ライフサイエンスコーパス: ICER

1 ICER binds to the FSH beta CRE site to reduce CREB occup

2 ICER compared with DT was euro 8.304 per LYG for BOC-RVR

3 ICER was lowest if screening was applied to a population

4 ICER was not detected under basal conditions, but pulsat

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

6 ICERs for annual BMD screening followed by oral bisphosp

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

8 ICERs using reductions in fatigue and disability as outc

9 ICERs were not substantially reduced when the perforatio

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

11 s with an additional per person cost of $55 (ICER of $3,120/YLS).

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

13 me acetylcholinesterase (AChE), and the AChE-ICERs produced were used in a liquid chromatograph-tande

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

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

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

17 0 QALYs compared to current practice, and an ICER of US$2,996 per QALY gained.

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

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

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

21 r-person survival gains by 0.37 QALYs for an ICER of $114,800/QALY.

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

23 by 348,800 and costs by $5.5 billion, for an ICER of $15,700 per QALY gained.

24 y 532,200 and costs by $19.0 billion, for an ICER of $35,700 per QALY saved.

25 e-years by 0.119 (CI, 0.017 to 0.378) for an ICER of $438 (CI, $48 to $1706).

26 ed treatment of women with osteopenia had an ICER less than $100,000 per QALY.

27 Assessment every 5 years had an ICER of $117 900 per QALY, and ICERs for more frequent a

28 mpared with no ART, generic-based ART has an ICER of $21,100/QALY.

29 tibodies and viral RNA every 6 months has an ICER of $65,900/QALY gained.

30 e COG guidelines versus no screening have an ICER of $61 500, extend life expectancy by 6 months and

31 ced cost to patient (of $300) resulted in an ICER of $20 000.

32 al levels of CXCL1, which is expressed in an ICER-independent manner.

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

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

35 These costs led to an ICER of $479,712 per PF-LYS for PCB and $401,088 per PF-

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

37 further improves maternal outcomes, with an ICER (compared with Option B) similar to many current HI

38 o be the more cost-effective option (with an ICER compared with no treatment of pound 6,803), and tre

39 The best strategy with an ICER less than $100,000 per QALY was initiation of scree

40 g initiation ages, the best strategy with an ICER less than $50,000 per QALY was initiation of screen

41 improved maternal and infant health, with an ICER of $1370 per YLS compared with Option B.

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 but only marginally more effective, with an ICER of $296,266 per QALY.

45 rel was superior to prasugrel alone, with an ICER of $35 800 per QALY relative to clopidogrel.

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

47 more effective than no surveillance, with an ICER of $5,743 per QALY gained.

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

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

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

51 disability-adjusted life-years (DALYs), and ICERs measured as cost per DALY averted through either t

52 ozambique (US$570) to be cost-effective, and ICERs less than one times the per capita gross domestic

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

54 years had an ICER of $117 900 per QALY, and ICERs for more frequent assessment exceeded $165 000 per

55 d ART efficacy and costs lead to branded ART ICERs greater than $100,000/QALY.

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

57 Because ICER is an immediate-early repressor, the circadian natu

58 CCL3, which is also negatively regulated by ICER, but they had normal levels of CXCL1, which is expr

59 ies provided enough information to calculate ICERs, of which ERP was dominant (less costly and more e

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

61 We consider ICERs less than three times the per capita gross domesti

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

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

64 hich core clock genes are controlled by CREM/ICER in the liver and adrenal gland.

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

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

67 interval [CI], -$22 to $1613), $142 per DID (ICER = $142; 95% CI, -$14 to $2529), and $78,948 per DFD

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

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

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

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

72 zone was more cost-effective than vitamin E (ICER $A2,056/QALY gained).

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

81 raphy-only strategy demonstrated a favorable ICER of $20429 per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) rel

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

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

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

85 cost per quality-adjusted life year gained (ICER) was $7900 for general population screening and $42

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

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

88 Strategies including HCV testing have ICERs exceeding $100,000/QALY gained unless awareness of

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

90 r, and mobility shift experiments identified ICER binding to cAMP-responsive elements of the Per1 pro

91 We identified ICER as a novel CHIP substrate and that the ERK5-CHIP co

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

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

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

95 activity was decreased, with an increase in ICER expression.

96 of CHIP activity and subsequent increase in ICER levels.

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

98 This resulted in ICERs of $56 409 per QALY for PK relative to no interven

99 CHIP activation, and subsequently increases ICER levels and apoptosis.

100 ation of CHIP ligase activity, which induces ICER ubiquitination and subsequent protein degradation.

101 t practice, but relatively cost-ineffective (ICER US$20,495).

102 protein responsible for Per1 attenuation is ICER.

103 higher treatment efficacy resulted in lower ICER.

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

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

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

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

108 mediated reduction of isoproterenol-mediated ICER induction and apoptosis.

109 Furthermore, pressure overload-mediated ICER induction was enhanced in heterozygous CHIP(+/-) mi

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

111 ex plays an obligatory role in inhibition of ICER expression, cardiomyocyte apoptosis, and cardiac dy

112 t can be rescued by forced overexpression of ICER.

