidelines for good practice in decision-analytic modelling in health technology assessment. Z Philips L Ginnelly M Sculpher K Claxton S Golder R Riemsma N Woolacoot J Glanville, Health Technol Assess 2004 8 36 ii iv ix-xi, 1-158 15361314
12. Chapter 1, Core principles and methods for conducting a systematic review of health interventions. In Systematic reviews: CRD's guidance for undertaking reviews in health care. Centre for Reviews and Dissemination, York: University of York 2009 1 108
13. Use of a decision analysis model to assess the medicoeconomic implications of FDG PET imaging in diagnosing a solitary pulmonary nodule. C Lejeune K Al Zahouri MC Woronoff-Lemsi P Arveux A Bernard C Binquet F Guillemin, Eur J Health Econ 2005 6 3 203 214 10.1007/s10198-005-0279-0 15834623
14. Positron emission tomography/computed tomography introduction in the clinical management of patients with suspected recurrence of ovarian cancer: a cost-effectiveness analysis. M Mansueto A Grimaldi G Mangili M Picchio G Giovacchini R Vigano C Messa F Fazio, Eur J Cancer Care (Engl) 2009 18 6 612 619 10.1111/j.1365-2354.2008.00945.x 19549284
15. Use of a decision analysis model to assess the cost-effectiveness of 18F-FDG PET in the management of metachronous liver metastases of colorectal cancer. C Lejeune MJ Bismuth T Conroy C Zanni P Bey L Bedenne J Faivre P Arveux F Guillemin, J Nucl Med 2005 46 12 2020 2028 16330566
16. Cost-effectiveness analysis of FDG PET-CT in the management of pulmonary metastases from malignant melanoma. B Krug R Crott I Roch M Lonneux C Beguin JF Baurain AS Pirson T Vander Borght, Acta Oncol 2010 49 2 192 200 10.3109/02841860903440254 20059314
17. The Cost-utility Analysis of 18-Fluoro-2-Deoxyglucose Positron Emission Tomography in the Diagnosis of Recurrent Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma. RF Yen MF Yen RL Hong KY Tzen CR Chien TH Chen, Acad Radiol 2009 16 1 54 60 10.1016/j.acra.2008.06.012 19064212
18. Cost-effectiveness of CT and PET-CT for determining the need for adjuvant neck dissection in locally advanced head and neck cancer. DJ Sher RB Tishler D Annino RS Punglia, Ann Oncol 2010 21 5 1072 1077 10.1093/annonc/mdp405 19833820
19. Cost-effectiveness of positron emission tomography in breast cancer. JS Sloka PD Hollett M Mathews, Mol Imaging Biol 2005 7 5 351 360 10.1007/s11307-005-0012-5 16086227
20. J van Loon JP Grutters R Wanders L Boersma AM Dingemans G Bootsma W Geraedts C Pitz J Simons B Brans, et al. 18FDG-PET-CT in the follow-up of non-small cell lung cancer patients after radical radiotherapy with or without chemotherapy: an economic evaluation. Eur J Cancer 2010 46 1 110 119 10.1016/j.ejca.2009.10.028 19944595
21. Cost-effectiveness analysis of strategies introducing FDG-PET into the mediastinal staging of non-small-cell lung cancer from the French healthcare system perspective. K Alzahouri C Lejeune MC Woronoff-Lemsi P Arveux F Guillemin, Clinical Radiology 2005 60 4 479 492 10.1016/j.crad.2004.10.010 15767106
22. Cost-effectiveness of positron emission tomography for the management of potentially operable non-small cell lung cancer in Quebec. VH Nguyen S Peloquin Y Lacasse, Can Respir J 2005 12 1 19 25 15776130
23. Cost-effectiveness analysis in the clinical management of patients with known or suspected lung cancer: [18F]fluorodeoxyglucose PET and CT comparison. M Mansueto A Grimaldi A Torbica G Pepe G Giovacchini C Messa F Fazio, Q J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2007 51 3 224 234 17538525
24. Economic Evaluation of Positron Emission Tomography (PET) in Non Small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC). A Bird R Norman S Goodall, CHERE Working Paper 2007 6 1 37
