ライフサイエンスコーパス: ICER

1 ICER was sensitive to variations in DAA costs, in the ut

2 ICERs greater than euro 120 000 for both SCIT and SLIT w

3 ICERs remained cost-effective in 94%-97% of the 10,000 p

4 ICERs were reduced below threshold when CLT-related 5-ye

5 ctive than SCIT (ICER for SCIT, euro 17 318; ICER for SLIT, euro 15 212).

6 ffective option (ICER for SCIT, euro 11 418; ICER for SLIT, euro 15 212).

7 rformed in less than 8 h, inexpensive with a ICER of $8.7/QALY, and affordable in developing countrie

8 ive compared with health-care testing alone (ICER $590 per year of life saved).

9 To achieve an ICER of $150000 per QALY, the annual net price would nee

10 Adaptive VL achieved an ICER <1x GDP if second-line ART and VL costs simultaneou

11 an ICUR of US$569 (95% CI 17 to 4180) and an ICER of $1280 (-58 to 7940), both of which are below the

12 an incremental cost of $80.1 billion and an ICER of $72 169.

13 remental effectiveness of 0.05 QALYs, and an ICER of $9 810 360 per QALY when compared with second-li

14 0 QALYs compared to current practice, and an ICER of US$2,996 per QALY gained.

15 lsartan would increase life expectancy at an ICER consistent with other high-value accepted cardiovas

16 , and increased costs by $26.2 billion at an ICER of $47 304 per QALY gained.

17 s added 0.56 QALY relative to the oSOC at an ICER of $55 400 per additional QALY.

18 wer QALYs due to more false negatives but an ICER of $3,012, making this strategy suited for areas wi

19 gaining 0.56 QALYs at a cost of $6975 for an ICER of $12 410 per QALY compared with laser treatment p

20 For an ICER threshold of less than $100 000 per quality-adjuste

21 Symptomatic+asymptomatic-monthly had an ICER <$100,000/QALY only when Re >=1.6; when test cost w

22 itiations per month, the intervention had an ICER of $197 (90% model variability -27 to 863) per DALY

23 DAA at 20% coverage had an ICER of $27,251/QALY.

24 mentation of a dedicated pediatric OR has an ICER of $37.25 per disability adjusted life year averted

25 Moving from COL to FIT has an ICER of 15,000 EUR per LYG.

26 $0.80 and US $0.40 per 500 mg resulted in an ICER between US $44 and US $28 per life-year saved.

27 costs ($81 327 vs. $76 705), resulting in an ICER of $19 570 per QALY gained.

28 cremental cost of $612 700), resulting in an ICER of $2 350 041 per QALY.

29 e per case than laparoscopy, resulting in an ICER of $2,322,715/QALY because of minimal differences i

30 of $13 427 (4994 to 22 895), resulting in an ICER of $25 (-151 to 224) per DALY averted.

31 ALYs gained per CDI patient, resulting in an ICER of $31 751 per QALY, below the willingness-to-pay t

32 r DALY averted and scenario B resulted in an ICER of $411 per DALY averted.

33 ystem perspective, scenario A resulted in an ICER of $582 per DALY averted and scenario B resulted in

34 QALYs compared to TAU, which resulted in an ICER of euro 27759 per QALY gained.

35 In the base case, we obtained an ICER of $22 765 208, meaning that second-generation TKIs

36 nalyses, the only variables that produced an ICER less than $100 000 per QALY were vaccine cost (at a

37 compared with standard care, and produced an ICER of $250,632 per QALY gained.

38 compared with monofocal IOLs, leading to an ICER of $4,805/QALY from the societal and health care se

39 d cost an incremental $77 290, leading to an ICER of $521 520 per QALY per patient.

40 y more effective and costly than GT, with an ICER > $100 000/QALY, compared to GT.

41 Treatments with an ICER below the standard willingness-to-pay (WTP) thresho

42 st, $105398; incremental QALY, 0.39, with an ICER of $268637 per QALY gained ($165689 with discounted

43 lowed by LED fluorescence microscopy with an ICER of $29 (6-59).

