Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Randomized Controlled Trial
. 2009 Apr;91(4):1005-11.
doi: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2008.01.064. Epub 2008 Mar 25.

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

Affiliations
Free article
Randomized Controlled Trial

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

Valerie L Baker et al. Fertil Steril. 2009 Apr.
Free article

Abstract

Objective: To compare the efficacy of highly purified human urinary follicle stimulating hormone (HP-hFSH) versus human recombinant follitropin-alpha (rFSH) in volunteers undergoing controlled ovarian stimulation for IVF.

Design: A randomized, controlled, investigator-blind trial.

Setting: Four assisted reproductive technology centers.

Patient(s): One hundred fifty-two IVF patients.

Intervention(s): Volunteers, aged 18-39, were randomized to HP-hFSH (n = 76) versus rFSH (n = 76) at a starting dose of 300 IU in down-regulated cycles.

Main outcome measure(s): Number of oocytes, clinical pregnancy rate, and live birth rate with HP-hFSH versus rFSH.

Result(s): The total IU of gonadotropin used did not differ between the two groups. There was no difference in number of oocytes retrieved with HP-hFSH (mean = 16.3) compared with rFSH (mean = 17.1), confidence interval (CI) of difference = -3.79 to +2.18. Clinical pregnancy rate, as defined by the presence of a gestational sac, was 48.7% (CI = 37.0%-60.4%) with HP-hFSH versus 44.7% (CI = 33.3%-56.6%) with rFSH (CI of difference = -11.9% to +19.8%). Live birth rate was 38.2% (29 of 76) in both groups (CI = 27.2%-50.0%), for a difference between groups of 0.0% (CI of the difference = -15.4% to +15.4%).

Conclusion(s): There were no statistically significant differences in mean oocyte number, clinical pregnancy rate, or live birth rate between HP-hFSH versus rFSH.

PubMed Disclaimer

Similar articles

Cited by

Publication types