25. The value of positron emission tomography in patients with non-small cell lung cancer. F Kee S Erridge I Bradbury K Cairns, Eur J Radiol 2010 73 1 50 58 10.1016/j.ejrad.2008.09.039 19084367
26. National Collaborating Centre for Acute Care, The diagnosis and treatment of lung cancer: Appendices London: National Collaborating Centre for Acute Care 2005
27. Integrated PET/CT: current applications and future directions. GK von Schulthess HC Steinert TF Hany, Radiology 2006 238 2 405 422 10.1148/radiol.2382041977 16436809
28. Should mediastinoscopy actually be incorporated into the FDG PET strategy for patients with non-small cell lung carcinoma? K Hayashi K Abe F Yano S Watanabe Y Iwasaki S Kosuda, Ann Nucl Med 2005 19 5 393 398 10.1007/BF03027404 16164196
29. Positron emission tomography (PET) imaging in cancer management. I Bradbury E Bonell J Boynton E Cummins K Facey K Iqbal G Laking C McDonald T Parpia P Sharp, et al. Glasgow: Health Technology Board for Scotland. Health Technology Assessment Report 2 2002
30. Cost-effectiveness of FDG-PET for staging non-small cell lung cancer: a decision analysis. WJ Scott J Shepherd SS Gambhir, Ann Thorac Surg 1998 66 6 1876 1883 discussion 1883-1875 10.1016/S0003-4975(98)01055-8 9930463
31. Cost-effectiveness of FDG-PET for the management of potentially operable non-small cell lung cancer: priority for a PET-based strategy after nodal-negative CT results. M Dietlein K Weber A Gandjour D Moka P Theissen KW Lauterbach H Schicha, Eur J Nucl Med 2000 27 11 1598 1609 10.1007/s002590000376 11105815
32. Decision-tree sensitivity analysis for cost-effectiveness of whole-body FDG PET in the management of patients with non-small-cell lung carcinoma in Japan. S Kosuda K Ichihara M Watanabe H Kobayashi S Kusano, Ann Nucl Med 2002 16 4 263 271 10.1007/BF03000105 12126096
33. Decision tree sensitivity analysis for cost-effectiveness of FDG-PET in the staging and management of non-small-cell lung carcinoma. SS Gambhir CK Hoh ME Phelps I Madar J Maddahi, J Nucl Med 1996 37 9 1428 1436 8790186
34. Cost-effectiveness of FDG-PET in staging non-small cell lung cancer: the PLUS study. P Verboom H van Tinteren OS Hoekstra EF Smit JH van den Bergh AJ Schreurs RA Stallaert PC van Velthoven EF Comans FW Diepenhorst, et al. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2003 30 11 1444 1449 10.1007/s00259-003-1199-9 14579081
35. Randomized controlled trial of the role of positron emission tomography in the management of stage I and II non-small-cell lung cancer. RC Viney MJ Boyer MT King PM Kenny CA Pollicino JM McLean BC McCaughan MJ Fulham, J Clin Oncol 2004 22 12 2357 2362 10.1200/JCO.2004.04.126 15197196
36. Integrated PET/CT as a first-line re-staging modality in patients with suspected recurrence of ovarian cancer. G Mangili M Picchio S Sironi R Vigano E Rabaiotti D Bornaghi V Bettinardi C Crivellaro C Messa F Fazio, Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2007 34 5 658 666 10.1007/s00259-006-0306-0 17180659
37. A decision chart for assessing and improving the transferability of economic evaluation results between countries. R Welte T Feenstra H Jager R Leidl, Pharmacoeconomics 2004 22 13 857 876 10.2165/00019053-200422130-00004 15329031
38. Can economic evaluations be made more transferable? S Boulenger J Nixon M Drummond P Ulmann S Rice G de Pouvourville, Eur J Health Econ 2005 6 4 334 346 10.1007/s10198-005-0322-1 16249933
39. Transferability of economic evaluations of medical technologies: a new technology for orthopedic surgery. L Steuten L Vallejo-Torres T Young M Buxton, Expert Rev Med Devices 2008 5 3 329 336 10.1586/17434440.5.3.329 18452383