44 100 lower lifetime cost per person, with an ICER of $34 300/QALY, compared to no intervention.

45 e, robotics cost $1339 more per case with an ICER of $4,174,849/QALY.

46 is the next most effective strategy with an ICER of $45 (95% CrI 25-74), followed by LED fluorescenc

47 .5-1.2 years and was cost-effective, with an ICER of $450/YLS in Malawi and $840/YLS in South Africa.

48 and became cost-effective by 5 years with an ICER of $91032 per QALY.

49 for the 123 610 MSM receiving PrEP, with an ICER of more than $7 million per QALY.

50 using an NIT to decide on treatment, with an ICER of pound16,028 per QALY gained.

51 er previous administration of ZVL yielded an ICER of less than $60 000 per QALY for persons aged 60 y

52 The lifetime analysis ICER for Argus II falls below the published societal wil

53 ults were sensitive to the time horizon, and ICERs otherwise remained less than $50,000 per QALY.

54 yses to reflect uncertainty around ICURs and ICERs.

55 nal costs per recurrence free patient and as ICER showing additional costs per QALY.

56 50.1% (41.5-58.0; New York City) by 2030, at ICERs ranging from cost-saving in Atlanta, Baltimore, an

57 days in the hospital affected the calculated ICER most.

58 with treatment of only school-aged children (ICER $167 per DALY averted) and WHO guidelines (ICER $12

59 ed surveillance strategies are considerable; ICERs for imaging strategies compared with clinical foll

60 In contrast, ICERs were > $175,000 per QALY gained for all strategies

61 The corresponding ICERs were $52,000 per life-year gained (95% CI, 34,000

62 red with scenario one in all four countries (ICER: $270 in Kenya, $260 in South Africa, $2207 in Colo

63 ed with the base case in all four countries (ICER: -$26 in Kenya,-$559 in South Africa, -$844 in Colo

64 nsitivity and scenario analyses demonstrated ICERs ranging from $100193 to $488642 per QALY, with ICE

65 Sensitivity analyses demonstrated ICERs ranging from $35357 to $75301 per QALY.

66 The discounted ICER comparing CXL to conventional management was Can$90

67 and patients with peripheral artery disease (ICER = $13,427/QALY gained).

68 lls in autoimmune and inflammatory diseases, ICER/CREM-deficient B6.lpr mice are protected from devel

69 ing is not cost-effective based on the Dutch ICER threshold and substantially increases colonoscopy d

70 g (net cost <0 AUD) or cost-effective (i.e., ICER < AUD 169,361/HALY) regardless of the time horizon,

71 alian base-case analysis, the cost-effective ICER obtained using policy 1 was euro8,775/QALY.

72 Accepting any heart was cost effective (ICER $85 602/QALY gained).

73 h-care costs by 33%, and was cost-effective (ICER $340 per year of life saved).

74 ing among pregnant women was cost-effective (ICER $6,000/QALY) and should be recommended nationally.

75 years vs 8.77 years) and was cost-effective (ICER = $1915/quality-adjusted life-year [QALY]).

76 after 2016, was found to be cost-effective (ICER = $33/QALY).

77 er treatment could be highly cost-effective (ICER< pound13,000).

78 was 31 days, and it was not cost-effective (ICER, $224,914 per life year gained).

79 Screening 3-monthly was cost-effective (ICER: $4,500/QALY) compared to SQ and reduced primary tr

80 n prisons could increase cost-effectiveness (ICER pound15,090/quality-adjusted life years gained).

81 esting with magnetic resonance elastography (ICER= pound9,189).

