Understanding the role of LH: myths and facts

Cumulus cell microRNA expression when LH is added to the ovarian stimulation protocol: a pilot study

RESEARCH QUESTION

Recombinant FSH administration in ovarian stimulation for IVF is a standard procedure, whereas the role of LH is controversial. MicroRNAs (mRNA) are small endogenous non-coding transcripts that are involved in the regulation of many cellular processes, including foliculogenesis and gonadotrophin function. The aim was to study the possible role of miRNA in ovarian follicular development in groups having different ovarian stimulation protocols. Are there different miRNA expression profiles in cumulus cells of infertile women undergoing IVF? What are the regulated pathways?

DESIGN

This prospective observational study included 13 patients who fulfilled the following inclusion criteria: younger than 38 years of age; a tubal infertility factor; a male factor; or idiopathic infertility. This is a pilot study in which the patients were aleatory enrolled into two groups: seven in FSH group (recombinant FSH, 225 IU) and six in FSH plus LH group (recombinant FSH, 150 IU + recombinant LH, 75 IU). The granulosa cells obtained from the follicular ovarian retrieval were analysed using polyerase chain reaction. Results were analysed using DIANA Tools, an online bioinformatics tool.

RESULTS

Among the 84 microRNAs evaluated, 11 were differentially expressed between the groups, all of which were upregulated in the FSH plus LH group, compared with the FSH group. Differentially expressed miRNA profiles are related to oestrogen signalling, oocyte meiosis and pluripotent cells regulation.

CONCLUSION

miRNA overexpression in the FSH plus LH group is consistent with the independent and fundamental role of LH in folliculogenesis, leading to a distinct molecular response between groups.

Supplementation with human menopausal gonadotropin in the gonadotropin-releasing hormone antagonist cycles of women with high AMH: Pregnancy outcomes and serial hormone levels

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the value of using both HMG and recombinant FSH (r-FSH) in the GnRH antagonist protocol for women with high AMH.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This retrospective, single-center cohort study was conducted from January 2013 to December 2018. Of 277 GnRH antagonist IVF/ICSI cycles in women with anti-Mullerian hormone (AMH) ≥5 μg/L, 170 cycles receiving the combination of r-FSH and HMG (77 with HMG added at the beginning of the GnRH antagonist cycle and 93 with HMG added after GnRH antagonist administration) and 107 cycles receiving r-FSH alone were analyzed. The dynamic hormone profiles and embryonic and clinical outcomes of the patients were evaluated.

RESULTS

We observed significantly lower serum LH levels in the r-FSH + HMG groups during ovarian stimulation. The serum estradiol and progesterone levels were lower in the r-FSH + HMG groups on the trigger day. Nevertheless, there were no significant differences with respect to the number of oocytes retrieved, maturation, fertilization, blastocyst formation rate or ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS). The implantation and live birth rates were increased in the r-FSH + HMG groups compared with the r-FSH alone group, with no statistical significance.

CONCLUSIONS

HMG for LH supplementation in the GnRH antagonist protocol for patients with high AMH is not significantly superior to r-FSH alone in terms of ovarian response and pregnancy outcome. Nevertheless, HMG supplementation might be appropriate for women with an initially inadequate response to r-FSH or intracycle LH deficiency.

Patients With Deep Ovarian Suppression Following GnRH Agonist Long Protocol May Benefit From a Modified GnRH Antagonist Protocol: A Retrospective Cohort Study

OBJECTIVE

To verify if patients with deep ovarian suppression following gonadotropin releasing hormone (GnRH) agonist long protocol may benefit from a modified GnRH antagonist protocol based on luteinizing hormone (LH) levels.

DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study.

SETTING

University-based hospital.

PATIENTS

110 patients exhibited ultra-low LH levels during ovarian stimulation using GnRH agonist long protocol.

INTERVENTIONS

As all the embryos in the first cycle were exhausted without being pregnant, these patients proposed to undergo a second cycle of ovarian stimulation. 74 of them were treated with a modified GnRH antagonist protocol based on LH levels. Other 36 patients were still stimulated following GnRH agonist long protocol.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE

The primary outcome was live birth rate (LBR). The second outcomes were biochemical pregnancy rate, clinical pregnancy rate (CPR), ongoing pregnancy rate (OPR) and cancellation rate.

