Reflections on the cost-effectiveness of recombinant FSH in assisted reproduction. The clinician's perspective

Early Pharmacologic Approaches to Avert Anabolic Steroid-induced Male Infertility: A Narrative Review

PURPOSE

To review the impact of testosterone and other androgenic-anabolic steroids (AASs) on male fertility, exploring potential drugs that can be used to preserve or restore male fertility upon AAS use or prior contact.

METHODS

A review was performed to provide a unifying clinical link between drugs used to preserve or restore male fertility (ie, clomiphene citrate, human chorionic gonadotropin, selective estrogen receptor modulators, recombinant luteinizing and follicle-stimulating hormones, and human menopausal gonadotrophin) in the context of AAS-induced infertility and related aspects.

FINDINGS

Human chorionic gonadotropin (125-500 IU every other day), clomiphene citrate (12.5-50 mg/d), recombinant luteinizing hormone (125-500 IU every other day), recombinant follicle-stimulating hormone (75-150 IU 1-3×/wk), and human menopausal gonadotrophin (75-150 IU 1-3×/wk) are promising early pharmacologic approaches to avert AAS-induced male infertility. Additionally, a full partner assessment is crucial to the success of a couple planning to have children. The partner's age and gynecopathies must be considered. Egg or sperm cryopreservation can also be alternatives for future fertility. Reinforcing AAS cessation is imperative to achieving better success in misusers.

IMPLICATIONS

The exponential increase in AAS misuse raises concerns about the impact on male fertility. This review suggests that gonadotropin analogs and selective androgen receptor modulators (clomiphene citrate) are viable approaches to early preserve or restore fertility in men on AAS use or with previous contact. However, proper standardization of doses and combinations is required and hence physicians should also be aware of patients' and partners' fertility.

Comparative economic study of the use of corifollitropin alfa and daily rFSH for controlled ovarian stimulation in older patients: Cost-minimization analysis based on the PURSUE study

This study presents an economic assessment of controlled ovarian stimulation in assisted reproductive technology procedures in Spain, comparing the use of corifollitropin alfa and various forms of recombinant follicle-stimulating hormone (rFSH) in women of advanced maternal age. A cost-minimization analysis (CMA) was performed to assess the cost per cycle of controlled controlled ovarian stimulation, including only direct costs associated with the stimulation phase. The CMA was based on the population characteristics, the protocol, and the results obtained from the PURSUE study, taking into account 9 days of controlled controlled ovarian stimulation and 300 IU rFSH/day. The primary analysis included pharmacological costs alone. Different scenarios were evaluated including various doses and possible additional days (0-5) for rFSH. For the alternative analyses, the total costs (direct pharmacological costs, costs of visits and follow-up tests, and any additional pharmacological costs) were considered in both the private and public sectors. Treatment with corifollitropin alfa resulted in a lower pharmacological cost compared with rFSH (€757.25 and €950.30, respectively), creating a saving of approximately -20%. The results of the scenario analyses showed that corifollitropin alfa reduced the pharmacological cost of controlled ovarian stimulation in comparison with daily administration of doses ≥ 250 IU rFSH (considering same daily dose for all days), regardless of the additional days required (7-12 days) (average -€223; range -€488 to -€44). In conclusion, in addition to the efficacy shown in the PURSUE study, the use of corifollitropin alfa results in a decrease in the direct costs associated with controlled ovarian stimulation in older women in Spain.

Pharmaceutical costs of assisted reproduction in Spain

BACKGROUND

Assisted reproduction is one of the health services currently being considered for possible limitation or exclusion from the public health services portfolio in Spain. One of the main reasons claimed for this is the impact on the budget for pharmaceutical expenditure.

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to assess the significance of the pharmaceutical costs of assisted reproduction in Spain.

METHODS

This study focused on medical practice in Spain, and is based on the opinions of experts in assisted reproduction and the results provided by professional societies' publications. The reference year is 2012 and the setting was secondary care. We have included all existing pharmaceutical modalities for assisted reproduction, as well as the most common drug for each modality. We have considered the pharmaceutical cost per cycle for artificial insemination, in vitro fertilisation with or without intracytoplasmic sperm injection (IVF_ICSI), and cryotransfer and donated fresh oocytes reception.

RESULTS

In Spain, artificial insemination has a pharmaceutical cost per cycle of between €69.36 and €873.79. This amounts to an average cycle cost of €364.87 for partner's sperm and €327.10 for donor sperm. The pharmaceutical cost of IVF_ICSI ranges between €278.16 and €1,902.66, giving an average cost per cycle of €1,139.65. In the case of cryotransfer and donated fresh oocytes reception, the pharmaceutical cost per cycle is between €22.61 and €58.73, yielding an average cost of €40.67. The budgetary impact of pharmaceutical expenditure for assisted reproduction in Spain for the year 2012 was estimated at €98.7 million.