40. Transferability indices for health economic evaluations: methods and applications. F Antonanzas R Rodriguez-Ibeas C Juarez F Hutter R Lorente M Pinillos, Health Econ 2009 18 6 629 643 10.1002/hec.1397 18677724
41. Cost Effectiveness of Positron Emission Tomography for Characterizing Pulmonary Nodules. MK Gould, PET Clinics 2006 1 4 339 346 10.1016/j.cpet.2006. 10.001
42. C Donaldson M Mugford L Vale, Evidence-based health economics from effectiveness to efficiency in systematic review London: BMJ Books 2002
43. Systematic reviews of economic evaluations: utility or futility? R Anderson, Health Econ 2010 19 3 350 364 10.1002/hec.1486 19378354
44. Cost and outcomes of patients with solitary pulmonary nodules managed with PET scans. PG Barnett L Ananth MK Gould, Chest 2010 137 1 53 59 10.1378/chest.08-0529 19525359
45. PET imaging in the management of tumors of testis and ovary: current thinking and future directions. S Basu D Rubello, Minerva Endocrinol 2008 33 3 229 256 18846028
46. [Evaluation of PET-CT: product safety, clinical usefulness, reimbursement in Germany and the USA]. HJ Biersack, Bundesgesundheitsblatt Gesundheitsforschung Gesundheitsschutz 2009 52 6 594 600 10.1007/s00103-009- 0851-3 19399376
47. PET evaluation of lung cancer. T Bunyaviroch RE Coleman, J Nucl Med 2006 47 3 451 469 16513615
48. Is 18F FDG PET-CT cost effective in lung cancer? J Buscombe E O'Rourke, Expert Rev Anticancer Ther 2007 7 4 471 476 10.1586/14737140.7.4.471 17428168
49. Mobile PET in the UK: legislative, regulatory and cost-effectiveness considerations. SC Chua AC Perkins D Pearson RH Ganatra, Nucl Med Commun 2008 29 2 98 102 10.1097/MNM.0b013e3282f25919 18094630
50. Marginal cost of operating a positron emission tomography center in a regulatory environment. A Chuck P Jacobs JW Logus D St Hilaire C Chmielowiec AJ McEwan, Int J Technol Assess Health Care 2005 21 4 442 451 10.1017/ S0266462305050610 16262966
51. Methodology for calculating a country's need for positron emission tomography scanners. I Cleemput C Camberlin A Van den Bruel D Ramaekers, Int J Technol Assess Health Care 2008 24 1 20 24 10.1017/S0266462307080038 18218165
52. FDG-PET in colorectal cancer. LF de Geus-Oei TJ Ruers CJ Punt JW Leer FH Corstens WJ Oyen, Cancer Imaging 2006 6 71 81 10.1102/1470-7330.2006.9014 17114081
53. PET/CT in non-small cell lung cancer staging-promises and problems. A Devaraj GJ Cook DM Hansell, Clin Radiol 2007 62 2 97 108 10.1016/j.crad.2006.09. 015 17207691
54. Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration in patients with non-small cell lung cancer and prior negative mediastinoscopy. MA Eloubeidi A Tamhane VK Chen RJ Cerfolio, Ann Thorac Surg 2005 80 4 1231 1239 10.1016/j.athoracsur.2005.04.001 16181845
55. Positron emission tomography/computed tomography influences on the management of resectable pancreatic cancer and its cost-effectiveness. BK Goh, Ann Surg 2006 243 5 709 710 author reply 710 10.1097/01.sla.0000216766.93589.34 16633011
56. Cost-effectiveness of medical imaging. MM Graham, Lancet Oncol 2009 10 8 744 745 10.1016/S1470-2045(09)70207-4 19647196
57. Established, emerging and future roles of PET/CT in the management of colorectal cancer. RA Herbertson AF Scarsbrook ST Lee N Tebbutt AM Scott, Clin Radiol 2009 64 3 225 237 10.1016/j.crad.2008.08.008 19185652
58. Positron emission tomography/computed tomography influences on the management of resectable pancreatic cancer and its cost-effectiveness. S Heinrich GW Goerres M Schafer M Sagmeister P Bauerfeind BC Pestalozzi TF Hany GK von Schulthess PA Clavien, Ann Surg 2005 242 2 235 243 10.1097/01.sla. 0000172095.97787.84 16041214
