Highly purified HMG versus recombinant FSH for ovarian stimulation in IVF cycles

Reproductive BioMedicine Online

Volumn 17, Issue 2, 2008, Pages 190-198

  Platteau, Peter ^a   Andersen, Anders Nyboe ^b   Loft, Anne ^b   Smitz, Johan ^a   Danglas, Pascal ^c   Devroey, Paul ^a  

^a CENTRE FOR REPRODUCTIVE MEDICINE   (Belgium)

^b Rigshospitalet   (Denmark)

^c Ferring Pharmaceuticals AS   (Denmark)

Author keywords

Highly purified HMG; IVF; LH activity; Pregnancy outcome; Randomized controlled trial; Recombinant FSH

Indexed keywords

CHORIONIC GONADOTROPIN; HUMAN MENOPAUSAL GONADOTROPIN; RECOMBINANT CHORIONIC GONADOTROPIN; RECOMBINANT FOLLITROPIN; TRIPTORELIN;

ARTICLE; BIRTH RATE; CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIAL; DRUG EFFICACY; DRUG INDUCED HEADACHE; DRUG SAFETY; DRUG SUBSTITUTION; DRUG WITHDRAWAL; EMBRYO TRANSFER; FEMALE INFERTILITY; FERTILIZATION IN VITRO; HUMAN; LIVE BIRTH; NAUSEA; OOCYTE RETRIEVAL; OVARY FOLLICLE MATURATION; OVARY HYPERSTIMULATION; OVULATION INDUCTION; PATIENT COMPLIANCE; PELVIS PAIN SYNDROME; PREGNANCY OUTCOME; PREGNANCY RATE; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL; SINGLE DRUG DOSE; SPONTANEOUS ABORTION; TREATMENT OUTCOME; VAGINA BLEEDING;

EID: 49749115724     PISSN: 14726483     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S1472-6483(10)60194-0     Document Type: Article

References (24)

1. Andersen AN, Devroey P, Arce JC 2006 Clinical outcome following stimulation with highly purified hMG or recombinant FSH in patients undergoing IVF: a randomized assessor-blind controlled trial. Human Reproduction 21, 3217-3227.
2. Arce JC, Nyboe Andersen A, Collins J 2005 Resolving methodological and clinical issues in the design of efficacy trials in assisted reproductive technologies: a mini-review. Human Reproduction 20, 1757-1771.
3. Assou S, Anahory T, Pantesco V et al. 2006 The human cumulusoocyte complex gene-expression profile. Human Reproduction 21, 1705-1719.
4. Cates CJ 2002 Simpson's paradox and calculation of number needed to treat from meta-analysis. BioMed Central Medical Research Methodology 2, 1.
5. Chatellier G, Zapletal E, Lemaitre D et al. 1996 The number needed to treat: a clinically useful nomogram in its proper context. British Medical Journal 312, 426-429.
6. Cook RJ, Sackett DL 1995 The number needed to treat: a clinically useful measure of treatment effect. British Medical Journal 310, 452-454.
7. Dickey RP, Sartor BM, Pyrzak R 2004 What is the most relevant standard of success in assisted reproduction? No single outcome measure is satisfactory when evaluating success in assisted reproduction: both twin births and singleton births should be counted as successes. Human Reproduction 19, 783-787.
8. European and Israeli Study Group on Highly Purified Menotrophin versus Recombinant Follicle-Stimulating Hormone 2002 Efficacy and safety of highly purified menotrophin versus recombinant follicle-stimulating hormone in in vitro fertilization/ intracytoplasmic sperm injection cycles: a randomized, comparative trial. Fertility and Sterility 78, 520-528.
9. Filicori M 1999 The role of luteinizing hormone in folliculogenesis and ovulation induction. Fertility and Sterility 71, 405-414.
10. Fleming R, Lloyd E, Herberr M et al. 1998 Effects of profound suppression of luteinizing hormone induces different hormone profiles compared with menotrophins, dependent upon the route of administration and endogenous luteinizing hormone activity. Human Reproduction 13, 1788-1792.
11. Hompes PGA, Broekmans FJ, Hoozemans DA, Schats R 2007 Effectiveness of highly purified human menopausalgonadotropin vs. recombinant follicle-stimulating hormone in first-cycle in vitro fertilization-intracytoplasmic sperm injection patients. Fertility and Sterility [published online ahead of print] Doi: 10.1016/ j.fertnstert.2007.05.039.
12. Lisi F, Rinaldi L, Fishel S et al. 2005 Evaluation of two doses of recombinant luteinizing hormone supplementation in an unselected group of women undergoing follicular stimulation for in vitro fertilization. Fertility and Sterility 83, 309-315.
13. McKenzie LJ, Pangas SA, Carson SA, et al. 2004 Human cumulus granulosa cell gene expression: a predictor of fertilization and embryo selection in women undergoing IVF. Human Reproduction 19, 2869-2874.
14. McQuay HJ, Moore RA 1997 Using numerical results from systematic reviews in clinical practice. Annals of Internal Medicine 126, 712-720.
15. Min JK, Breheny SA, MacLachlan V, Healy DL 2004 What is the most relevant standard of success in assisted reproduction? The singleton, term gestation, live birth rate per cycle initiated: the BESST endpoint for assisted reproduction. Human Reproduction 19, 3-7.
16. Mochtar MH, Van der Veen, Ziech M, van Wely M 2007 Recombinant luteinizing hormone (rLH) for controlled ovarian hyperstimulation in assisted reproductive cycles. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2, CD005070.
17. Platteau P, Smitz J, Albano C et al. 2004 Exogenous luteinizing hormone activity may influence the treatment outcome in in vitro fertilization but not in intracytoplasmic sperm injection cycles. Fertility and Sterility 81, 1401-1404.
18. Smeeth L, Haines A, Ebrahim S 1999 Numbers needed to treat derived from meta-analysis-sometimes informative, usually misleading. British Medical Journal 318, 1548-1551.
19. Smitz J, Andersen AN, Devroey P, Arce JC 2007 Endocrine profile in serum and follicular fluid differs after ovarian stimulation with HP-hMG or recombinant FSH in 1VF patients. Human Reproduction 22, 676--687.
20. van Wely M, Westergaard LG, Bossuyt PMM, Van der Veen F 2003 Human menopausal gonadotrophin versus recombinant follicle stimulation hormone for ovarian stimulation in assisted reproductive cycles. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 1: CD003973.
21. Wechowski J, Connolly M, McEwan P, Kennedy R 2007 An economic evaluation of highly purified HMG and recombinant FSH based on a large randomized trial. Reproductive BioMedicine Online 15, 500-506.
22. Wennerholm UB, Bergh C 2004 What is the most relevant standard of success in assisted reproduction? Singleton live births should also include preterm births. Human Reproduction 19, 1943-1945.
23. Wolfenson C, Groisman J, Couto AS et al. 2005 Batch-to-batch consistency of human-derived gonadotrophin preparations compared with recombinant preparations. Reproductive BioMedicine Online 10, 442-454.
24. Ziebe S, Lundin K, Janssens R et al. 2007 Influence of ovarian stimulation with HP-hMG or recombinant FSH on embryo quality parameters in patients undergoing IVF. Human Reproduction 22, 2404-2413.