Clinical efficacy and cost-effectiveness of HP-human FSH (Fostimon®) versus rFSH (Gonal-F®) in IVF-ICSI cycles: a meta-analysis

Effects of different gonadotropin preparations in GnRH antagonist protocol for patients with polycystic ovary syndrome during IVF/ICSI: a retrospective cohort study

Purpose

To compare the effects of recombinant FSH alfa (rFSH-alfa), rFSH-beta, highly purified human menopausal gonadotropin (HP-hMG) and urinary FSH (uFSH) in women with polycystic ovarian syndrome who have undertaken the GnRH antagonist protocol during IVF/ICSI treatment.

Method

A single-center retrospective cohort study including women with PCOS who received the GnRH antagonist protocol from January 2019 to July 2022 was conducted. Patients were divided into rFSH-alfa group, HP-hMG group, uFSH group, and rFSH-beta group, and the number of oocytes retrieved, clinical pregnancy rate of the fresh cycle (primary outcomes), embryo quality, and severe OHSS rate (secondary outcomes) were compared.

Results

No statistical differences were found among the four groups in fresh cycle clinical pregnancy rate (p=0.426), nor in the subgroup analyses. The HP-hMG group had a smaller number of oocytes retrieved and a higher high-quality D3 embryo rate than the three FSH groups (p<0.05). No statistical differences were found among the four groups in the severe OHSS rate (p=0.083).

Conclusion

For women with PCOS undergoing the GnRH antagonist protocol, the clinical pregnancy rates of fresh IVF/ICSI-ET cycle are similar for all four types of Gn. With a lower risk of OHSS and a similar number of high-quality and available embryos, HP-hMG may have an advantage in the PCOS population.

Required amount of rFSH, HP-hMG and HP-FSH to reach a live birth: a systematic review and meta-analysis

STUDY QUESTION

In women undergoing IVF or ICSI cycles, do recombinant gonadotrophins differ from urinary-derived highly purified human menopausal gonadotropin (HP-hMG) or highly purified follicle-stimulating hormone (HP-FSH) in the total amount of gonadotrophins required to reach a live birth?

SUMMARY ANSWER

The difference between recombinant and urinary-derived HP-hMG or HP-FSH in the required amount to reach a live birth in IVF/ICSI cycles appears small.

WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY

At present, gynecologists can choose between recombinant FSH (rFSH), urinary-derived HP-hMG and HP-FSH. These products are equally effective and safe, but it is unknown how these gonadotrophins compare in terms of IU required to reach a live birth.

STUDY DESIGN, SIZE AND DURATION

We conducted a search in Medline, Embase and CINAHL up to July 2018. We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared rFSH with HP-hMG or HP-FSH for ovarian stimulation in couples scheduled for IVF or ICSI treatment. From each randomized trial, we extracted the outcome data and information on participants, methods, interventions and funding.

PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING AND METHODS

Women undergoing ovarian stimulation with rFSH, HP-hMG or HP-FSH were included. We extracted data for the mean amount of gonadotrophins with SD, clinical pregnancy rate, live birth rate and cumulative live birth rate per woman from the included RCTs. We summarized these outcomes by calculating the individual and pooled mean difference (MD) or relative risk (RR) with 95% CI. We used the Review Manager software to perform the meta-analyses. We applied a random effect model to pool the data. We estimated the total amount of gonadotrophins used per extra live birth by STATA 14.2 and R software.

MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE

A total of 28 studies with 7553 women were included in this review, of which 24 studies provided information on the total amount of gonadotrophins per woman who started an IVF/ICSI cycle. The total amount of gonadotrophins varied significantly between studies. The MDs in total amount were −37 IU (seven studies; N = 3220; 95% CI, −115 to 41; I² = 68%) for rFSH versus HP-hMG and −31 IU (17 studies; N = 3629; 95% CI, −290 to 228; I² = 97%) for rFSH versus HP-FSH. For rFSH versus HP-hMG, the RR for clinical pregnancy, live birth and cumulative live birth were 0.90 (95% CI, 0.81–1.00), 0.88 (95% CI, 0.78–0.99) and 0.91 (95% CI, 0.80–1.04), respectively. For rFSH versus HP-FSH, the RR for clinical pregnancy and live birth were 1.03 (95% CI, 0.94–1.13) and 1.03 (95% CI, 0.90–1.18), respectively; the data on cumulative live birth rate were lacking. The estimated difference in mean gonadotrophin amount per extra live birth was 789 IU (95% CI, −9.5 to 1570) for rFSH versus HP-hMG and −365 IU (95% CI, −2675 to 1945) for rFSH versus HP-FSH.

LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION

There was severe heterogeneity in the total amount of gonadotrophins between studies. A small fraction of women did not start gonadotrophin treatment; this was usually not accounted for in the provided mean amount of gonadotrophins per study and might have affected the averaged total amount of gonadotrophins but is unlikely to have affected the differences in the amount between rFSH and HP-hMG or HP-FSH.

WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS

The differences in the required amount to reach a live birth between rFSH, HP-hMG and HP-FSH appear to be small. Decision-making should be based on convenience, availability, actual costs and patient preferences.

STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTERESTS

The authors declare no conflict of interest. No external funding was either sought or obtained for this study.

REGISTRATION NUMBER

Prospero CRD42016038238

A cost-effectiveness analysis comparing the originator follitropin alfa to its biosimilars in patients undergoing a medically assisted reproduction program from a French perspective

OBJECTIVE

To assess the cost-effectiveness (CE) of the originator follitropin-α (Gonal-F) in patients undergoing a medically assisted reproduction (MAR) program in comparison to its biosimilars Bemfola and Ovaleap in a French context.

METHODS

A CE model was developed for France with a National Health Service (NHS) perspective. Clinical, safety, and dosage data were derived from pivotal clinical trials that compared Gonal-F to Ovaleap and Bemfola. Costs pertaining to drugs, hospitalizations, specialist visits, and examinations were retrieved from the French Programme de Médicalisation des Systèmes d'Information (PMSI) hospital database, literature review, and French clinical experts using 2017 Euro tariffs. In order to test the robustness of results, deterministic one-way sensitivity analyses were carried out on the main variables to assess the impact of treatment cost, probability of birth, ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS) rates, and dosage.

RESULTS

The average incremental cost per live birth with OHSS and without OHSS was €259.56 and €278.39, respectively for Gonal-F compared to the pooled biosimilars (i.e., Ovaleap and Bemfola). GONAL-F had an incremental efficacy of 0.06 over the pooled biosimilars. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio for Gonal-F with OHSS ranged from €3,274.80 to €4,877.76 compared to the pooled biosimilars, owing to the additional live births reported with Gonal-F. Sensitivity analyses also supported results from the base case analyses, with Gonal-F being cost-effective or the dominant strategy in most cases.

CONCLUSION

Gonal-F seems to be a cost-effective strategy compared to its biosimilars Ovaleap and Bemfola, irrespective of the incidence of OHSS events, but further data are needed to confirm these results.

Clinical efficacy of recombinant versus highly purified follicle-stimulating hormone according to follicle-stimulating hormone receptor genotype

OBJECTIVE

Conflicting data have been reported on the comparative doses of recombinant follicle-stimulating hormone (rFSH) and urinary highly purified follicle-stimulating hormone (HP-FSH) required for ovarian stimulation. Nothing is known about the clinical efficacy of rFSH or HP-FSH depending on the N680S follicle-stimulating hormone receptor (FSHR) polymorphism. Our aim was to investigate whether the N680S polymorphism of the FSHR gene affects ovarian response with different forms of FSH.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This retrospective cohort study includes 382 cycles performed at Instituto Bernabeu from 191 oocyte donors. All donors carried out two cycles: one with rFSH and the other one with HP-FSH (group 1, n=63), both with HP-FSH (group 2, n=100) or both with rFSH (group 3, n=28). The results were compared by pairs from each patient. The main outcomes were oocyte yield, metaphase II matured oocytes (MII), days of stimulation, and gonadotropin dosage.