RESULTS

Reproductive outcomes were much better in the modified GnRH antagonist protocol. The OPR and LBR were much higher in the GnRH antagonist protocol group than in the GnRH agonist long protocol group [odds ratio (OR) 3.82, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.47, 10.61, P=0.018; OR 4.33, 95% CI 1.38, 13.60, P=0.008; respectively]. Meanwhile, the cancellation rate was much lower in the GnRH antagonist protocol group (OR 0.13, 95% CI 0.02, 0.72; P=0.014). Mean LH level during stimulation did not have a predictive value on live birth. However, it was independently associated with the occurrence of ongoing pregnancy (OR 2.70, 95% CI 1.25, 5.85; P=0.01). The results of sensitivity analyses were consistent with the data mentioned above. The patients got completely different and excellent clinical outcomes in their second cycles stimulated with the modified GnRH antagonist protocol.

CONCLUSION

Patients with deep ovarian suppression following GnRH agonist long protocol may benefit from a modified GnRH antagonist protocol based on LH levels.

Human Menopausal Gonadotropin Commenced on Early Follicular Period Increases Live Birth Rates in POSEIDON Group 3 and 4 Poor Responders

Human menopausal gonadotropin (hMG) has LH activity, and it may have beneficial effects in terms of oocyte quality and endometrial receptivity similar to recombinant LH supplementation. The aim of this study was to assess the effects of hMG, and its commencement time on the outcome of assisted reproductive technology (ART) cycles of POSEIDON group 3 and 4 poor responders. Data of 558 POSEIDON group 3 and 4 poor responders who underwent ART treatment following a GnRH antagonist cycle at a university-based infertility clinic between January 2014 and December 2019 were reviewed. hMG was commenced at the early follicular phase or mid-follicular phase in the study groups. The control group did not receive hMG stimulation. Live birth rate (LBR) was the main outcome measure. The mean duration of stimulation was significantly shorter in early follicular hMG group than in mid-follicular hMG group (11.9 ± 3.6 days vs. 12.8 ± 4 days, respectively; P = 0.027). The mean numbers of oocytes retrieved and MII oocytes were comparable between the groups. The LBRs per embryo transfer in early follicular hMG, mid-follicular hMG, and control groups were 21.9%, 11.7%, and 11.6%, respectively (P = 0.035). In conclusion, there is a significant association between the commencement time of hMG and live birth chance in ART cycles of POSEIDON group 3 and 4 poor responders. Early initiation of hMG together with rFSH seems to be beneficial in this specific population.

The impact of adding hp-hMG in r-FSH started GnRH antagonist cycles on ART outcome

While luteinizing hormone (LH) activity is believed to play a role in follicle maturation, human chorionic gonadotropin (hCG) might play an important role in implantation process. We aimed to investigate whether addition of human menopausal gonadotropin (hMG) in recombinant-follicle-stimulating hormone (r-FSH) started GnRH antagonist controlled ovarian hyperstimulation (COH) cycles might enhance implantation rate and improve in vitro fertilization (IVF) success. A total of 246 patients undergoing GnRH antagonist IVF cycles were analyzed. One hundred and twenty-three cycles (%50) were treated with only r-FSH and 123 cycles were treated with r-FSH plus hp-hMG combination. Total gonadotropin doses, total number of oocytes retrieved, metaphase 2 (MII) oocytes, top quality embryos, fertilization and implantation rates, clinical pregnancy rates (CPRs) and ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS) rates were compared between the groups. Both groups were comparable in terms of demographic details and baseline characteristics. Peak estradiol and progesterone levels in hCG trigger day, number of retrieved oocytes and top quality embryo counts, fertilization rates were similar between the groups. In r-FSH + hp-hMG group, significantly higher implantation rates (35.3% vs 24.3%, p=.017), CPRs (51.2% vs 35.8%, p=.015) and lower OHSS rates (1.6% vs 7.4%, p = .03) were observed respectively compared to r-FSH only treated patients. In conclusion, addition of hp-hMG on the day of antagonist initiation might increase CPRs. A better endometrial receptivity associated with higher implantation rates might be achieved due to hCG component in hp-hMG.

Luteinizing hormone changes in gonadotropin-releasing hormone antagonist protocol in in vitro fertilization cycles: A cross-sectional study

Background

Because of the unexpected and often dramatic inhibition of luteinizing hormone (LH) secretion related with the usage of gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH)-antagonist, there has been a probable need for exogenous LH supplementation. There is a basic and clinical evidences that show late development of follicle needs an LH but there is a threshold for LH requirements during folliculogenesis.

