Skip to content
EvidenceHelixEvidenceLib · Scientific Encyclopedia
⌘ K

Scientific library

EvidenceLib encyclopediaAll articles A–Z2,835Open textbooks209Open-access articles1,406Cancer study catalog458How it is made

My workspace this browser

Saved pages0Notes & annotations0

Recently viewed

Explore by field

Cancer and Oncology182Genetics and Genomics170Neuroscience185Cardiovascular Medicine180Immunology142Pharmacology173Molecular Biology161Infectious Diseases150Rare and Inherited Diseases181Clinical Research173Anatomy and Physiology613Drugs and Chemicals621Psychiatry and Psychology185Public Health and Nutrition178Diagnostics and Medical Technology125Respiratory Medicine113Digestive System and Liver91Metabolism and Endocrine Disease177Bones, Joints, Muscles and Skin213Kidney, Urology and Women's Health173Eye, Ear, Nose and Throat55
Plans & pricingCompare EvidenceHelix workspace plans
Library›Open textbooks›Lenvatinib and sorafenib for differentiated thyroid cancer after radioactive iodine: a systematic review and economic evaluation›Acknowledgements

Continue where you left off ()

Explore more with EvidenceHelix Workspace

Compare studies, analyze evidence and create research reports with premium tools.

Explore Researcher plans

Lenvatinib and sorafenib for differentiated thyroid cancer after radioactive iodine: a systematic review and economic evaluation · Acknowledgements

Acknowledgements

CC BY 4.0 · NIHR Journals Library · approximately 2 min read

The authors would like to thank to Gareth Jones (Liverpool Reviews and Implementation Group) for administrative support and Eleanor Kotas (Liverpool Reviews and Implementation Group) for conducting the searches. The AG would also like to thank Dr Caroline Brammer (Consultant in Clinical Oncology, The Clatterbridge Cancer Centre) for reading and commenting on a draft of the report.

Contributions of authors

Nigel Fleeman (Research Fellow, University of Liverpool) reviewed the evidence for clinical effectiveness, including study selection, data extraction, synthesis and interpretation. He contributed to the study selection for inclusion into the cost-effectiveness review and provided editorial input.

Rachel Houten [Research Associate (Health Economics Modelling), University of Liverpool] reviewed the evidence for cost-effectiveness, including study selection, data extraction, synthesis and interpretation. She contributed to the study selection for inclusion into the clinical effectiveness review and developed cost models for routine treatment and AEs.

Adrian Bagust (Professor of Health Modelling, University of Liverpool) developed the de novo economic model.

Marty Richardson [Research Associate (Medical Statistician), University of Liverpool] provided statistical advice and quality assessment of the systematic reviews included in the clinical effectiveness review.

Sophie Beale [Research Associate (Decision Analyst), University of Liverpool] interpreted the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness evidence, summarised the company economic models and provided editorial input.

Angela Boland (Associate Director, University of Liverpool) interpreted the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness evidence and provided editorial input.

Yenal Dundar (Research Fellow, University of Liverpool) contributed to data extraction and the quality assessment of studies included in the clinical effectiveness review.

Janette Greenhalgh [Senior Research Fellow (Clinical Effectiveness), University of Liverpool] contributed to data extraction and the quality assessment of studies included in the clinical effectiveness review.

Juliet Hounsome (Research Associate, University of Liverpool) contributed to the protocol development and the selection of studies for inclusion into the clinical effectiveness review.

Rui Duarte (Health Technology Assessment Lead, University of Liverpool) provided editorial input.

Aditya Shenoy (Consultant in Clinical Oncology, The Clatterbridge Cancer Centre NHS Foundation Trust) provided clinical advice on all aspects of the review.

All authors contributed to the writing of the report.

Publication

Fleeman N, Houten R, Chaplin M, Beale S, Boland A, Dundar Y, et al. A systematic review of lenvatinib and sorafenib for treating progressive, locally advanced or metastatic, differentiated thyroid cancer after treatment with radioactive iodine. BMC Cancer 2019;19;1209.

Data-sharing statement

All data requests should be submitted to the corresponding author for consideration. Access to anonymised data may be granted following review.

Disclaimers

This report presents independent research funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR). The views and opinions expressed by authors in this publication are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect those of the NHS, the NIHR, NETSCC, the HTA programme or the Department of Health and Social Care. If there are verbatim quotations included in this publication the views and opinions expressed by the interviewees are those of the interviewees and do not necessarily reflect those of the authors, those of the NHS, the NIHR, NETSCC, the HTA programme or the Department of Health and Social Care.

← References

Attribution. Nigel Fleeman; Rachel Houten; Adrian Bagust; Marty Richardson; Sophie Beale; Angela Boland et al. (2020). Lenvatinib and sorafenib for differentiated thyroid cancer after radioactive iodine: a systematic review and economic evaluation. NIHR Journals Library. Copyright © Queen’s Printer and Controller of HMSO 2020. This work was produced by Fleeman et al. under the terms of a commissioning contract issued by the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care. This issue may be freely reproduced for the purposes of private research and study and extracts (or indeed, the full report) may be included in professional journals provided that suitable acknowledgement is made and the reproduction is not associated with any form of advertising. Applications for commercial reproduction should be addressed to: NIHR Journals Library, National Institute for Health Research, Evaluation, Trials and Studies Coordinating Centre, Alpha House, University of Southampton Science Park, Southampton SO16 7NS, UK. Licensed under CC BY 4.0. NCBI Bookshelf NBK552390. CC BY 4.0. Original source ↗. Text reproduced from the Bookshelf XML without changing wording; figures, images and supplements are not reproduced.

In this chapter Contents

  • Acknowledgements

Source

OpenStax source file ↗

Source record ↗

EvidenceLib is a research-education resource, not medical advice. It does not diagnose, prescribe or recommend starting, stopping or changing any treatment. Talk to a qualified clinician about your own situation. Methods, sources and licences · Rights and removal requests · Legal · Support