82 of dominated options, we estimated expected ICER among induction categories: no-induction, alemtuzum

83 Several high-risk groups had more favorable ICERs, including patients with >1 prior MI, multivessel

84 Importantly, we find ICER overexpressed in CD4(+) T cells from patients with

85 ely, our findings identify a unique role for ICER, which affects both organ-specific and systemic aut

86 R $167 per DALY averted) and WHO guidelines (ICER $127 per DALY averted), and remained highly cost ef

87 with MAT+ at 20%, 40%, and 80% coverage had ICERs of $165 985/QALY, $325 860/QALY, and $399 189/QALY

88 with MAT+ at 20%, 40%, and 80% coverage had ICERs of $165,985/QALY, $325,860/QALY, and $399,189/QALY

89 d 3.0% or higher (67% of adults treated) had ICERs of $81,000/QALY and $140,000/QALY, respectively.

90 Higher ICERs were estimated at low PfPR2-10 levels.

91 howed that EarlyTest was cost-effective (ie, ICERs less than $69.547) for similar populations of MSM

92 n San Diego, EarlyTest was cost-savings (ie, ICERs per AHI diagnosis less than $13.000) when compared

93 rimental encephalomyelitis are attenuated in ICER/CREM-deficient mice compared with their ICER/CREM-s

94 ct decreased by almost 50% with increases in ICERs (up to 4.2-fold) in conservative base-case analysi

95 least as cost-effective as the intervention (ICERs $420/YLS in Malawi and $810/YLS in South Africa).

96 red with IVR were cost-saving interventions (ICER, <0) regardless of the perspective or setting.

97 fective at 5 years and beyond, with lifetime ICERs of $18,184/QALY (F&V incentive) and $13,194/QALY (

98 higher treatment efficacy resulted in lower ICER.

99 In Benin, Cameroon and Madagascar ICERs were: $31, $138 and $118 per additional YLL averte

100 tes with existing treatments produces a mean ICER of pound19,850/quality-adjusted life years gained c

101 ughly 20% chance of cost-effectiveness; mean ICER pound62,600/QALY [ pound48,000-89,400]).

102 in all treatment eligibility scenarios (mean ICER <$3000/QALY gained).

103 probabilistic sensitivity analysis, the mean ICER was $500 754 per QALY (95% CI, $93 510 to $1 691 21

104 em perspective, 16 studies reported a median ICER of $13 761 per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) sa

105 Our model ICER suggests that the construction and maintenance of a

106 In vitro differentiation from naive ICER/CREM-deficient CD4(+) T cells to Th17 cells is impa

107 t can be rescued by forced overexpression of ICER.

108 For persons aged 60 years or older, ICERs were less than $60 000 per QALY.

109 nario analyses that had a relevant impact on ICER included the discount rate, visual acuity before CX

110 SLIT, being the most cost-effective option (ICER for SCIT, euro 11 418; ICER for SLIT, euro 15 212).

111 Our ICER of Can$9090/QALY falls well below the range of Can$

112 rolment into community ART delivery produced ICERs that exceeded the cost-effectiveness threshold for

113 as an acceptable cost-effectiveness profile (ICER, $37,000/QALY), but more lenient ASCVD thresholds w

114 ], $1000/year of life saved [YLS]) and PWID (ICER, $500/YLS).

115 sions, screening Yearly was <=$100,000/QALY (ICER: $70,900/QALY).

116 ronic HBV infections and saved 13,600 QALYs (ICER: $6,957/QALY saved).

117 l, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER - cost per additional year of graft survival) withi

118 sed an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER = difference in lifetime costs/difference in lifeti

119 ng the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) as the incremental cost in dollars per quality-adj

120 ), and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) at willingness-to-pay threshold of GBPpound 20,000

121 as the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) between test and no-test options.

122 The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) for HZ vaccine versus no vaccine was $323 456 per

123 The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) for the MR imaging IPH strategy compared with the

124 nd the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) from the perspective of the health-care sector and

125 or the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) in dollars per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) g

126 ith an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) less than the country-specific cost-effectiveness

127 had an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of $27 251/quality-adjusted life-year (QALY).

128 ded an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of $323 per QALY, and naloxone distribution plus l

129 had an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of $37,000/QALY compared with a 10% or higher thre

130 had an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of $4100/year of life saved compared with VL confi

131 to an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of $45017 per QALY for the base-case.

132 has an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of $540 per DALY averted, $645 per life-year saved

133 ing an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of $7.28 per DALY averted.

