Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

CLINICAL ASSISTED REPRODUCTION: Comparison of Recombinant and Urinary Follicle-Stimulating Hormone Preparations in Short-Term Gonadotropin Releasing Hormone Agonist Protocol for In Vitro Fertilization-Embryo Transfer

  • Published:
Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose: To compare the efficiency and efficacy of two recombinant human FSH (r-FSH) and urinary (u-FSH) preparations in patients undergoing superovulation for IVF-ET using a short-term gonadotropin releasing hormone agonist (GnRH-a) (Triptorelin) protocol.

Methods: A total of 88 women undergoing IVF-ET were included in this prospective study. They were randomized to receive u-FSH (150 IU/d), follitropin-α (100 IU/d), or follitropin-β (100 IU/d) for 2 days, and dosages were subsequently adjusted according to the ovarian response.

Results: The FSH dose required for the overall stimulation was significantly lower in patients treated with r-FSH than in those treated with u-FSH while serum FSH values were higher in the latter group. There were no statistically significant differences in ovarian response and IVF outcome between r-FSH preparations.

Conclusions: Recombinant FSH preparations have a higher efficiency than urinary ones in patients undergoing IVF-ET using a short-term GnRH-a protocol. In this situation, the two recombinant follitropins have comparable effectiveness.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

REFERENCES

  1. Howles CM: Genetic engineering of human FSH (Gonal F). Hum Reprod Update 1996;2:172-191

    Google Scholar 

  2. Out HJ, Driessen SG, Mannaerts BM, Coelingh Bennink HJ: Recombinant follicle-stimulating hormone (follitropin beta, Puregon) yields higher pregnancy rates in in vitro fertilization than urinary gonadotropins. Fertil Steril 1997;68:138-142

    Google Scholar 

  3. Bergh C, Howles CM, Borg K, Hamberger L, Josefsson B, Nilsson L, Wikland M: Recombinant human follicle stimulating hormone (r-FSH; 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

    Google Scholar 

  4. Daya S, Gunby J: Recombinant versus urinary follicle stimulating hormone for ovarian stimulation in assisted reproduction. Hum Reprod 1999;14:2207-2215

    Google Scholar 

  5. Hedon B, Hugues JN, Emperaire JC, Chabaud JJ, Barbereau D, Boujenah A, Howles CM, Truong F: A comparative prospective study of a chronic low dose versus a conventional ovulation stimulation regimen using recombinant human follicle stimulating hormone in anovulatory infertile women. Hum Reprod 1998;13:2688-2692

    Google Scholar 

  6. Coelingh Bennink HJ, Fauser BC, Out HJ: Recombinant follicle-stimulating hormone (FSH; Puregon) is more efficient than urinary FSH (Metrodin) in women with clomiphene citrate-resistant, normogonadotropic, chronic anovulation: A prospective, multicenter, assessor-blind, randomized, clinical trial. European Puregon Collaborative Anovulation Study Group. Fertil Steril 1998;69:19-25

    Google Scholar 

  7. Raga F, Bonnilla-Musoles F, Casan EM, Bonilla F: Recombinant follicle stimulating hormone stimulation in poor responders with normal basal concentrations of follicle stimulating hormone and oestradiol: Improved reproductive outcome. Hum Reprod 1999;14:1431-1434

    Google Scholar 

  8. Loumaye E, Dreano M, Galazka, Howles C, Ham L, Manufo A, Eshbol A, Gudice E, DeLuca E, Sirna A, Antonetti F, Giartosio CE, Scaglia L, Kelton C, Campbell R, Chappel S, Duthu B, Cymbalista S, Lepage P: Recombinant follicle stimulating hormone: Development of the first biotechnology product for the treatment of infertility. Hum Reprod Update 1998;4:862-881

    Google Scholar 

  9. 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 (Puregon®) and 225 IU highly purified urinary follicle stimulating hormone (Metrodin-HP®) in a fixed-dose regimen in women undergoing ovarian stimulation. Hum Reprod 1999;14:2442-2447

    Google Scholar 

  10. Tulppala, M, Aho M, Tuuri T, Vilska S, Foudila T, Hakala-Ala-Pietilä T, Moilanen J, Bützow T, Kaukoranta S, Söderström-Anitila V, Siegberg R, Suikkari AM, Hovatta O: Comparison of two recombinant follicle-stimulating hormone preparations in in-vitro fertilization:Arandomized clinical study. HumReprod 1999;11:2709-2715

    Google Scholar 

  11. Brinsden, P, Akagbosu F, Gibbons LM, Lancaster S, Gourdon D, Engrand P, Loumaye E: A comparison of the efficacy and tolerability of two recombinant human follicle-stimulating hormone preparations in patients undergoing in vitro fertilization-embryo transfer. Fertil Steril 2000;73:114-116

    Google Scholar 

  12. Harlin, J, Csemiczky G, Wramsby H, Fried G: Recombinant follicle stimulating hormone in in-vitro fertilization treatment-clinical experience with follitropin alpha and follitropin beta. Hum Reprod 2000;15:239-244.

    Google Scholar 

  13. The European Recombinant human LH study group: Recombinant human luteinizing hormone (LH) to support recombinant human follicle-stimulating hormone (FSH)-induced follicular development in LH and FSH-deficient anovulatory women: A dose-finding study. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 1998;83:1507-1514

    Google Scholar 

  14. CPMP Working Party on Efficacy of Medical Products: Good clinical practice for trial on medicinal products in the European Community. Pharmacol. Toxicol. 1990;67:361-372

    Google Scholar 

  15. Philips, E, Page M, Fleming SD: A prospective comparison of two different recombinant FSH preparations. Abstract Book of the 11th World Congress on In Vitro Fertilization and Human Reproductive Genetics 1999;88 (Abstract 0-053)

  16. Von During, V, Kahn JA, Sunde, Kjotrod SB, Vainio T: Results of a prospective randomized study comparing two recombinant FSH preparations (Gonal F, Puregon) in IVF and ICSI treatments. Abstract Book of the 11th World Congress on In Vitro Fertilization and Human Reproductive Genetics 1999;265 (Abstract P-199)

  17. Olijve, W, de Boer W, Mulders JWM, van Wezenbeek PNGF: Molecular biology and biochemistry of human recombinant follicle stimulating hormone (Puregon). Mol Hum Reprod 1996;5:371-382

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Reproductive Medecine Unit. Department of Gynaecology and Obstetrics, University Paris XIII, France

    Jean-Noël Hugues, Helene Bry-Gauillard, Bettina Bständig, Michele Uzan & Isabelle Cedrin-Durnerin

Authors
  1. Jean-Noël Hugues
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Helene Bry-Gauillard
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Bettina Bständig
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Michele Uzan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Isabelle Cedrin-Durnerin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Hugues, JN., Bry-Gauillard, H., Bständig, B. et al. CLINICAL ASSISTED REPRODUCTION: 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 18, 193–198 (2001). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1009408029509

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1009408029509

Search

Navigation