59. Traditional versus up-front [18F] fluorodeoxyglucose-positron emission tomography staging of non-small-cell lung cancer: a Dutch cooperative randomized study. GJ Herder H Kramer OS Hoekstra EF Smit J Pruim H van Tinteren EF Comans P Verboom CA Uyl-de Groot A Welling, et al. J Clin Oncol 2006 24 12 1800 1806 10.1200/JCO.2005.02.4695 16567772
60. Evaluation of Cost-effectiveness of FDG-PET in Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer. OS Hoekstra H van Tinteren EF Smit, PET Clinics 2006 1 4 329 337 10.1016/j.cpet.2006.09.003
61. Positron-emission tomography and assessment of cancer therapy. ME Juweid BD Cheson, N Engl J Med 2006 354 5 496 507 10.1056/NEJMra050276 16452561
62. Activity-based costing evaluation of a [(18)F]-fludeoxyglucose positron emission tomography study. B Krug A Van Zanten AS Pirson R Crott TV Borght, Health Policy 2009 92 2-3 234 243 10.1016/j.healthpol.2009.04.002 19446356
63. Activity-based costing evaluation of [(18)F]-fludeoxyglucose production. B Krug A Van Zanten AS Pirson R Crott T Vander Borght, Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2008 35 1 80 88 10.1007/s00259-007-0551-x 17891498
64. Is a methodology available that accurately measures the cost of an FDG-PET study? B Krug AS Pirson R Crott T Vander Borght, Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2007 34 5 625 627 10.1007/s00259-006-0308-y 17160411
65. Imaging in staging of malignant lymphoma: a systematic review. TC Kwee RM Kwee RA Nievelstein, Blood 2008 111 2 504 516 10.1182/blood-2007-07-101899 17916746
66. Integrated PET/CT in imaging of non-small cell lung cancer. EH Mattar, J Egypt Natl Canc Inst 2007 19 4 263 274 19652669
67. Cost-effectiveness of routine mediastinoscopy in computed tomography- and positron emission tomography-screened patients with stage I lung cancer. BF Meyers F Haddad BA Siegel JB Zoole RJ Battafarano N Veeramachaneni JD Cooper GA Patterson, J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2006 131 4 822 829 discussion 822-829 10.1016/j.jtcvs.2005.10.045 16580440
68. Non-Hodgkin lymphoma: retrospective study on the cost-effectiveness of early treatment response assessment by FDG-PET. G Moulin-Romsee K Spaepen S Stroobants L Mortelmans, European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging 2008 35 6 1074 1080 10.1007/s00259-007-0690-0 18219485
69. Staging non-small lung cancer with positron emission tomography: diagnostic value, impact on patient management, and cost-effectiveness. M Nosotti M Castellani V Longari B Chella A Baisi L Rosso L Santambrogio, Int Surg 2008 93 5 278 283 19943430
70. An extension of the real option approach to the evaluation of health care technologies: the case of positron emission tomography. P Pertile, Int J Health Care Finance Econ 2009 9 3 317 332 10.1007/s10754-008-9053-z 19152067
71. The timing of adoption of positron emission tomography: a real options approach. P Pertile E Torri L Flor S Tardivo, Health Care Manag Sci 2009 12 3 217 227 10.1007/s10729-008-9085-4 19739356
72. [Cost considerations for whole-body MRI and PET/CT as part of oncologic staging]. C Plathow M Walz MP Lichy P Aschoff C Pfannenberg H Bock SM Eschmann CD Claussen HP Schlemmer, Radiologe 2008 48 4 384 396 10.1007/s00117-007-1547-z 17891370
73. FDG PET scan strategies and long-term outcomes after first-line therapy in Hodgkin's disease. LS Poulou G Karianakis PD Ziakas, Eur J Radiol 2009 70 3 499 506 10.1016/j.ejrad.2008.01.043 18342471
74. [Impact of FDG-PET on radiation therapy: economic results of a STIC study]. R Remonnay M Morelle F Giammarile P Pommier MO Carrere, Cancer Radiother 2009 13 4 313 317 19493691
