Skip Navigation

This Article
Right arrow Full Text Freely available
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF ) Freely available
Right arrow Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Search for citing articles in:
ISI Web of Science (25)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Schats, R.
Right arrow Articles by study group, o. b. o. T. F. a. A.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Schats, R.
Right arrow Articles by study group, o. b. o. T. F. a. A.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

Human Reproduction, Vol. 15, No. 8, 1691-1697, August 2000
© 2000 European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology

Ovarian stimulation during assisted reproduction treatment: a comparison of recombinant and highly purified urinary human FSH

R. Schats1,7, P.De Sutter2, S. Bassil3,6, J.A.M. Kremer4, H. Tournaye5, J. Donnez3 and on behalf of The Feronia Apis study group

1 Academic Hospital `Vrije Universiteit' Amsterdam, Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Subdivision of Reproductive Endocrinology and Fertility/IVF Centre, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2 Centre for Infertility, University Hospital, De Pintelaan 185, B-9000 Gent, Belgium, 3 Catholic University of Louvain, Faculty of Medicine, Department of Gynaecology, St Luc's University Hospital, Avenue Hippocrate 10, 1200 Brussels, Belgium, 4 Academic Hospital St Radboud, Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, G. Grooteplein Zuid 16, 6525 GA Nijmegen, The Netherlands, and 5 Centre for Reproductive Medicine, University Hospital of the Dutch speaking Brussels Free University, Laarbeeklaan 101, B-1090 Brussels, Belgium

This randomized, single-blind, multicentre, multinational study compared recombinant human FSH (rhFSH, Gonal-F®) with highly purified urinary human FSH (uhFSH, Metrodin HP®) in women undergoing ovarian stimulation for IVF/intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI). Following desensitization in a long gonadotrophin-releasing hormone (GnRH) agonist protocol, patients received s.c. Gonal-F® or Metrodin HP®, at a fixed dose of 150 IU, until there was adequate follicular development. Of 496 women randomized, 232 and 231 in the Gonal-F® and Metrodin HP® groups respectively received human chorionic gonadotrophin (HCG). The duration of FSH treatment was significantly shorter with Gonal-F® than with Metrodin HP® (11.6 ± 1.9 days versus 12.4 ± 2.7 days; P < 0.0001) and significantly fewer ampoules were required (mean 22.6 ± 5.0 versus 24.3 ± 5.1, P < 0.0002). There were, however, significantly more follicles >=10 mm in diameter with Gonal-F® (15.6 ± 8.2 versus 13.6 ± 7.1, P < 0.01) and oocytes retrieved (13.1 ± 7.7 versus 11.4 ± 7.6, P < 0.002). Although no statistical difference in pregnancy rate was recorded, patients receiving Gonal-F® had a higher pregnancy rate per cycle than patients given Metrodin HP® (25.1 versus 20.1%). Moderate to severe ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome occurred in 2.8 and 1.2% of Gonal-F® and Metrodin HP® patients respectively (not significant). In conclusion, FSH stimulation in combination with a long GnRH agonist protocol is effective in inducing multiple follicular development and embryos with a high implantation potential. However, Gonal-F® is clearly more effective than Metrodin HP® in inducing multifollicular development.

Key words: highly purified uhFSH/ICSI/IVF/multiple follicular development/rhFSH

6 Present address: Maternité Grande Duchesse Charlotte, Rue Barblé 4, L-1210 Luxembourg

7 To whom correspondence should be addressed at: Academic Hospital `Vrije Universiteit' Amsterdam, Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Subdivision: Reproductive Endocrinology and Fertility/IVF Centre, De Boelelaan 1117, 1081 HV Amsterdam, The Netherlands. E-mail: r.schats{at}azvu.nl


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Hum ReprodHome page
H. Al-Inany, M. Aboulghar, R. Mansour, and G. Serour
Meta-analysis of recombinant versus urinary-derived FSH: an update
Hum. Reprod., February 1, 2003; 18(2): 305 - 313.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Hum ReprodHome page
S.J. Dyer
Bye-bye urinary gonadotrophins?: The conflict between effective and affordable health care--a perspective from the developing world
Hum. Reprod., July 1, 2002; 17(7): 1680 - 1683.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Hum ReprodHome page
J.E.F. Zwart-van Rijkom, F.J. Broekmans, and H.G.M. Leufkens
From HMG through purified urinary FSH preparations to recombinant FSH: a substitution study
Hum. Reprod., April 1, 2002; 17(4): 857 - 865.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Hum ReprodHome page
P. R. Casson, J. E. Buster, and S. A. Carson
Augmentation of ovarian response by dehydroepiandrosterone
Hum. Reprod., July 1, 2001; 16(7): 1538 - 1539.
[Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Hum ReprodHome page
H.G.I. van Weering, D.R. Gutknecht, and R. Schats
Augmentation of ovarian response by dehydroepiandrosterone
Hum. Reprod., July 1, 2001; 16(7): 1537 - 1538.
[Full Text] [PDF]


Disclaimer:
Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.