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

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

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

116 I, -$14 to $2529), and $78,948 per DFD-QALY (ICER = $78,948; 95% CI, -$9261 to $677,448).

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

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

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

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

121 ted an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) comparing costs and benefits before and after the

122 ng the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) comparing treating IDUs, ex/non-IDUs, or no treatm

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

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

125 $100 (incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of $1,490/year of life saved (YLS)).

126 ave an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of $1.50 ($US 2010) per disability-adjusted life y

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

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

129 ces an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of $37,700 per quality-adjusted life year gained v

130 in an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of $4,869/QALY gained for CPM.

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

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

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

134 ing an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of $7.28 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 ACEI+BB+AldA versus ACEI+BB and ACEI+BB versus

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

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 ith an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of less than $50,000 per QALY was DXA screening wi

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

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

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

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

146 The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of Xpert scale-up ($169 per DALY averted, 95% cred

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

148 nd the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was $255,970 per QALY gained.

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

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

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

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

153 nd the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was derived.

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

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

156 rimary incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was the incremental costs per clinically improved

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

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

159 as the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER), with $A50,000 or less considered cost-effective.

160 ), and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER).

161 s, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER).

162 ALYs); incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER).

163 s) and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER).

164 t, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER).

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

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

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

168 only (incremental cost-effectiveness ratio [ICER] = $17516).

169 $188 (incremental cost-effectiveness ratio [ICER] = $188; 95% confidence interval [CI], -$22 to $161

170 n year; incremental cost effectiveness ratio(ICER) US$889,267 per life year gained).

171 y the incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICER) of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor (ACEI),

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

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

177 rmine incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) comparing PK with no intervention and DSEK with P

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

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

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

181 , and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) for three alternative strategies: screening with

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

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

184 , and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) in dollars per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY).

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

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

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

188 Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) per progression-free life-year saved (PF-LYS) wer

189 The incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were at least US$970 000 per quality-adjusted lif

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

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

192 lity; incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were computed.

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

194 Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were estimated for measles mortality reduction an

195 , and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were measured.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

204 es of incremental cost effectiveness ratios (ICERs).

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

206 mean incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs).

207 Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs, in USD per year of life saved [YLS]) were calcula

208 are reported as incremental cost per ratios (ICERs) with outcomes and costs discounted at an annual r

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

210 se of immobilized capillary enzyme reactors (ICERs) for online ligand screening has been adopted as a

211 production via the transcriptional regulator ICER/CREM and upregulating IL-10 after interaction of th

212 l module via inducible cAMP early repressor (ICER) destabilization.

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

214 egulation of inducible cAMP early repressor (ICER), a known transcriptional repressor of the Tnfa gen

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

216 In vitro runoff assay and Ub assay showed ICER as a substrate of CHIP Ub ligase.

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

218 al conditions, but pulsatile GnRH stimulated ICER to a greater extent at high than at low pulse frequ

219 We propose that ICER acts as a noise filter for different signals that c

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

221 These data suggest that ICER production antagonizes the stimulatory action of CR

222 The ICER at 3 years was $297,800/QALY for bilateral disease,

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

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

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

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

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

228 The ICER for universal alendronate therapy without a BMD tes

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

230 The ICER of birth-cohort screening was most sensitive to sus

231 The ICER of dose-adjusted sorafenib compared with BSC was eu

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

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

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

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

236 The ICER values in terms of dollars per VA letter were $393

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

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

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

240 The ICER was euro5442.

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

242 The ICER was somewhat higher if the discount rate was set at

243 ormation was 1.3% per year (base: 0.5%), the ICER of the 3/5 strategy was <$50,000 per QALY gained if

244 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

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

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

247 otal intervention cost was $147,865, and the ICER was $21,124 per percentage point increase in CRC sc

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

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

250 acizumab was reduced to 25% of baseline, the ICER of PCB+B fell below $100,000 per PF-LYS.

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

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

253 sed, minimally effective, and expensive, the ICER was $14 000.

254 e treatment rates and efficacy increases the ICER.

255 mic consequences are evaluated increases the ICER; similarly, decreasing the treatment rates and effi

256 account the uncertainty in model inputs the ICER was euro14,482/QALY in the probabilistic analysis.

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

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

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

260 For pseudophakics, the ICER value for comparison triamcinolone with laser versu

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 Even in the most unfavorable situations, the ICER was <$10,000 per life-year gained.

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

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

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 penditures were applied to heroin users, the ICER was $2429.

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

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

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

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 for the strategy of a BMD test and selective alend

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

278 The ICERs ranged between $8399 and $11 575, for coverage ran

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

280 The ICERs were highest in the strategies with highest freque

281 The ICERs were most sensitive to uncertainty in the starting

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

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

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

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

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

287 d CXR would be cost-effective at a threshold ICER of $7,800 per quality-adjusted life year (QALY), bu

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

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

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

291 esponsive element modulator) and its variant ICER (inducible cAMP early repressor) is linked to the c

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

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

294 % baseline chronic prevalence settings, with ICERs compared with no treatment of pound 521 and pound

295 t was the most cost-effective strategy, with ICERs of $556 per DALY averted (2030 time horizon) and $

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

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

298 -effective for patients older than 70 years (ICER $62,750/QALY).

299 70,000/QALY gained), patients age <75 years (ICER = $44,779/QALY gained), and patients with periphera

300 time periods 1 and 2, respectively, yielding ICERs of $25,471 and $7319 per event avoided.