Objective

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the changes in serum LH and the identification of patients who benefit from the addition of LH.

Materials and Methods

Seventy volunteers for antagonist protocol in IVF cycle were enrolled in this prospective cross-sectional study. The study was carried out in Reproductive Health Research Center, University of Medical Sciences between July 2016 and February 2016. Serum LH level was estimated 24 h before and after the first (GnRH) antagonist injection. The primary outcome was the serum level of LH and its change in the three groups and the secondary outcome was Egg and Embryo quality.

Results

LH changes above or below 50% had no effect on the number of follicle, the number of oocyte, Germinal vesicle oocyte, metaphase 1 oocyte, metaphase 2 oocyte, endometrial thickness, and chemical and clinical pregnancy.

Conclusion

We evaluated the changes of serum LH in the patients who were entered in the antagonist protocol. Our study showed no significant difference in LH levels 24 h before and after the injection of the antagonist between the three groups, and LH changes did not affect the outcome of pregnancy.

Clinical outcomes following long GnRHa ovarian stimulation with highly purified human menopausal gonadotropin plus rFSH or rFSH in patients undergoing in vitro fertilization-embryo transfer: a multi-center randomized controlled trial

Background

This clinical trial aimed to compare the clinical efficacy of highly purified human menopausal gonadotropin (HP-HMG) plus recombinant human follicle-stimulating hormone (rFSH) versus rFSH alone on controlled ovarian stimulation (COS) in vitro fertilization-embryo transfer (IVF-ET).

Methods

A total of 610 women underwent long gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) agonist protocol for IVF treatment. The subjects were randomized into 2 groups: HP-HMG + rFSH group (n=305) and rFSH group (n=305). The main outcome was the progesterone (P) level on the day of HCG injection.

Results

There was no significant difference in terms of the demographic and baseline characters between the two groups. In rFSH group, the P level on the day of HCG trigger were significantly higher than that of HP-HMG+rFSH group (4.3±2.2 vs. 3.8±1.7 nmol/L, P<0.001). The fertilization rate in rFSH group was significantly lower than that of HP-HMG + rFSH group (69.2% vs. 73.9%, P<0.001). Simultaneously, the percentage of cycles with fresh embryo transfer in rFSH group was also significantly lower than that of HP-HMG + rFSH group (49.6% vs. 57.5%, P=0.007). However, there was no difference in terms of cleavage rate, implantation rate, clinical pregnancy rate and ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS) rate between two groups.

Conclusions

The use of combined HP-HMG with FSH may be superior to rFSH alone in stimulating the ovary in normal responders undergoing IVF treatment. Furthermore, the further prospective studies with large sample are still needed to confirm the study.

Implantation rates subsequent to the transfer of embryos produced at different phases during double stimulation of poor ovarian responders

To compare the implantation capacity of embryos obtained at different phases of double stimulation (DS) of poor ovarian responders, 153 DS cycles were analysed retrospectively. As part of the DS protocol, antral follicles were stimulated continuously during both the follicular and luteal phases. Fresh embryos obtained in both phases were cryopreserved and transferred in the next artificial cycle. The mean number of oocytes retrieved, MII oocytes and zygotes with two pronuclei was significantly higher for collections during luteal-phase stimulation. Furthermore, the dose of exogenous gonadotropin administered was higher during the luteal phase. The rate of clinical pregnancy and embryo implantation increased progressively from pure follicular phase embryos to mixed embryos to pure luteal phase embryos. Embryos produced during the luteal phase resulted in higher implantation rates.

Luteinizing Hormone Facilitates Antral Follicular Maturation and Survival via Thecal Paracrine Signaling in Cattle

LH supplementation in assisted reproductive technology cycles improves the ongoing pregnancy rate in women with poor ovarian response (POR). However, our knowledge of the precise role of LH during the follicular phase of the menstrual cycle is incomplete. To explore the role of LH in the maturation of small antral follicles, we used an in vitro two-cell system that involved coculturing bovine granulosa cells (GCs) and theca cells (TCs) on a collagen membrane. Treatment of TCs with LH stimulated androgen production in TCs by inducing the expression of androgenic factors, subsequently increasing estrogen biosynthesis in GCs by providing androgen substrates, and inducing aromatase expression. LH stimulation of TCs induced functional LH receptor expression in GCs, a response modulated by the synthesis and action of estrogen. In the presence of TCs, LH stimulation of TCs and FSH stimulation of GCs increased the expression of IGF-1, IGF-2, and IGF-1 receptor in GCs. LH-induced expression of thecal IGF-1 protected GCs from apoptosis and promoted GC survival. Furthermore, LH stimulation of TCs increased FSH sensitivity in GCs. Thus, the LH-TC axis may be involved in the acquisition of LH dependence and the survival of small antral follicles by upregulating androgen/estrogen biosynthesis and activating the IGF system. The use of LH supplementation in ovarian stimulation may increase gonadotropin sensitivity in small antral follicles and promote follicular growth and survival by suppressing GC apoptosis and follicular atresia, resulting in multiple follicular development, even in patients with POR.