134 ing an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of $8 (2 to 29) per DALY averted.

135 ing an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of $94,917/QALY gained.

136 ed the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of 3 cryptococcal induction regimens: (1) amphoter

137 The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of CLT versus LR ranged from $111,821/QALY in Sing

138 t, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of DAAs at a price USD 41,046 per treatment was US

139 nd the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of different treatment initiation strategies.

140 nd the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of different treatment options expressed as discou

141 in an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of euro 549 per reduction in log10 viral load and

142 s with incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of less than US$3250 per year of life saved were c

143 ith an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of pound10 726 per QALY.

144 had an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of pound9,204 per additional QALY gained.

145 s, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of SiDRP relative to FP-based DR screening over a

146 The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of vaccinating boys was euro9134/LY (95% credible

147 as the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) over 3 years: the ratio of the difference in cost

148 if its incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was <$100 000/quality-adjusted life-year (QALY).

149 D.90, incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was &OV0556;7192 per averted complication.

150 The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was calculated assuming pharmacological therapy as

151 The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was calculated between the intervention and counte

152 An incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was calculated for a 10-year horizon and tested wi

153 The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was calculated in 2014 US dollars per disability-a

154 The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was euro6840.75 (95% CI 2545-2759) per QALY gained

155 if the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was less than US$750/year of life saved (YLS) in M

156 The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was presented as costs in Thai baht per QALY gaine

157 QALY), incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER), and net value-based price.

158 as the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER), based on 2017 US dollars.

159 Incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER), defined as euros per QALY.

160 Incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER), expressed as euros per quality-adjusted life-year

161 as the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER).

162 as the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER).

163 ained [incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER)].

164 s, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER; compared with brief intervention) was pound159 per

165 ), and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER; from the health-care sector perspective, 3% annual

166 y, with an incremental cost-effective ratio [ICER] of euro1096.88 for any-DR, euro4571.2 for STDR and

167 elers (incremental cost-effectiveness ratio [ICER] $4.6M/measles case averted), but offered better va

168 term (incremental cost-effectiveness ratio [ICER] $5,387-$8,430/QALY), depending on whether diagnost

169 ng the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio [ICER]) from a health system perspective, including progr

170 h MSM (incremental cost-effectiveness ratio [ICER], $1000/year of life saved [YLS]) and PWID (ICER, $

171 mined incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICER) and benefit-cost-ratios (BCR).

172 ) and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICER) of policy 1 versus policy 2.

173 ed as incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICER) showing additional costs per recurrence free patie

174 ) and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICER).

175 ll as incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICER, $/quality-adjusted life-year [QALY]).

176 alculated incremental cost-effective ratios (ICERs), comparing the incremental cost of Avahan per dis

177 lated incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) and assessed cost-effectiveness by considering tw

178 lated incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) and report the mean and 90% model variability of

179 Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) are reported in 2016 US$/quality-adjusted life ye

180 d the incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) between current practice and the screen and treat

181 , and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) for each city (10-year implementation; 20-year ho

182 lated incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) for high-dose versus standard-dose vaccine and us

183 ysis, incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) for screening plus surveillance exceeded the Dutc

184 uated incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) for the use of necitumumab across a range of valu

185 lting incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) from the health system and societal perspectives.

186 ed as incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) in 2013 Australian dollars per quality-adjusted l

187 were incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) in 2015 U.S. dollars per quality-adjusted life ye

188 , and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) of the four prevention programs, considered singl

189 d the incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) of the programs.

190 , and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) of two policy scenarios for adults within Medicar

191 Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) per diagnosis of AHI were calculated for programs

192 mean incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) under a willingness-to-pay threshold of $50 000/Q

193 on of incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) using net policy cost and HALYs gained.

194 s and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) using years of blindness avoided.

195 , and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were calculated for each surveillance strategy.

196 Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were calculated for sorafenib-treated and control

197 , and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were calculated from a US payer perspective.