75. Assessing short-term effects and costs at an early stage of innovation: The use of positron emission tomography on radiotherapy treatment decision making. R Remonnay M Morelle P Pommier F Giammarile MO Carrère, International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care 2008 24 02 212 220 10.1017/S026646230808029X 18400125
76. Rising costs of medical imaging spur debate. K Rowan, J Natl Cancer Inst 2008 100 23 1665 1667 10.1093/jnci/djn430 19033570
77. Cost effectiveness of positron emission tomography in Canada. JS Sloka PD Hollett, Med Sci Monit 2005 11 10 H1 6 16192911
78. Ensuring the right PET scan for the right patient. SG Spiro J Buscombe G Cook T Eisen F Gleeson M O'Brien MD Peake NP Rowell R Seymour, Lung Cancer 2008 59 1 48 56 10.1016/j.lungcan.2007.07.026 17850919
79. Cost-effective therapy remission assessment in lymphoma patients using 2-[fluorine-18] fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose-positron emission tomography/computed tomography: is an end of treatment exam necessary in all patients? K Strobel NG Schaefer C Renner P Veit-Haibach D Husarik AY Koma TF Hany, Annals of Oncology 2007 18 4 658. 10.1093/annonc/mdl493 17308330
80. Colonography by CT, MRI and PET/CT combined with conventional colonoscopy in colorectal cancer screening and staging. L Sun H Wu YS Guan, World J Gastroenterol 2008 14 6 853 863 10.3748/wjg.14.853 18240342
81. The roles of PET and PET/CT in the diagnosis and management of prostate cancer. N Takahashi T Inoue J Lee T Yamaguchi K Shizukuishi, Oncology 2007 72 3-4 226 233 10.1159/000112946 18176088
82. Chest CT and whole-body 18F-FDG PET are cost-effective in screening for distant metastases in head and neck cancer patients. CA Uyl-de Groot A Senft R de Bree CR Leemans OS Hoekstra, J Nucl Med 2010 51 2 176 182 10.2967/jnumed.109.067371 20124045
83. The evaluation of diagnostic tests: evidence on technical and diagnostic accuracy, impact on patient outcome and cost-effectiveness is needed. A Van den Bruel I Cleemput B Aertgeerts D Ramaekers F Buntinx, J Clin Epidemiol 2007 60 11 1116 1122 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2007.03.015 17938052
84. The implementation of PET in non-small-cell lung cancer in the Netherlands. H van Tinteren OS Hoekstra EF Smit M Boers, Clin Oncol (R Coll Radiol) 2006 18 2 156 157 16523822
85. The cost-effectiveness of 18FDG-PET in selecting patients with suspicion of recurrent laryngeal carcinoma after radiotherapy for direct laryngoscopy. AC van Hooren J Brouwer R de Bree OS Hoekstra CR Leemans CA Uyl-de Groot, Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol 2009 266 9 1441 1448 10.1007/s00405-008-0878-3 19043728
86. The Role of Positron Emission Tomography in the Management of Recurrent Colorectal Cancer: A Review. A Watson S Lolohea G Robertson F Frizelle, Dis Colon Rectum 2006 50 102 114 10.1007/s10350-006-0735-7 (Pubitemid 46147029)
87. Positron emission tomography with selected mediastinoscopy compared to routine mediastinoscopy offers cost and clinical outcome benefits for pre-operative staging of non-small cell lung cancer. KK Yap KS Yap AJ Byrne SU Berlangieri A Poon P Mitchell SR Knight PC Clarke A Harris A Tauro, et al. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2005 32 9 1033 1040 10.1007/s00259-005-1821-0 15875178
88. Who wants cancer screening with PET? A contingent valuation survey in Japan. H Yasunaga, Eur J Radiol 2009 70 1 190 194 10.1016/j.ejrad.2007.11.020 18093777
89. The measurement of willingness to pay for mass cancer screening with whole-body PET (positron emission tomography). H Yasunaga H Ide T Imamura K Ohe, Ann Nucl Med 2006 20 7 457 462 10.1007/BF02987254 17037277
