A prospective, randomized, assessor-blind, multicentre study comparing recombinant and urinary follicle stimulating hormone (Puregon versus Metrodin) in in-vitro fertilization
- PMID: 8567765
- DOI: 10.1093/oxfordjournals.humrep.a135740
A prospective, randomized, assessor-blind, multicentre study comparing recombinant and urinary follicle stimulating hormone (Puregon versus Metrodin) in in-vitro fertilization
Abstract
Urinary follicle stimulating hormone (FSH) is being used for the treatment of human infertility. Recently, FSH manufactured by means of recombinant DNA technology with a much higher purity (> 99%) has become available. A prospective, randomized, assessor-blind, multicentre (n = 18) study was conducted in infertile women undergoing in-vitro fertilization comparing recombinant FSH (Org 32489, Puregon) and urinary FSH (Metrodin). Eligible subjects were randomized (recombinant versus urinary FSH = 3:2) and pretreated with buserelin for pituitary suppression. FSH was given until three or more follicles with a diameter of at least 17 mm were seen. After oocyte retrieval, fertilization routines were applied according to local procedures. No more than three embryos were replaced. In all, 585 subjects received recombinant FSH and 396 urinary FSH. Significantly more oocytes were retrieved after recombinant FSH treatment (mean adjusted for centre 10.84 versus 8.95, P < 0.0001). Ongoing pregnancy rates per attempt and transfer in the recombinant FSH group were 22.17 and 25.97% respectively, and in the urinary FSH group, 18.22 and 22.02% respectively (not significant). Ongoing pregnancy rates including pregnancies resulting from frozen-thawed embryo cycles were 25.7% for recombinant and 20.4% for urinary FSH (P = 0.05). Compared to urinary FSH, the total dose of FSH was significantly lower with recombinant FSH (2138 versus 2385 IU, P < 0.0001) in a significantly shorter treatment period (10.7 versus 11.3 days, P < 0.0001). No clinically relevant differences between recombinant and urinary FSH were seen with respect to safety variables. It is concluded that recombinant FSH (Puregon) is more effective than urinary FSH in inducing multifollicular development and achieving an ongoing pregnancy.
Similar articles
-
Efficacy and safety of recombinant follicle stimulating hormone (Puregon) in infertile women pituitary-suppressed with triptorelin undergoing in-vitro fertilization: a prospective, randomized, assessor-blind, multicentre trial.Hum Reprod. 1995 Dec;10(12):3102-6. doi: 10.1093/oxfordjournals.humrep.a135866. Hum Reprod. 1995. PMID: 8822422 Clinical Trial.
-
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 Jan;69(1):19-25. doi: 10.1016/s0015-0282(97)00423-8. Fertil Steril. 1998. PMID: 9457926 Clinical Trial.
-
A prospective, randomized clinical trial comparing 150 IU recombinant follicle stimulating hormone (Puregon((R))) and 225 IU highly purified urinary follicle stimulating hormone (Metrodin-HP((R))) in a fixed-dose regimen in women undergoing ovarian stimulation.Hum Reprod. 1999 Oct;14(10):2442-7. doi: 10.1093/humrep/14.10.2442. Hum Reprod. 1999. PMID: 10527965 Clinical Trial.
-
Recombinant follicle stimulating hormone (rFSH; Puregon) in assisted reproduction: more oocytes, more pregnancies. Results from five comparative studies.Hum Reprod Update. 1996 Mar-Apr;2(2):162-71. doi: 10.1093/humupd/2.2.162. Hum Reprod Update. 1996. PMID: 9079411 Review.
-
What are the clinical benefits of recombinant gonadotrophins?: the development of recombinant FSH (Puregon((R))): a scientific business.Hum Reprod. 1999 Sep;14(9):2189-90. doi: 10.1093/humrep/14.9.2189. Hum Reprod. 1999. PMID: 10469679 Review. No abstract available.
Cited by
-
A Narrative Review Discussing the Efficiency of Personalized Dosing Algorithm of Follitropin Delta for Ovarian Stimulation and the Reproductive and Clinical Outcomes.Diagnostics (Basel). 2023 Jan 4;13(2):177. doi: 10.3390/diagnostics13020177. Diagnostics (Basel). 2023. PMID: 36672987 Free PMC article. Review.
-
Cost-effectiveness of recombinant versus urinary follicle-stimulating hormone in assisted reproduction techniques in the Spanish public health care system.J Assist Reprod Genet. 2003 Aug;20(8):294-300. doi: 10.1023/a:1024899806149. J Assist Reprod Genet. 2003. PMID: 12948090 Free PMC article.
-
Statistical flaws in design and analysis of fertility treatment -studies on cryopreservation raise doubts on the conclusions.Facts Views Vis Obgyn. 2011;3(4):273-80. Facts Views Vis Obgyn. 2011. PMID: 24753877 Free PMC article.
-
The therapeutic effects of rFSH versus uFSH/uHMG on ovarian stimulation in women undergoing assisted reproductive technology: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2024 Jun;309(6):2529-2555. doi: 10.1007/s00404-023-07095-5. Epub 2023 Jul 20. Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2024. PMID: 37470817
-
Controlled ovarian stimulation protocols for assisted reproduction: a network meta-analysis.Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2025 Jul 1;7(7):CD012586. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD012586.pub2. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2025. PMID: 40590303 Review.
Publication types
MeSH terms
Substances
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources
Medical