Are all human-derived follicle-stimulating hormone products the same? A systematic review and meta-analysis using direct and adjusted indirect analyses, to determine whether Fostimon ® is more efficient than Metrodin-HP ®

Gynecological Endocrinology

Volumn 28, Issue 2, 2012, Pages 94-101

  Al Inany, Hesham G ^a   Abou Setta, Ahmed M ^b  

^a CAIRO UNIVERSITY   (Egypt)

^b UNIVERSITY OF ALBERTA   (Canada)

Author keywords

Fostimon ; HFSH; Meta analysis; Metrodin HP ; Recombinant FSH

Indexed keywords

CHORIONIC GONADOTROPIN; RECOMBINANT FOLLITROPIN; UROFOLLITROPIN;

ARTICLE; BIRTH RATE; DRUG DOSAGE FORM COMPARISON; DRUG EFFICACY; DRUG SAFETY; FERTILIZATION IN VITRO; HUMAN; INTRACYTOPLASMIC SPERM INJECTION; LIVE BIRTH; META ANALYSIS; OOCYTE; OVARY HYPERSTIMULATION; PREGNANCY RATE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SPONTANEOUS ABORTION; SYSTEMATIC REVIEW; TREATMENT DURATION; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

FEMALE; FERTILIZATION IN VITRO; FOLLICLE STIMULATING HORMONE, HUMAN; HUMANS; PREGNANCY; PREGNANCY OUTCOME; PREGNANCY RATE; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIALS AS TOPIC; SPERM INJECTIONS, INTRACYTOPLASMIC; TREATMENT OUTCOME; UROFOLLITROPIN;

EID: 84856119441     PISSN: 09513590     EISSN: 14730766     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3109/09513590.2011.569612     Document Type: Article

References (43)

