The date of sample collection from the herd was identified from the diagnostic-sample submission report.
The submission report page not only lists all of the data generated, but it also presents applied protocols with enough detail to replicate the given experiment.
However, all of these submissions reported ICERs in line with the threshold.
Most of these submissions reported only a subset of affected genes, which may be acceptable, although all data should be available upon request.
Over the past few years, Disease Models & Mechanisms (DMM) has witnessed an increase in high-quality research submissions reporting advances in drug discovery and development.
Reasons for accepting submissions reporting ICERs above the threshold included high clinical benefit over the standard of care, and addressing an unmet therapeutic need.
Nevertheless, submissions reporting a higher-than-threshold base-case ICER must be supported by transparent, robust, and concrete evidence in order to achieve patient access.
Supporters of paper submissions reported higher response rates, while proponents of electronic surveys felt that they provide the opportunity to tailor evaluations to different stakeholders.
For example, the Journal of Medicinal Chemistry frequently receives submissions reporting hits from experimental or computational (virtual) screening campaigns with PAINS liability (and is currently taking appropriate measures to tackle these problems, in collaboration with Jonathan Baell).
Interestingly, while a large number of these submissions reported ICERs higher than the threshold, the proportion of accepted submissions in this category did not differ significantly to that in other disease areas, based on the outputs of the funnel plot and chi-square test.
