Skip Navigation



Hum. Reprod. Advance Access published online on March 14, 2006

Human Reproduction, doi:10.1093/humrep/del030
This Article
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF ) Freely available
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
21/6/1408    most recent
del030v1
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 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 arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Huirne, J.A.
Right arrow Articles by Lambalk, C.B.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Huirne, J.A.
Right arrow Articles by Lambalk, C.B.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© The Author 2006. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oxfordjournals.org
Received October 24, 2005
Revised January 1, 2006
Accepted January 11, 2006

Article

Cetrorelix in an oral contraceptive-pretreated stimulation cycle compared with buserelin in IVF/ICSI patients treated with r-hFSH: a randomized, multicentre, phase IIIb study

J.A. Huirne 1, J.N. Hugues 2, C. Pirard 3, F. Fischl 4, J.C. Sage 5, J.L. Pouly 6, A. Obruca 7, D.M. Braat 8, A.C.D. van Loenen 1, and C.B. Lambalk 1 *

1 Division of Reproductive Medicine, Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Vrije Universiteit Medical Centre, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
2 Hôpital Jean Verdier, Reproductive Medicine Center, University Paris XIII, Paris, France
3 Universite Catholique de Louvain, Cliniques Universitaires Saint-Luc, Bruxelles, Belgium
4 Allgemeines Krankenhaus, Universitätsklinik für Frauenheilkunde Abteilung Gynäkologischen Endocrinologie und Reproduktions Medicin Spitalgasse 23, Vienna, Austria
5 Tour Belledonne, Boulevard Maréchal Leclerc 23, Grenoble
6 Polyclinique Hotel Dieu, Boulevard Charles-de-Gaulle 13, Clermont-Ferrand, France
7 Kinderwunschzentrum Wien, Lazarettgasse 16-18, Vienna, Austria
8 University Hospital Nijmegen, AZ St Radboud, Obstetrecs-Gynaecology, Geert Grootenplein Zuid 1b, GA Nijmegen, The Netherlands

* To whom correspondence should be addressed.
C.B. Lambalk, E-mail: cb.lambalk{at}vumc.nl


   Abstract

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to assess the non-inferiority of an oral contraceptive (OC)-pretreated cetrorelix regimen and a buserelin regimen in IVF/ICSI patients treated with r-hFSH in terms of total number of oocytes retrieved. METHODS: Multicentre, randomized study. One hundred and eighty two patients were randomized to receive cetrorelix with OC pretreatment (n = 91) or to receive buserelin (n = 91). The cetrorelix group started with daily OCs on cycle day 5 and continued for 21-28 days. Cetrorelix (0.25 mg) was given daily from stimulation day 6 up to and including the day of r-hCG administration. The buserelin group started with buserelin (500 µg/day) for at least 10 days until down-regulation was achieved, after which the dose was reduced to daily 200 µg up to and including the day of r-hCG administration. r-hFSH was started in both groups on a Friday, in the cetrorelix group 5 days after the last OC pill intake. Both regimens were followed by a standard IVF or ICSI procedure. The primary efficacy endpoint was the number of oocytes retrieved per patient. RESULTS: Number of oocytes, cancellation rates, r-hFSH requirements, number of oocyte retrievals during the weekend or public holiday and number of pregnancies were similar in both groups. Both treatment regimens were well tolerated. CONCLUSIONS: Cetrorelix pretreated with OCs resulted in similar number of oocytes retrieved compared with a long buserelin protocol. Both regimens were well tolerated and allowed scheduling of the oocyte retrieval, with only small number of retrievals falling on a weekend or public holiday.

Keywords: GnRH agonist/GnRH antagonist/IVF/oral contraceptive/programming.
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
J.A. Huirne, R. Homburg, and C.B. Lambalk
Are GnRH antagonists comparable to agonists for use in IVF?
Hum. Reprod., November 1, 2007; 22(11): 2805 - 2813.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Hum ReprodHome page
I. Cedrin-Durnerin, B. Bstandig, I. Parneix, V. Bied-Damon, C. Avril, C. Decanter, and J.N. Hugues
Effects of oral contraceptive, synthetic progestogen or natural estrogen pre-treatments on the hormonal profile and the antral follicle cohort before GnRH antagonist protocol
Hum. Reprod., January 1, 2007; 22(1): 109 - 116.
[Abstract] [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.