1. Keck C, Bassett R, Ludwig M. Factors influencing response, ovarian stimulation. Reprod Biomed Online 2005;11:562-569. (Pubitemid 41700762)
2. Andersen CY, Westergaard LG, van Wely M. FSH isoform composition of commercial gonadotrophin preparations: a neglected aspect? Reprod Biomed Online 2004;9:231-236. (Pubitemid 39157491)
3. Bassett RM, Driebergen R. Continued improvements in the quality and consistency of follitropin alfa, recombinant human FSH. Reprod Biomed Online 2005;10:169-177. (Pubitemid 40246630)
4. Baker VL, Fujimoto VY, Kettel LM, Adamson GD, Hoehler F, Jones CE, Soules MR. 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. Fertil Steril 2009;91:1005-1011.
5. Moustafa M, Abdelwahed A, Abosekena I, Abdelazim S, Abou-Setta A, Al-Inany H. IVF outcomes with either highly purified FSH vs. recombinant FSH in down-regulated normogonadotrophic women: a prospective comparative study in a developing country and metaanalysis. Open Women Health J 2009;3:11-15.
6. Higgins J, Green S. El-Danasouri I. Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions version 5.0.1: the Cochrane collaboration. 2008.
7. Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and metaanalyses: the PRISMA statement. PLoS Med 2009;6: e1000097.
8. Song F, Altman DG, Glenny AM, Deeks JJ. Validity of indirect comparison for estimating efficacy of competing interventions: empirical evidence from published meta-analyses. BMJ 2003;326:472.
9. Petitti DB. Approaches, heterogeneity in meta-analysis. Stat Med 2001;20:3625-3633.
10. Higgins JPT, Green S (editors). Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions Version 5.1.0 [updated March 2011]. The Cochrane Collaboration, 2011. Available from www.cochrane-handbook.org
11. Berger E, Chabloz P, De Quay N, Sann A, Walton S, Germond M, Birkhauser M. An open, randomized, groupcomparative bicentre study comparing recombinant FSH Follitropinum B 150 IU and highly purified urinary FSH 225 IV as a fixed dose regimen in IVF/lCSI treatment [abstract]. Hum Reprod 1999;14:61-62.
12. Cheon KW, Byun HK, Yang KM, Song IO, Choi KH, Yoo KJ. Efficacy of recombinant human follicle-stimulating hormone in improving oocyte quality in assisted reproductive techniques. J Reprod Med 2004;49:733-738. (Pubitemid 39244923)
13. Machado MG, Borges de Souza MC, Oliveira JBA, Henriques CA, Mancebo ACA. Highly purified gonadotropin and recombinant gonadotropin: study in IVF cycles. Gynecol Endocrinol 1999;37(suppl 13):Abstract FC-51.
14. Ulug U, Bahceci M. Efficacy of urinary follicle-stimulating hormone (FSH) among poor responders. ClinicalTrialsgov, 2009:NCT00677573. Available online at: www.clinicaltrials.gov
15. Anserini P, Costa M, Remorgida V, Venturini PL. A prospective, randomized, controlled clinical study of a new subcutaneous, purified, urinary FSH preparation for controlled ovarian hyperstimulation in in vitro fertilization. Gynecol Endocrinol 2000;14:75-80. (Pubitemid 30307214)
16. Gerli S, Perino M, Abate A, Costabile L, Gholami H, Vitiello L. Ovarian stimulation using a new highly purified urinary FSH: a prospective randomized clinical study. Clin Exp Obstet Gynecol 1999;26:93-94. (Pubitemid 29322121)
17. Aboulghar M, Saber W, Amin Y, Mansour R, Serour G. Prospective, randomized study comparing highly purified urinary follicle-stimulating hormone (FSH) and recombinant FSH for in vitro fertilization/intracytoplasmic sperm injection in patients with polycystic ovary syndrome. Fertil Steril. 2010;94(6):2332-2334.
18. Selman HA, De Santo M, Sterzik K, Coccia E, El-Danasouri I. Effect of highly purified urinary folliclestimulating hormone on oocyte and embryo quality. Fertil Steril 2002;78:1061-1067. (Pubitemid 35292509)
19. Selman H, Pacchiarotti A, El-Danasouri I. Ovarian stimulation protocols based on follicle-stimulating hormone glycosylation pattern: impact on oocyte quality and clinical outcome.
20. Mohamed MA, Sbracia M, Pacchiarotti A, Micara G, Linari A, Tranquilli D, Espinola SM, Aragona C. Urinary follicle-stimulating hormone (FSH) is more effective than recombinant FSH in older women in a controlled randomized study. Fertil Steril 2006;85:1398-1403.
21. Abate A, Nazzaro A, Salerno A, Marzano F, Pavone Cossut MR, Perino M. Efficacy of recombinant versus human derived follicle stimulating hormone on the oocyte and embryo quality in IVF-ICSI cycles: randomised, controlled, multi-centre trial. Gynecol Endocrinol 2009:1-6.
22. Aboulghar M, Saber W, Amin Y, Aboulghar M, Mansour R, Serour G. A prospective randomized study comparing highly purified urinary FSH and recombinant FSH for IVF/ICSI in patients with polycystic ovarian syndrome. In. Cairo: The Egyptian IVF-ET Center, 2009.
23. Grudzinskas G. Recent clinical evidence for selecting u-FSH or rFSH in ART. Fertil Steril 2006;86:S427-S428.
24. Bergh C, Howles CM, Borg K, Hamberger L, Josefsson B, Nilsson L, Wikland M. Recombinant human follicle stimulating hormone (r-hFSH; Gonal-F) versus highly purified urinary FSH (Metrodin HP): results of a randomized comparative study in women undergoing assisted reproductive techniques. Hum Reprod 1997;12:2133-2139. (Pubitemid 27494016)