Recombinant luteinizing hormone supplementation to recombinant follicle stimulating hormone therapy in gonadotropin releasing hormone analogue cycles: what is the evidence?

OBJECTIVE

To look into current evidence exploring the added value of rLH supplementation to rFSH in GnRH analogues cycles, to identify groups of women that still have no evidence for adjuvant rLH therapy and to discuss ways that may advance research on this topic.

METHODS

Eight systematic reviews and meta-analyses exploring the benefit for pregnancy achievement of rLH supplementation, excluding other LH activity preparations, to GnRH analogues cycles in the ART setting were thoroughly evaluated.

RESULTS

Evidence exists to show that rLH supplementation seems to have added value for pregnancy achievement in women with poor ovarian response and in women ≥35 years of age employing the GnRH agonist protocol, while the evidence is still debatable when the GnRH antagonist is administered. In the general infertile population, rLH supplementation does not have added value in the GnRH-antagonist cycles while the evidence is still controversial when the GnRH agonist is employed. Whether rLH supplementation may have a benefit in some young, normo-gonadotropic women, who may develop LH deficiency following GnRH analogues, is still to be shown. The main task remains how to identify subgroups of women that may benefit from rLH supplementation.

CONCLUSION

An accurate definition of the LH threshold in GnRH analogue treated cycles may contribute to the discussion of which subgroups of women may benefit from adjuvant rLH therapy.

Urinary Versus Recombinant Gonadotropins for Ovarian Stimulation in Women Undergoing Treatment with Assisted Reproductive Technology

Globally, about 10%-15% couples are affected by infertility, with major role being played by the couple's lifestyle. Several gonadotropin preparations (urinary, purified urinary, recombinant, and biosimilars) are available for use. Purified urinary formulations offer numerous advantages over their predecessor, including lesser injection dose required, ability to be administered subcutaneously, less batch-to-batch variability, better efficacy, ability to individualize protocols as per patient's need, better control of developing follicles, less risk of multiple pregnancies, and hyperstimulation. Published results of Cochrane reviews and meta-analysis show no difference in efficacy or safety between urinary and recombinant gonadotropins. In the absence of any significant difference, cost plays an important role in deciding choice of gonadotropins. In this article, we have reviewed the results of comparative clinical trials, Cochrane analysis, and meta-analysis to derive consensus statements regarding efficacy, safety, and cost implications of urinary versus recombinant gonadotropin preparations.

The effect of rLH supplementation to the GnRH-antagonist protocol on endocrine dynamics in the advanced reproductive age

PURPOSE

To explore serum endocrine dynamics, specifically LH levels, following rLH supplementation to rFSH following GnRH-antagonist treatment in the advance reproductive age.

METHODS

Women were prospectively and similarly treated employing rFSH and the flexible GnRH-antagonist protocol, while rLH was supplemented only to the study group. Serum FSH, LH, E_2, and P were evaluated throughout the follicular phase. Three strategies were a priori planned to examine endocrine dynamics among women enrolled.

RESULTS

While serum LH drop were similar before GnRH-antagonist stimulation, it dropped more times in the control group compared to the study group. Among women receiving rFSH only, serum LH levels dropped ≤2, ≤1 and ≤0.5 mIU/mL in 71.4, 46.4, and 28.6% of cases, while this occurred only in 38.7% (P = 0.01), 6.5% (P = 0.0004) and 3.2% (P = 0.007) of women receiving combined rFSH and rLH treatment, respectively. The same trend was found when serum LH dropped in at least two occasions following the GnRH-antagonist administration. Conversely, serum LH diagrams throughout the follicular phase did not differ between the two groups. Furthermore, individual area under the curve values of LH, E_2, and P was similar between the two groups following GnRH-antagonist initiation.

