Clinical efficacy of highly purified urinary FSH versus recombinant FSH in volunteers undergoing controlled ovarian stimulation for in vitro fertilization: a randomized, multicenter, investigator-blind trial

Fertility and Sterility

Volumn 91, Issue 4, 2009, Pages 1005-1011

  Baker, Valerie L ^a,b   Fujimoto, Victor Y ^c   Kettel, L Michael ^d   Adamson, G David ^b   Hoehler, Fred ^e   Jones, Clarence E ^e   Soules, Michael R ^f  

^a STANFORD UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

^b Fertility Physicians of Northern California   (United States)

^c Gynecology   (United States)

^d Male Fertility Specialists in San Diego   (United States)

^e Seattle Reproductive Medicine ^*

^f Seattle Reproductive Medicine   (United States)

Author keywords

clinical outcome; highly purified urinary FSH; IVF; pregnancy; recombinant FSH

Indexed keywords

RECOMBINANT FOLLITROPIN; UROFOLLITROPIN;

ADULT; ARTICLE; CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED STUDY; DRUG EFFICACY; DRUG TOLERABILITY; FEMALE; FEMALE INFERTILITY; FERTILIZATION IN VITRO; HUMAN; LIVE BIRTH; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MULTICENTER STUDY; OOCYTE; OOCYTE RETRIEVAL; PREGNANCY RATE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL;

EID: 62949173719     PISSN: 00150282     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2008.01.064     Document Type: Article

References (21)

1. Macklon N.S., Stouffer R.L., Giudice L.C., and Fauser B.C.J.M. The science behind 25 years of ovarian stimulation for in vitro fertilization. Endocr Rev 27 (2006) 170-207
2. Al-Inany H., Aboulghar M., Mansour R., and Serour G. Meta-analysis of recombinant versus urinary-derived FSH: an update. Hum Reprod 18 (2003) 305-313
3. Loumaye E., Campbell R., and Salat-Baroux J. Human follicle stimulating hormone produced by recombinant DNA technology: a review for clinicians. Hum Reprod Update 1 (1995) 188-199
4. Bayram N., van Wely M., and van der Veen F. Recombinant FSH versus urinary gonadotrophins or recombinant FSH for ovulation induction in subfertility associated with polycystic ovarian syndrome. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2 (2001) CD002121
5. Balen A., Platteau P., Andersen A.N., Devroey P., Helmgaard L., and Arce J.-C. Highly purified FSH is as efficacious as recombinant FSH for ovulation induction in women with WHO Group II anovulatory infertility: a randomized controlled non-inferiority trial. Hum Reprod 22 (2007) 1816-1823
6. Demirol A., and Gurgan T. Comparison of different gonadotrophin preparations in intrauterine insemination cycles for the treatment of unexplained infertility: a prospective, randomized study. Hum Reprod 22 (2007) 97-100
7. van Wely M., Westergaard L.G., Bossuyt P.M.M., and van der Veen F. Effectiveness of human menopausal gonadotropin versus recombinant follicle stimulating hormone for controlled ovarian hyperstimulation in assisted reproductive cycles: a meta-analysis. Fertil Steril 80 (2003) 1086-1093
8. Kilani Z., Dakkak A., Ghunaim S., Cognigni G.E., Tabarelli C., Parmegiani L., et al. A prospective, randomized, controlled trial comparing highly purified hMG with recombinant FSH in women undergoing ICSI: ovarian response and clinical outcomes. Hum Reprod 18 (2003) 1194-1199
9. Andersen A.N., Devroey P., Arce J.-C., and for the MERIT Group. Clinical outcome following stimulation with highly purified hMG or recombinant FSH in patients undergoing IVF; a randomized assessor-blind controlled trial. Hum Reprod 21 (2006) 3217-3227
10. Hompes P.G.A., Broekmans F.J., Hoozemans D.A., Schats R., and for the FIRM group. Effectiveness of highly purified human menopausal gonadotropin vs. recombinant follicle-stimulating hormone in first-cycle in vitro fertilization-intracytoplasmic sperm injection patients. Fertil Steril (2007) (in press)
11. Mohamed M.A., Sbracia M., Pacchiarotti A., Micara G., Linari A., Tranquilli D., et al. Urinary follicle-stimulating hormone (FSH) is more effective than recombinant FSH in older women in a controlled randomized study. Fertil Steril 85 (2006) 1398-1403
12. Selman H.A., De Santo M., Sterzik K., Coccia E., and El-Danasouri I. Effect of highly purified urinary follicle stimulating hormone on oocyte and embryo quality. Fertil Steril 78 (2002) 1061-1067
13. Pacchiarotti A., Aragona C., Gaglione R., and Selman H. Efficacy of a combined protocol of urinary and recombinant follicle-stimulating hormone used for ovarian stimulation of patients undergoing ICSI cycle. J Assist Reprod Genet 24 (2007) 400-405
14. Anserini P., Costa M., Remorgida V., and Venturini P.L. A prospective, randomized, controlled clinical study of a new subcutaneous, purified, urinary FSH preparation for controlled ovarian hyperstimulation in in vitro fertilization. Gynecol Endocrinol 14 (2000) 75-80
15. Gerli S., Perino M., Abate A., Costabile L., Gholami H., and Vitiello L. Ovarian stimulation using a new highly purified urinary FSH: a prospective randomized clinical study. Clin Exp Obstet Gynecol 26 (1999) 93-94
16. Gerli S. Ovulation induction with urinary FSH or recombinant FSH in polycystic ovarian syndrome patients: a prospective randomized analysis of cost-effectiveness. RBM Online 9 (2004) 494-499
17. Sibug R.M., Datson N., Tijssen A.M.I., Morsink M., de Koning J., de Kloet E.R., et al. Effects of urinary and recombinant gonadotrophins on gene expression profiles during the murine peri-implantation period. Hum Reprod 22 (2007) 75-82
18. Silverberg K., Daya S., Auray J.P., Duru G., Ledger W., Wikland M., et al. Analysis of the cost effectiveness of recombinant versus urinary follicle-stimulating hormone in in vitro fertilization/intracytoplasmic sperm injection programs in the United States. Fertil Steril 77 (2002) 107-113
19. Hatoum H.T., Keye W.R., Marrs R.P., Walton S.M., and Marshall D.C. A Markov model of the cost-effectiveness of human-derived follicle-stimulating hormone (FSH) versus recombinant FSH using comparative clinical trial data. Fertil Steril 83 (2005) 804-807
20. Weiss N. Gonadotrophin products: empowering patients to choose the product that meets their needs. RBM Online 15 (2007) 31-37
21. Arce J.-C., Andersen A.N., and Collins J. Resolving methodological and clinical issues in the design of efficacy trials in assisted reproductive technologies: a mini-review. Hum Reprod 20 (2005) 1757-1771