Comparison of recombinant and urinary follicle-stimulating hormone preparations in short-term gonadotropin releasing hormone agonist protocol for in vitro fertilization-embryo transfer.

Hugues JN, Bry-Gauillard H, Bständig B, Uzan M, Cedrin-Durnerin I
Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics · 2001 · doi:10.1023/a:1009408029509 · PMID:11432109 · PMC3455363
OA: closed
📄 Open PDF Full text JSON View on PubMed View at publisher
⚙ AI-generated summary by claude@2026-07, 2026-07-16 ⓘ

This study found that recombinant FSH preparations are more efficient than urinary FSH in patients undergoing IVF-ET with a short-term GnRH-a protocol, with the two recombinant preparations showing comparable effectiveness.

One-sentence paraphrase of the abstract; not a substitute for reading it. No clinical advice. How this works

⚙ AI-generated deep summary by claude@2026-07, 2026-07-16 · read from full text ⓘ

This prospective randomized study evaluated 88 women undergoing IVF-ET with a short-term GnRH agonist (triptorelin) protocol, comparing urinary FSH (150 IU/day) with two recombinant FSH preparations (follitropin-α 100 IU/day or follitropin-β 100 IU/day), with subsequent dose adjustments based on ovarian response. The overall stimulation required a significantly lower total FSH dose in patients receiving recombinant FSH than in those receiving urinary FSH, and serum FSH levels were higher in the urinary group. Ovarian response and IVF outcomes did not differ significantly between recombinant preparations and urinary FSH. The paper concludes on efficiency differences but notes comparable effectiveness, without identifying a trial limitation in the abstract provided. The paper does not explicitly discuss endometriosis or adenomyosis; it was included in the corpus via a keyword match in the upstream search index.

Read from the paper's body, not the abstract. Not a substitute for reading the paper. No clinical advice. How this works

Abstract

PurposeTo compare the efficiency and efficacy of two recombinant human FSH (r-FSH) and urinary (u-FSH) preparations in patients undergoing superovulation for IVF-ET using a short-term gonadotropin releasing hormone agonist (GnRH-a) (Triptorelin) protocol.MethodsA total of 88 women undergoing IVF-ET were included in this prospective study. They were randomized to receive u-FSH (150 IU/d), follitropin-alpha (100 IU/d), or follitropin-beta (100 IU/d) for 2 days, and dosages were subsequently adjusted according to the ovarian response.ResultsThe FSH dose required for the overall stimulation was significantly lower in patients treated with r-FSH than in those treated with u-FSH while serum FSH values were higher in the latter group. There were no statistically significant differences in ovarian response and IVF outcome between r-FSH preparations.ConclusionsRecombinant FSH preparations have a higher efficiency than urinary ones in patients undergoing IVF-ET using a short-term GnRH-a protocol. In this situation, the two recombinant follitropins have comparable effectiveness.
Full text 6,124 characters · extracted from oa-doi-fallback · 5 sections · click to expand

Abstract

Purpose: To compare the efficiency and efficacy of two recombinant human FSH (r-FSH) and urinary (u-FSH) preparations in patients undergoing superovulation for IVF-ET using a short-term gonadotropin releasing hormone agonist (GnRH-a) (Triptorelin) protocol.

Methods

A total of 88 women undergoing IVF-ET were included in this prospective study. They were randomized to receive u-FSH (150 IU/d), follitropin-α (100 IU/d), or follitropin-β (100 IU/d) for 2 days, and dosages were subsequently adjusted according to the ovarian response.

Results

The FSH dose required for the overall stimulation was significantly lower in patients treated with r-FSH than in those treated with u-FSH while serum FSH values were higher in the latter group. There were no statistically significant differences in ovarian response and IVF outcome between r-FSH preparations.

Conclusions

Recombinant FSH preparations have a higher efficiency than urinary ones in patients undergoing IVF-ET using a short-term GnRH-a protocol. In this situation, the two recombinant follitropins have comparable effectiveness. Similar content being viewed by others