25. Ferraretti AP, Gianaroli L, Magli MC, Feliciani E, Gergolet M, Fortini D. Recombinant FSH versus urinary FSH in non-down regulated poorly responding patients. In: 11th world congress of in vitro fertilization and human reproductive genetics, 1999. International Society for In Vitro Fertilization.
26. Franco JG, Jr., Baruffi RL, Coelho J, Mauri AL, Petersen CG, Garbellini E. A prospective and randomized study of ovarian stimulation for ICSI with recombinant FSH versus highly purified urinary FSH. Gynecol Endocrinol 2000;14:5-10. (Pubitemid 30198868)
27. Frydman R, Howles CM, Truong F. A double-blind, randomized study, compare recombinant human follicle stimulating hormone (FSH; Gonal-F) with highly purified urinary FSH (Metrodin) HP) in women undergoing assisted reproductive techniques including intracytoplasmic sperm injection. The french multicentre trialists. Hum Reprod 2000;15:520-525. (Pubitemid 30142355)
28. Germond M, De Palma R, Senn A, Inaudi P, Dessole S, De Grandi P. Recombinant versus highly purified urinary FSH to induce ovulation induction and pregnancies in women over 35 years in an IVF/ICSI programme. Hum Reprod 2000;16: (Abstract book), 46-47.
29. Ghosh S, Chattopadhyay R, Goswami S, Chakravarty BN. Recombinant FSH versus highly purified urinary FSH - our experience. In: 11th world congress of in vitro fertilization and human reproductive genetics, International Society for In Vitro Fertilization. 1999:264.
30. Hoomans EH, Andersen AN, Loft A, Leerentveld RA, van Kamp AA, Zech H. A prospective, randomized clinical trial comparing 150 IU recombinant follicle stimulating hormone (Puregon1) and 225 IU highly purified urinary follicle stimulating hormone (Metrodin-HP1) in a fixed-dose regimen in women undergoing ovarian stimulation. Hum Reprod 1999;14:2442-2447.
31. Hugues JN, Bry-Gauillard H, Bstandig B, Uzan M, Cedrin-Durnerin I. Comparison of recombinant and urinary follicle-stimulating hormone preparations in short-term gonadotropin releasing hormone agonist protocol for in vitro fertilization-embryo transfer. J Assist Reprod Genet 2001;18: 191-196. (Pubitemid 32574597)
32. Lenton E, Soltan A, Hewitt J, Thomson A, Davies W, Ashraf N, Sharma V, Jenner L, Ledger W, McVeigh E. Induction of ovulation in women undergoing assisted reproductive techniques: recombinant human FSH (follitropin alpha) versus highly purified urinary FSH (urofollitropin HP). Hum Reprod 2000;15:1021-1027. (Pubitemid 30251293)
33. Nardo LG, Bellanca SA, Messina K, Nardo F. Efficacy of recombinant follicle stimulating hormone versus urinary follicle stimulating hormone in in-vitro fertilization: a prospective, randomized, assessor-blind study. Ital J Gynaecol Obstet 2000;12:44-53.
34. Schats R, Sutter PD, Bassil S, Kremer JA, Tournaye H, Donnez J. Ovarian stimulation during assisted reproduction treatment: a comparison of recombinant and highly purified urinary human FSH. On behalf of the Feronia and Apis study group. Hum Reprod 2000;15:1691-1697. (Pubitemid 30636054)
35. Chen X-N, Lu GX, Yan JM, Chen ZJ, Xiao HM, Chen G. An open, prospective, randomized, multicenter study, compare recombinant human follicle stimulating hormone (rec-FSH; follitropin-beta; Puregon (R) solution) with highly purified urinary FSH (uFSH, urofollitropin (highly purified), Metrodin (R) HP) in Chinese women undergoing in vitro fertilization (IVF). Fertil Steril 2004;82:s228.
36. Daya S. Updated meta-analysis of recombinant folliclestimulating hormone (FSH) versus urinary FSH for ovarian stimulation in assisted reproduction. Fertil Steril 2002;77: 711-714. (Pubitemid 34275349)
37. Daya S, Gunby J. Recombinant versus urinary follicle stimulating hormone for ovarian stimulation in assisted reproduction. Hum Reprod 1999;14:2207-2215. (Pubitemid 29425401)
38. Bayram N, van Wely M, Van der Veen F. Recombinant FSH versus urinary gonadotrophins or recombinant FSH for ovulation induction in subfertility associated with polycystic ovary syndrome. In: Cochrane database of systematic reviews. Chichester, UK: John Wiley & Sons, Ltd, 2001.
39. D'Antonio M, Borrelli F, Datola A, Bucci R, Mascia M, Polletta P, Piscitelli D, Papoian R. Biological characterization of recombinant human follicle stimulating hormone isoforms. Hum Reprod 1999;14:1160-1167. (Pubitemid 29224883)
40. Baird DT. Is there a place for different isoforms of FSH in clinical medicine? IV. The clinician's point of view. Hum Reprod 2001;16:1316-1318. (Pubitemid 32640300)
41. Lambert A, Talbot JA, Anobile CJ, Robertson WR. Gonadotrophin heterogeneity and biopotency: implications for assisted reproduction. Mol Hum Reprod 1998;4: 619-629.
42. Nayudu PL, Vitt UA, Barrios De Tomasi J, Pancharatna K, Ulloa-Aguirre A. Intact follicle culture: what it can tell us about the roles of FSH glycoforms during follicle development. Reprod Biomed Online 2002;5:240-253.
43. McAlister FA, Laupacis A, Wells GA, Sackett DL. Users' Guides, the Medical Literature: XIX. Applying clinical trial results B. Guidelines for determining whether a drug is exerting (more than) a class effect. JAMA 1999;282:1371-1377. (Pubitemid 29483196)