CONCLUSION

In Spain, the total pharmaceutical cost of assisted reproduction is substantial. According to our results, we can say that about 29% of the total pharmaceutical expenditure for assisted reproduction techniques is funded by the National Health System and the rest represents 2.4% of the total annual out-of-pocket family expenditure on drugs.

Cost-saving treatment strategies in in vitro fertilization: a combined economic evaluation of two large randomized clinical trials comparing highly purified human menopausal gonadotropin and recombinant follicle-stimulating hormone alpha

OBJECTIVE

To assess the cost-effectiveness of two gonadotropin treatments that are available in the United Kingdom in light of limited public funding and the fundamental role of costs in IVF treatment decisions.

DESIGN

An economic evaluation based on two large randomized clinical trials in IVF patients using a simulation model.

SETTING

Fifty-three fertility clinics in 13 European countries and Israel.

PATIENT(S)

Women indicated for treatment with IVF (N = 986), aged 18-38, participating in double-blind, randomized controlled trials.

INTERVENTION(S)

Highly purified menotropin (HP-hMG, Menopur) or recombinant follitropin alpha (rFSH, Gonal-F).

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S)

Cost per IVF cycle and cost per live birth for HP-hMG and rFSH alpha.

RESULT(S)

HP-hMG was more effective and less costly versus rFSH for both IVF cost per live birth and for IVF cost per baby (incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was negative). The mean costs per IVF treatment for HP-hMG and rFSH were 2408 pounds (95% confidence interval [CI], 2392 pounds, 2421 pounds) and 2660 pounds (95% CI 2644 pounds, 2678 pounds), respectively. The mean cost saving of 253 pounds per cycle using HP-hMG allows one additional cycle to be delivered for every 9.5 cycles.

CONCLUSION(S)

Treatment with HP-hMG was dominant compared with rFSH in the United Kingdom. Gonadotropin costs should be considered alongside live-birth rates to optimize outcomes using scarce health-care resources.

Coste de las técnicas de reproducción asistida en un hospital público

OBJECTIVES

Most studies on the costs of assisted reproductive technologies (ART) identify the total cost of the procedure with the direct cost, without considering important items such as overhead or intermediate costs. The objective of this study was to determine the cost per ART procedure in a public hospital in 2003 and to compare the results with those in the same hospital in 1998.

METHODS

Data from the Human Reproduction Unit of the Virgen de las Nieves University Hospital in Granada (Spain) from 1998 and 2003 were analyzed. Since the total costs of the unit were known, the cost of the distinct ART procedures performed in the hospital was calculated by means of a methodology for cost distribution.

RESULTS

Between 1998 and 2003, the activity and costs of the Human Reproduction Unit analyzed evolved differently. Analysis of activity showed that some techniques, such as intracytoplasmic sperm injection, were consolidated while others, such as stimulation without assisted reproduction or intracervical insemination were abandoned. In all procedures, unit costs per cycle and per delivery decreased in the period analyzed.

CONCLUSIONS

Important changes took place in the structure of costs of ART in the Human Reproduction Unit of the Virgen de las Nieves University Hospital between 1998 and 2003. Some techniques were discontinued, while others gained importance. Technological advances and structural innovations, together with a "learning effect," modified the structure of ART-related costs.

Recombinant gonadotrophins in reproductive medicine: gold standard for ovarian stimulation therapy in the 21st century

The clinical use of gonadotrophin preparations started in the 1960s when it was possible to extract human menopausal gonadotrophins from urine of post-menopausal women. Recombinant gonadotrophins became available in 1995. Whereas in other therapeutic areas the introduction of pure, recombinant preparations such as insulin and growth hormone has lead to rapid phasing out of biological extraction-based therapies, this is different for gonadotrophins. It is difficult to understand why even today women are exposed to urinary products although the benefits of recombinant gonadotropohins in terms of safety are obvious.

Cost-effectiveness of recombinant versus urinary follicle-stimulating hormone in assisted reproduction techniques in the Spanish public health care system

PURPOSE

To evaluate the relative cost-effectiveness of recombinant and urinary follicle-stimulating hormone (FSH) in assisted reproduction techniques in the Spanish National Health Service.

METHODS

Markov modelling was used to compare costs and outcomes of three complete treatment cycles using recombinant or urinary FSH for controlled ovarian stimulation. Cost and effectiveness estimates were obtained from the literature and from Spanish clinicians. A Monte Carlo technique was used to randomise the distribution of outcomes at each stage. The analysis was performed by passing a virtual population of 100,000 patients through the computer simulation in each of 5000 Monte Carlo simulations.