CONCLUSIONS

Different strategies to explore LH dynamics following the GnRH-antagonist administration have resulted in diverse results, implying the need for a consensus definition of LH threshold for adequate folliculogenesis and steroidogenesis. Such action would pave the way for understanding which groups of patients may benefit from rLH supplementation.

The evaluation of recombinant LH supplementation in patients with suboptimal response to recombinant FSH undergoing IVF treatment with GnRH agonist down-regulation

We aimed to evaluate the clinical efficacy of r-LH supplementation to r-FSH in patients with suboptimal response to ovarian stimulation undergoing assisted reproduction with GnRH-a downregulation and stimulation with r-FSH. One-hundred thirty-seven patients were included in the study; among them 52 showed normal ovarian response to stimulation and composed the control group (Group 1), and 85 showed suboptimal response to stimulation and were divided into two groups. For Group 2 (n = 50), 75 IU/L r-LH was added to the treatment, for Group 3 (n = 35) r-FSH dose was increased by 75 IU/L. IVF results were compared between the groups. Implantation rates were 34.8% in control group, and 36.1% and 15% in LH supplementation group and increased-dose r-FSH group, respectively. Implantation rates were statistically significantly higher in Groups 1 and 2 compared to Group 3 (p < 0.02). Pregnancy rate was noticed in 64.7% of Group 1, 57.8% of Group 2 and at 32.4% of Group 3. Pregnancy rate was significantly higher in Group 2 than Group 3 (p < 0.05). r-LH supplementation is an option for improving IVF outcome in patients with suboptimal ovarian response to ovulation induction with r-FSH during GnRH agonist down-regulation. Particularly, r-LH is recommended as it may have a beneficial action on implantation in selected group.

Recombinant human follicle-stimulating hormone (r-hFSH) plus recombinant luteinizing hormone versus r-hFSH alone for ovarian stimulation during assisted reproductive technology: systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The potential benefit of adding recombinant human luteinizing hormone (r-hLH) to recombinant human follicle-stimulating hormone (r-hFSH) during ovarian stimulation is a subject of debate, although there is evidence that it may benefit certain subpopulations, e.g. poor responders.

METHODS

A systematic review and a meta-analysis were performed. Three databases (MEDLINE, Embase and CENTRAL) were searched (from 1990 to 2011). Prospective, parallel-, comparative-group randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in women aged 18-45 years undergoing in vitro fertilization, intracytoplasmic sperm injection or both, treated with gonadotrophin-releasing hormone analogues and r-hFSH plus r-hLH or r-hFSH alone were included. The co-primary endpoints were number of oocytes retrieved and clinical pregnancy rate. Analyses were conducted for the overall population and for prospectively identified patient subgroups, including patients with poor ovarian response (POR).

RESULTS

In total, 40 RCTs (6443 patients) were included in the analysis. Data on the number of oocytes retrieved were reported in 41 studies and imputed in two studies. Therefore, data were available from 43 studies (r-hFSH plus r-hLH, n=3113; r-hFSH, n=3228) in the intention-to-treat (ITT) population (all randomly allocated patients, including imputed data). Overall, no significant difference in the number of oocytes retrieved was found between the r-hFSH plus r-hLH and r-hFSH groups (weighted mean difference -0.03; 95% confidence interval [CI] -0.41 to 0.34). However, in poor responders, significantly more oocytes were retrieved with r-hFSH plus r-hLH versus r-hFSH alone (n=1077; weighted mean difference +0.75 oocytes; 95% CI 0.14-1.36). Significantly higher clinical pregnancy rates were observed with r-hFSH plus r-hLH versus r-hFSH alone in the overall population analysed in this review (risk ratio [RR] 1.09; 95% CI 1.01-1.18) and in poor responders (n=1179; RR 1.30; 95% CI 1.01-1.67; ITT population); the observed difference was more pronounced in poor responders.

CONCLUSIONS

These data suggest that there is a relative increase in the clinical pregnancy rates of 9% in the overall population and 30% in poor responders. In conclusion, this meta-analysis suggests that the addition of r-hLH to r-hFSH may be beneficial for women with POR.

A large, multicentre, observational, post-marketing surveillance study of the 2:1 formulation of follitropin alfa and lutropin alfa in routine clinical practice for assisted reproductive technology

BACKGROUND

Follicle-stimulating hormone (FSH) and luteinizing hormone (LH) both have a role to play in follicular development during the natural menstrual cycle. LH supplementation during controlled ovarian stimulation (COS) for assisted reproductive technology (ART) is used for patients with hypogonadotropic hypogonadism. However, the use of exogenous LH in COS in normogonadotropic women undergoing ART is the subject of debate. The aim of this study was to investigate characteristics of infertile women who received the 2:1 formulation of follitropin alfa and lutropin alfa (indicated for stimulation of follicular development in women with severe LH and FSH deficiency) in German clinical practice.