198 Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were compared to a $100 000/QALY gained willingne

199 Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were determined.

200 lated incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) with Monte Carlo simulation and one-way sensitivi

201 ear), incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs), and clinical outcomes such as development of hep

202 ed as incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs), defined as incremental costs per quality-adjuste

203 , and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs), over 10-year and lifetime horizons, assuming a s

204 lated incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs), using discounted costs and life expectancies for

205 , and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs).

206 , and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs).

207 es of incremental cost effectiveness ratios (ICERs).

208 mean incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs).

209 , and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs).

210 e the incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs).

211 , and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs).

212 , and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs).

213 , and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs).

214 , and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs, $/quality-adjusted life-year saved [QALY]; thresh

215 ) and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios [ICER].

216 mean incremental cost-effectiveness ratios [ICERs] pound45,200 [range pound35,300-61,400] and pound4

217 Inducible cAMP early repressor (ICER) has been described as a transcriptional repressor

218 care costs and lost productivity, respective ICERs were $14,576/QALY and $9,497/QALY.

219 Institute for Clinical and Economic Review (ICER) published its final report on the effectiveness an

220 Compared with ranibizumab, aflibercept's ICER was $648000 per QALY at 1 year and $203000 per QALY

221 SLIT resulted more cost-effective than SCIT (ICER for SCIT, euro 17 318; ICER for SLIT, euro 15 212).

222 f internalized receptors, and (2) a JAK-STAT-ICER pathway leading to the repression of GABAARs synthe

223 Here we report that ICER is predominantly expressed in Th17 cells through th

224 The ICER amounted to euro 28,299/QALY.

225 The ICER for Argus II was euro14,603/QALY.

226 The ICER for assessment every 10 years was $111 600 per qual

227 The ICER for HIV-negative women was $6.2 per DALY averted.

228 The ICER for the 52-week programme was cost-effective compar

229 The ICER for the intervention vs standard care, per life-yea

230 The ICER for unilateral disease was more favorable, namely,

231 The ICER is below the willingness-to-pay threshold in the Ne

232 The ICER is well below multiple cost-effectiveness threshold

233 The ICER of amphotericin plus flucytosine was $23 842 per qu

234 The ICER of IVA compared with that of IVB was $153 633/QALY

235 The ICER of sofosbuvir-based therapy for treatment-naive non

236 The ICER of sofosbuvir-based treatment was less than $100,00

237 The ICER of the 6 weeks alone strategy versus the no EID str

238 The ICER of the polypill compared with current care increase

239 The ICER remained robust under 1-way and probabilistic sensi

240 The ICER value was negative with lower in total costs (peg 2

241 The ICER was $1,754 per LYG in France and $32,415 per LYG in

242 The ICER was $22 500/QALY for induction-maintenance and >$50

243 The ICER was euro19,529 per life-year gained.

244 The ICER was euro5442.

245 The ICER was most sensitive to the magnitude of ALVD treatme

246 The ICER was most sensitive to uncertainty in the number of

247 nd US$2,800 (95% CI, US$2,790-US$2,800); the ICER of POC-CD4 compared to LAB-CD4 is US$500/year of li

248 When the risk ratio for death was 0.95, the ICER increased to $119 600 per QALY.

249 the probabilistic sensitivity analyses, the ICER was $7.7 per DALY averted for moderate risk of low

250 euro7153.62 +/- 212.15 per patient, and the ICER was euro30,361.

251 Modelled over 25 years after baseline, the ICER for the 12-week programme was dominant compared wit

252 Assuming a 10-year effect of CXL, the ICER was euro54 384/QALY ($59 822/QALY).

253 of CXL to a lifelong stabilizing effect, the ICER decreased to euro10 149/QALY ($11 163/QALY).

254 ceration (societal perspective) improved the ICER to $6,200/QALY gained (95% CI, cost-saving $24,300)

255 c volumes (20 ART initiations per month) the ICER was $734 (93 to 2569).

256 The probability of the ICER being cost-effective at thresholds of $50,000/QALY

257 varying mortality and 5FC drug costs on the ICER.