90. The economic impact of 18FDG positron emission tomography in the surgical management of colorectal cancer with hepatic metastases. JM Zubeldia EM Bednarczyk JG Baker HA Nabi, Cancer Biother Radiopharm 2005 20 4 450 456 10.1089/cbr.2005.20.450 16114993
91. Test performance of positron emission tomography and computed tomography for mediastinal staging in patients with non-small-cell lung cancer: a meta-analysis. MK Gould WG Kuschner CE Rydzak CC Maclean AN Demas H Shigemitsu JK Chan DK Owens, Ann Intern Med 2003 139 11 879 892 14644890
92. The cost of treating small cell lung cancer. MA Rosenthal PJ Webster VJ Gebski RC Stuart-Harris AO Langlands J Boyages, Med J Aust 1992 156 9 605 610 1320729
93. Preoperative staging of non-small-cell lung cancer with positron-emission tomography. RM Pieterman JW van Putten JJ Meuzelaar EL Mooyaart W Vaalburg GH Koeter V Fidler J Pruim HJ Groen, N Engl J Med 2000 343 4 254 261 10.1056/NEJM200007273430404 10911007
94. Follow-up with 18FDG-PET-CT after radical radiotherapy with or without chemotherapy allows the detection of potentially curable progressive disease in non-small cell lung cancer patients: a prospective study. J van Loon J Grutters R Wanders L Boersma M Oellers AM Dingemans G Bootsma W Geraedts C Pitz J Simons, et al. Eur J Cancer 2009 45 4 588 595 10.1016/j.ejca.2008.10.017 19046631
95. Decision analysis for the cost-effective management of recurrent colorectal cancer. KC Park J Schwimmer JE Shepherd ME Phelps JR Czernin C Schiepers SS Gambhir, Ann Surg 2001 233 3 310 319 10.1097/00000658-200103000- 00003 11224617
96. Cost-effectiveness of positron emission tomography in recurrent colorectal cancer in Canada. JS Sloka PD Hollett M Mathews, McGill Journal of Medicine 2004 7 2 165 174 (Pubitemid 38787533)
97. The cost-effectiveness of fluorodeoxyglucose 18-F positron emission tomography in the N0 neck. CS Hollenbeak VJ Lowe BC Stack Jr, Cancer 2001 92 9 2341 2348 10.1002/1097-0142(20011101)92:9<2341::AID-CNCR1581>3.0.CO;2-8 11745289
98. Cost-effectiveness of FDG-PET for the management of solitary pulmonary nodules: a decision analysis based on cost reimbursement in Germany. M Dietlein K Weber A Gandjour D Moka P Theissen KW Lauterbach H Schicha, Eur J Nucl Med 2000 27 10 1441 1456 10.1007/s002590000324 11083532
99. Analytical decision model for the cost-effective management of solitary pulmonary nodules. SS Gambhir JE Shepherd BD Shah E Hart CK Hoh PE Valk T Emi ME Phelps, J Clin Oncol 1998 16 6 2113 2125 9626211
100. Cost-effectiveness of alternative management strategies for patients with solitary pulmonary nodules. MK Gould GD Sanders PG Barnett CE Rydzak CC Maclean MB McClellan DK Owens, Ann Intern Med 2003 138 9 724 735 12729427
101. Positron emission tomography in Quebec. FP Dussault VH Nguyen F Rachet, Montreal: Agence d'Evaluation des Technologies et des Modes d'Intervention en Sante (AETMIS) 2001
102. Decision-tree sensitivity analysis for cost-effectiveness of chest 2-fluoro-2-D-[(18)F]fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography in patients with pulmonary nodules (non-small cell lung carcinoma) in Japan. S Kosuda K Ichihara M Watanabe H Kobayashi S Kusano, Chest 2000 117 2 346 353 10.1378/chest.117.2.346 10669673
103. Cost-effectiveness of positron emission tomography for non-small cell lung carcinoma in Canada. JS Sloka PD Hollett M Mathews, Med Sci Monit 2004 10 5 T73 80 15114279
104. [Entwicklung eines Kriterienkataloges zur Beschreibung und Bewertung ökonomischer Evaluationsstudien in Deutschland]. In [Ansätze und Methoden der ökonomischen Evaluation - eine internationale Perspektive]. U Siebert C Behrend N Mühlberger J Wasem W Greiner JM Graf von der Schulenburg R Welte R Leidl, Baden-Baden: Nomos, Leidl R, Graf von der Schulenburg JM, Wasem J, 1999 156 170