METHODS

A 3-year, multicentre, open-label, observational/non-interventional, post-marketing surveillance study of women (21-45 years) undergoing ART. Primary endpoint: reason for prescribing the 2:1 formulation of follitropin alfa and lutropin alfa. Secondary variables included: COS duration/dose; oocytes retrieved; fertilization; clinical pregnancy; ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS).

RESULTS

In total, 2220 cycles were assessed; at least one reason for prescribing the 2:1 formulation was given in 1834/2220 (82.6%) cycles. Most common reasons were: poor ovarian response (POR) (39.4%), low baseline LH (17.8%), and age (13.8%). COS: mean dose of the 2:1 formulation on first day, 183.1/91.5 IU; mean duration, 10.8 days. In 2173/2220 (97.9%) cycles, human chorionic gonadotrophin was administered. Oocyte pick-up (OPU) was attempted in 2108/2220 (95.0%) cycles; mean (standard deviation) 8.0 (5.4) oocytes retrieved/OPU cycle. Fertilization (≥1 oocyte fertilized) rates: in vitro fertilization (IVF), 391/439 (89.1%) cycles; intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI)/IVF + ICSI, 1524/1613 (94.5%) cycles. Clinical pregnancy rate: all cycles, 25.9%; embryo transfer cycles, 31.3%. OHSS: hospitalization for OHSS, 8 (0.36%) cycles, Grade 2, 60 (2.7%), and Grade 3, 1 (0.05%).

CONCLUSIONS

In German routine clinical practice, the most common reasons for using the 2:1 formulation of follitropin alfa and lutropin alfa for women undergoing ART were POR, low baseline LH, and age. Severe OHSS incidence was low and similar to that reported previously.

hMG increases the yield of mature oocytes and excellent-quality embryos in patients with a previous cycle having a high incidence of oocyte immaturity

In a selected group of patients with >20% oocyte immaturity during an IVF cycle with FSH alone, the addition of hMG to the stimulation protocol results in a higher yield of mature oocytes and excellent-quality embryos.

Assessment of the biopotency of follitropin alfa and lutropin alfa combined in one injection: a comparative trial in Sprague-Dawley rats

BACKGROUND

The current study was designed to determine if follitropin alfa (recombinant human follicle-stimulating hormone; r-hFSH) and lutropin alfa (recombinant human luteinizing hormone; r-hLH) biopotencies were unchanged by reconstituting in sterile water for injection and mixing prior to injection.

METHODS

The biopotencies of r-hFSH and r-hLH were determined following injection of female Sprague-Dawley rats with a mixture of follitropin alfa revised formulation female (RFF) and lutropin alfa (1:1, r-hFSH:r-hLH). Biopotencies of follitropin alfa RFF and lutropin alfa were measured using ovarian weight and ascorbic acid depletion assays, respectively, and compared with a reference standard. Stock mixtures of follitropin alfa RFF and lutropin alfa (1:1) were prepared within 1 h prior to each respective assay's injection and stored at 6 +/- 2 degrees C. Separate low dose (follitropin alfa RFF 1.5 IU/rat, lutropin alfa 2 IU/rat) and high dose (follitropin alfa RFF 3 IU/rat, lutropin alfa 8 IU/rat) treatments were prepared from stock mixtures or individual solutions by diluting with 0.22% bovine serum albumin saline solution and injected within 1 h of preparation. The main outcome measures were ovarian weight and ovarian ascorbic acid depletion.

RESULTS

FSH bioactivities were similar (p > 0.10) between the individual follitropin alfa RFF test solution (84.2 IU) and follitropin alfa RFF/lutropin alfa (87.6 IU) mixtures prepared within 1 h of injection and stored at 6 +/- 2 degrees C. LH bioactivities were similar (p > 0.10) between lutropin alfa (94.7 IU) test solution and lutropin alfa/follitropin alfa RFF (85.3 IU) mixtures prepared within 1 h of injection and stored at 6 +/- 2 degrees C for not more than 1 h prior to injection.

CONCLUSION

Mixing follitropin alfa RFF and lutropin alfa did not alter the bioactivity of either FSH or LH.