258 e the impact of individual parameters on the ICER.

259 ing public-sector pharmaceutical prices, the ICER of the polypill compared with current care over a l

260 ca's per capita gross domestic product); the ICER for the birth and 6 weeks strategy versus the 6 wee

261 modelled with the meta-analysis results, the ICER increased from $127 per life-year saved at a neonat

262 For the European treatment scenario the ICER obtained using policy 1 was euro19,541.75/QALY.

263 e high-risk group and its subcategories, the ICER was very sensitive to the graft survival; overall b

264 For Switzerland, the ICER remained above the cost-effectiveness threshold reg

265 5FC price of US $1.30 per 500 mg tablet, the ICER of 5FC+FLU versus FLU alone was US $65 (95% CI $28-

266 per cycle, there was 90% confidence that the ICER for adding necitumumab would be less than $100 000

267 keratoconus of 15 years or longer, then the ICER would be less than the 1 x GDP per capita threshold

268 The ceiling vaccination costs at which the ICER remained below the per capita gross domestic produc

269 model time horizon as short as 10 years the ICER increased to euro31,890/QALY and euro49,769/QALY re

270 dy results were extrapolated to 4 years, the ICER decreased to $114078 per QALY and became cost-effec

271 Among persons older than 55 years, the ICER for F/TAF remained more than $3 million per QALY an

272 The ICERs decrease with decreasing DAA prices, becoming cost

273 The ICERs for all trial participants and subgroups with base

274 The ICERs for first-line etanercept-methotrexate and triple

275 The ICERs for the MR imaging IPH strategy were slightly high

276 The ICERs of screening scenarios were $19,600 to $29,200 per

277 The ICERs ranged from $9700 to $284 300 per QALY depending o

278 The ICERs were highest in the strategies with highest freque

279 The ICERs were most sensitive to uncertainty in the starting

280 However, the ICERs varied widely in subgroup and sensitivity analyses

281 For all participants, during 1 year, the ICERs of aflibercept and ranibizumab compared with bevac

282 tarting patient ages of 60 and 80 years, the ICERs for the MR imaging IPH strategy were $3100 per QAL

283 ICER/CREM-deficient mice compared with their ICER/CREM-sufficient littermates.

284 These ICERs are in line with willingness-to-pay levels of one

285 ith PrEP and linkage to addiction treatment (ICER $95 337 per QALY) at a willingness-to-pay threshold

286 gies, SOF was cost-effective in IL28B CT/TT (ICER per LYG euro 22,229) and G1a (euro 19,359) patients

287 ntal cost of $30747, yielding an unfavorable ICER of $154684 per QALY.

288 ation with RZV compared with no vaccination, ICERs ranged by age from $10 000 to $47 000 per quality-

289 les case averted), but offered better value (ICER <$100 000/measles case averted) or was even cost sa

290 d Seattle) and 12 (Miami) interventions with ICER values ranging from $94 069/QALY in Los Angeles to

291 nging from $100193 to $488642 per QALY, with ICER of $413579 per QALY for trial patient characteristi

292 sease, diabetes, renal dysfunction (all with ICERs $50,000 to $70,000/QALY gained), patients age <75

293 reening strategies were cost-effective, with ICERs averaging $49 200, $68 600, and $96 700 per QALY,

294 1/HALY) regardless of the time horizon, with ICERs of 1,073 (95% UI: dominant; 3,503) and 1,956 (95%

295 ctive (accuracy 93%, $297 per patient), with ICERs between $490 and $1,037/QALY.

296 Strategies with ICERs < $100,000 per QALY gained were considered cost-ef

297 Given current evidence, treatments with ICERs above the range $100 000 to $150 000 per QALY are

298 roup with worse baseline vision, the 10-year ICERs of aflibercept and ranibizumab compared with bevac

299 ith quantitative CT screening every 5 years (ICER, $2000 per QALY).

300 70,000/QALY gained), patients age <75 years (ICER = $44,779/QALY gained), and patients with periphera