RESULTS

No significant differences were found when we compared the cycles for donors in group 1. However, according to the FSHR polymorphism, statistical differences were shown. For the SS genotype, more oocytes (16.9 vs. 18.4) and MII (12.8 vs. 15.5) were yielded in the HP-FSH cycle. For the NS genotype, more oocyte (20.1 vs. 16.9) and MII (17.4 vs. 14.2) were yielded in the rFSH cycle. For the NN genotype, no differences were found. No differences were found when we compared the cycles in groups 2 and 3 irrespective of the FSHR polymorphism.

CONCLUSION

For the first time, we have shown in a population of egg donors that the N680S FSHR gene polymorphism affects the efficacy of HP-FSH or rFSH. The FSHR genotype is an important factor to determine the dosage and the nature of the gonadotropin selected for ovarian stimulation.

Economic Evaluation of Three Frequently Used Gonadotrophins in Assisted Reproduction Techniques in the Management of Infertility in the Netherlands

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Subfertility represents a multidimensional problem associated with significant distress and impaired social well-being. In the Netherlands, an estimated 50,000 couples visit their general practitioner and 30,000 couples seek medical specialist care for subfertility. We conducted an economic evaluation comparing recombinant human follicle-stimulating hormone (follitropin alfa, r-hFSH, Gonal-F^®) with two classes of urinary gonadotrophins-highly purified human menopausal gonadotrophin (hp-HMG, Menopur^®) and urinary follicle-stimulating hormone (uFSH, Fostimon^®)-for ovarian stimulation in women undergoing in vitro fertilization (IVF) treatment in the Netherlands.

METHODS

A pharmacoeconomic model was developed, simulating each step in the IVF protocol from the start of therapy until either a live birth, a new IVF treatment cycle or cessation of IVF, following a long down-regulation protocol. A decision tree combined with a Markov model details progress through each health state, including ovum pickup, fresh embryo transfer, up to two subsequent cryo-preserved embryo transfers, and (ongoing) pregnancy or miscarriage. A health insurer perspective was chosen, and the time horizon was set at a maximum of three consecutive treatment cycles, in accordance with Dutch reimbursement policy. Transition probabilities and costing data were derived from a real-world observational outcomes database (from Germany) and official tariff lists (from the Netherlands). Adverse events were considered equal among the comparators and were therefore excluded from the economic analysis. A Monte Carlo simulation of 5000 iterations was undertaken for each strategy to explore uncertainty and to construct uncertainty intervals (UIs). All cost data were valued in 2013 Euros. The model's structure, parameters and assumptions were assessed and confirmed by an external clinician with experience in health economics modelling, to inform on the appropriateness of the outcomes and the applicability of the model in the chosen setting.

RESULTS

The mean total treatment costs were estimated as €5664 for follitropin alfa (95 % UI €5167-6151), €5990 for hp-HMG (95 % UI €5498-6488) and €5760 for uFSH (95 % UI €5256-6246). The probability of a live birth was estimated at 36.1 % (95 % UI 27.4-44.3 %), 33.9 % (95 % UI 26.2-41.5 %) and 34.1 % (95 % UI 25.9-41.8 %) for follitropin alfa, hp-HMG and uFSH, respectively. The costs per live birth estimates were €15,674 for follitropin alfa, €17,636 for hp-HMG and €16,878 for uFSH. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis indicated a probability of 72.5 % that follitropin alfa is cost effective at a willingness to pay of €20,000 per live birth. The probabilistic results remained constant under several analyses.

CONCLUSION

The present analysis shows that follitropin alfa may represent a cost-effective option in comparison with uFSH and hp-HMG for IVF treatment in the Netherlands healthcare system.