RESULTS

The cost per pregnancy was Euro12,791+/-1202 ($11,346+/-1066) with recombinant and Euro13,007+/-1319 ($11,537+/-1170) with urinary FSH (p < 0.0001). The mean number of cycles per pregnancy was 4.69 and 5.21, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Recombinant FSH is more cost-effective than urinary FSH in the Spanish public health care system.

Ovarian responses to recombinant FSH or HMG in normogonadotrophic women following pituitary desensitization by a depot GnRH agonist for assisted reproduction

At present, there is considerable debate about the utility of supplemental LH in assisted reproduction treatment. In order to explore this, the present authors used a depot gonadotrophin-releasing hormone agonist (GnRHa) protocol combined with recombinant human FSH (rhFSH) or human menopausal gonadotrophin (HMG) in patients undergoing intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI). The response to either rhFSH (75 IU FSH/ampoule; group rhFSH, 25 patients) or HMG (75 IU FSH and 75 IU LH/ampoule; group HMG, 25 patients) was compared in normo-ovulatory women suppressed with a depot triptorelin injection and candidates for ICSI. A fixed regimen of 150 IU rhFSH or HMG was administered in the first 14 days of treatment. Treatment was monitored with transvaginal pelvic ultrasonographic scans and serum measurement of FSH, LH, oestradiol, androstenedione, testosterone, progesterone, inhibin A, inhibin B and human chorionic gonadotrophin (HCG) at 2-day intervals. Although oestradiol serum concentrations on the day of HCG injection were similar, both the duration of treatment and the per cycle gonadotrophin dose were lower in group HMG. In the initial 16 days of gonadotrophin treatment, the area under the curve (AUC) of LH, oestradiol, androstenedione and inhibin B were higher in group HMG; no differences were seen for the remaining hormones measured, including the inhibin B:inhibin A ratio. The dynamics of ovarian follicle development during gonadotrophin treatment were similar in both study groups, but there were more leading follicles (>17 mm in diameter) on the day of HCG injection in the rhFSH group. The number of oocytes, mature oocytes and good quality zygotes and embryos obtained were significantly increased in the rhFSH group. It is concluded that in IVF patients undergoing pituitary desensitization with a depot agonist preparation, supplemental LH may be required in terms of treatment duration and gonadotrophin consumption. However, both oocyte, embryo yield and quality were significantly higher with the use of rhFSH.

Gonadotrophin-releasing hormone antagonists: will they replace the agonists?

Modern gonadotrophin-releasing hormone (GnRH) antagonists such as cetrorelix and ganirelix reliably prevent premature LH surges in controlled ovarian hyperstimulation for assisted reproductive technologies. Cetrorelix and ganirelix are safe and effective compounds. Because of their distinct pharmacological mode of action, it has been possible to achieve a significant reduction of treatment time. Fertilization and pregnancy rates are comparable to those obtained in agonist protocols for ovarian stimulation. No allergic or hyperergic reactions have been reported, and patient compliance is excellent. The fact that GnRH antagonists allow an immediate suppression of gonadotrophin concentrations while preserving pituitary responsiveness to endogenous GnRH provides enormous flexibility in treatment. GnRH antagonists have helped to overcome some major disadvantages of GnRH agonists, especially of the long protocol, which is currently the standard protocol for ovarian stimulation. The mistaken administration of antagonists during early pregnancy is not possible, since they are only administered during ovarian stimulation when a premature LH surge may be imminent. They are used in the spontaneous cycle or after pretreatment with oral contraceptives. Pregnancy can easily be ruled out by testing for human gonadotrophic hormone before onset of gonadotrophin stimulation on the second or third day of the cycle. Since flare-up effects are absent, there is no risk of cyst formation. Hormonal withdrawal symptoms are eliminated, since no period of pituitary suppression occurs, and therefore exogenous gonadotrophins are not required. Overall, the duration of the stimulation cycle is as short as a normal menstrual cycle. The procedure seems to be safer than the long protocol, since the most serious complication, the occurrence of severe cases of OHSS, is reduced. It is also safe with respect to the course of pregnancies and the health of offspring. Both protocols developed so far, the single dose and multiple dose antagonist protocol, are comparable, utilizing data from the large prospective phase IIIb studies. Although several studies have indicated a slight reduction in pregnancy rate with GnRH antagonists as compared with agonists, this problem may be rectified by developing flexible antagonist regimens designed for individual patients. Introducing flexible GnRH antagonist regimens should be the area of research in the near future.

The use of urinary gonadotrophins should be discouraged

In view of concerns regarding the potential presence and infectivity of prion proteins in human urinary gonadotrophin preparations, together with the availability of both recombinant FSH and recombinant LH, it is argued that the use of urinary gonadotrophins should be discouraged.