EDP Sciences logo
Subscriber Authentication Point
Search
Menu
Home All issues Volume 28 (Mars 2012) Hors série n°1 Med Sci (Paris), 28 (2012) 19-23 References
Free Access
Issue
Med Sci (Paris)
Volume 28, Mars 2012
Génomique et recherche clinique en oncologie : approches de sciences humaines, économiques et sociales (SHES)
Page(s) 19 - 23
Section M/S Revues
DOI https://doi.org/10.1051/medsci/2012281s106
Published online 09 April 2012
  1. L’Horty Y, Quinet A, Rupprecht F. Expliquer la croissance des dépenses de santé : le rôle du niveau de vie et du progrès technique. Économie et Prévision 1997 ; 129–130 : 257–268. [Google Scholar]
  2. Mariotto AB, Yabroff KR, Shao Y, et al. Projections of the cost of cancer care in the United States: 2010–2020. J Natl Cancer Inst 2011 ; 103 : 117–128. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Situation de la chimiothérapie des cancers en 2010. Collection Rapports et synthèses. Boulogne-Billancourt : INCa, 2010. [Google Scholar]
  4. Sobrero A, Bruzzi P. Incremental advance or seismic shift? The need to raise the bar of efficacy for drug approval. J Clin Oncol 2009 ; 27 : 5868–5873. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Cohn DE, Kim KH, Resnick KE, et al. At what cost does a potential survival advantage of Bevacizumab make sense for the primary treatment of ovarian cancer? A cost-effectiveness analysis. J Clin Oncol 2009 ; 29 : 1247–1251. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  6. Hensley ML. Big costs for little gain in ovarian cancer. J Clin Oncol 2011 ; 29 : 1230–1232. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Munro AJ, Niblock PG. Cancer research in the global village. Lancet 2010 ; 376 : 659–660. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Jackson DB, Sood AK. Personalized cancer medicine-advances and socio-economic challenges. Nat Rev Clin Oncol 2011 ; 8 : 735–741. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. Fojo T, Grady C. How much is life worth: Cetuximab, non-small cell lung cancer, and the $440 billion question. J Natl Cancer Inst 2009 ; 101 : 1044–1048. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. Meropol NJ, Schrag D, Smith TJ, et al. American society of clinical oncology guidance statement: the cost of cancer care. J Clin Oncol 2009 ; 27 : 3868–3874. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. Les tests de génétique moléculaire pour l’accès aux thérapies ciblées. Collection Rapports et synthèses. Boulogne-Billancourt : INCa, 2010. [Google Scholar]
  12. De Lima Lopes G Jr, Segel JE, Tan DS, et al. Cost-effectiveness of epidermal growth factor receptor mutation testing and first-line treatment with gefitinib for patients with advanced adenocarcinoma of the lung. Cancer 2011 ; 26 juillet. doi : 10.1002/cncr.26372. [Google Scholar]
  13. Blank PR, Moch H, Szucs TD, Schwenkglenks M. KRAS and BRAF mutation analysis in metastatic colorectal cancer: a cost-effectiveness analysis from a Swiss perspective. Clin Cancer Res 2011 ; 17 : 6338–6346. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  14. Shankaran V, Bentrem DJ, Mulcahy MF, et al. Economic implications of KRAS testing in metastatic colorectal cancer. San Francisco, CA : Gastrointestinal Cancers Symposium, January 15–17, 2009. [Google Scholar]
  15. Van’t Veer LJ, Dai H, van de Vijver MJ, et al. Gene expression profiling predicts clinical outcome of breast cancer. Nature 2002 ; 415 : 530–536. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  16. Van de Vijver MJ, He YD, van’t Veer LJ, et al. A gene-expression signature as a predictor of survival in breast cancer. N Engl J Med 2002 ; 347 : 1999–2009. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  17. Paik S, Shak S, Tang G, et al. A multigene assay to predict recurrence of tamoxifen-treated, node-negative breast cancer. N Engl J Med 2004 ; 351 : 2817–2826. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  18. Bertucci F, Borie N, Roché H, et al. Gene expression profile predicts outcome after anthracycline-based adjuvant chemotherapy in early breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res Treat 2011 ; 127 : 363–373. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  19. Marino P, Siani C, Bertucci F, et al. Economic issues involved in integrating genomic testing into clinical care: the case of genomic testing to guide decision-making about chemotherapy for breast cancer patients. Breast Cancer Res Treat 2011 ; 129 : 401–409. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  20. Seror V, Elasri K, Avenel E. Premières applications de la pharmacogénomique en oncologie : stratégies industrielles et enjeux de régulation publique. Revue d’Économie Industrielle 2007 ; 120 : 235–252. [Google Scholar]
  21. Gabszewicz J, Sonnac N, Wauthy X. On price competition with complementary goods. Economics Letters 2001 ; 70 : 431–439. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  22. Bertucci F, Birnbaum D. Génomique et recherche clinique en cancérologie mammaire. Med Sci (Paris) 2012 ; 28 (Suppl 1) : 14–18. [CrossRef] [EDP Sciences] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Current usage metrics show cumulative count of Article Views (full-text article views including HTML views, PDF and ePub downloads, according to the available data) and Abstracts Views on Vision4Press platform.

Data correspond to usage on the plateform after 2015. The current usage metrics is available 48-96 hours after online publication and is updated daily on week days.

Initial download of the metrics may take a while.