References

Howles CM: Genetic engineering of human FSH (Gonal F). Hum Reprod Update 1996;2:172-191 Out HJ, Driessen SG, Mannaerts BM, Coelingh Bennink HJ: Recombinant follicle-stimulating hormone (follitropin beta, Puregon) yields higher pregnancy rates in in vitro fertilization than urinary gonadotropins. Fertil Steril 1997;68:138-142 Bergh C, Howles CM, Borg K, Hamberger L, Josefsson B, Nilsson L, Wikland M: Recombinant human follicle stimulating hormone (r-FSH; Gonal-F) versus highly purified urinary FSH (Metrodin HP): Results of a randomized comparative study in women undergoing assisted reproductive techniques. Hum Reprod 1997;12:2133-2139 Daya S, Gunby J: Recombinant versus urinary follicle stimulating hormone for ovarian stimulation in assisted reproduction. Hum Reprod 1999;14:2207-2215 Hedon B, Hugues JN, Emperaire JC, Chabaud JJ, Barbereau D, Boujenah A, Howles CM, Truong F: A comparative prospective study of a chronic low dose versus a conventional ovulation stimulation regimen using recombinant human follicle stimulating hormone in anovulatory infertile women. Hum Reprod 1998;13:2688-2692 Coelingh Bennink HJ, Fauser BC, Out HJ: Recombinant follicle-stimulating hormone (FSH; Puregon) is more efficient than urinary FSH (Metrodin) in women with clomiphene citrate-resistant, normogonadotropic, chronic anovulation: A prospective, multicenter, assessor-blind, randomized, clinical trial. European Puregon Collaborative Anovulation Study Group. Fertil Steril 1998;69:19-25 Raga F, Bonnilla-Musoles F, Casan EM, Bonilla F: Recombinant follicle stimulating hormone stimulation in poor responders with normal basal concentrations of follicle stimulating hormone and oestradiol: Improved reproductive outcome. Hum Reprod 1999;14:1431-1434 Loumaye E, Dreano M, Galazka, Howles C, Ham L, Manufo A, Eshbol A, Gudice E, DeLuca E, Sirna A, Antonetti F, Giartosio CE, Scaglia L, Kelton C, Campbell R, Chappel S, Duthu B, Cymbalista S, Lepage P: Recombinant follicle stimulating hormone: Development of the first biotechnology product for the treatment of infertility. Hum Reprod Update 1998;4:862-881 Hoomans, EH, Andersen AN, Loft A, Leerentveld RA, van Kamp AA, Zech H: A prospective, randomized clinical trial comparing 150 IU recombinant follicle stimulating hormone (Puregon®) and 225 IU highly purified urinary follicle stimulating hormone (Metrodin-HP®) in a fixed-dose regimen in women undergoing ovarian stimulation. Hum Reprod 1999;14:2442-2447 Tulppala, M, Aho M, Tuuri T, Vilska S, Foudila T, Hakala-Ala-Pietilä T, Moilanen J, Bützow T, Kaukoranta S, Söderström-Anitila V, Siegberg R, Suikkari AM, Hovatta O: Comparison of two recombinant follicle-stimulating hormone preparations in in-vitro fertilization:Arandomized clinical study. HumReprod 1999;11:2709-2715 Brinsden, P, Akagbosu F, Gibbons LM, Lancaster S, Gourdon D, Engrand P, Loumaye E: A comparison of the efficacy and tolerability of two recombinant human follicle-stimulating hormone preparations in patients undergoing in vitro fertilization-embryo transfer. Fertil Steril 2000;73:114-116 Harlin, J, Csemiczky G, Wramsby H, Fried G: Recombinant follicle stimulating hormone in in-vitro fertilization treatment-clinical experience with follitropin alpha and follitropin beta. Hum Reprod 2000;15:239-244. The European Recombinant human LH study group: Recombinant human luteinizing hormone (LH) to support recombinant human follicle-stimulating hormone (FSH)-induced follicular development in LH and FSH-deficient anovulatory women: A dose-finding study. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 1998;83:1507-1514 CPMP Working Party on Efficacy of Medical Products: Good clinical practice for trial on medicinal products in the European Community. Pharmacol. Toxicol. 1990;67:361-372 Philips, E, Page M, Fleming SD: A prospective comparison of two different recombinant FSH preparations. Abstract Book of the 11th World Congress on In Vitro Fertilization and Human Reproductive Genetics 1999;88 (Abstract 0-053) Von During, V, Kahn JA, Sunde, Kjotrod SB, Vainio T: Results of a prospective randomized study comparing two recombinant FSH preparations (Gonal F, Puregon) in IVF and ICSI treatments. Abstract Book of the 11th World Congress on In Vitro Fertilization and Human Reproductive Genetics 1999;265 (Abstract P-199) Olijve, W, de Boer W, Mulders JWM, van Wezenbeek PNGF: Molecular biology and biochemistry of human recombinant follicle stimulating hormone (Puregon). Mol Hum Reprod 1996;5:371-382 Author information Authors and Affiliations Rights and permissions About this article Cite this article Hugues, JN., Bry-Gauillard, H., Bständig, B. et al. CLINICAL ASSISTED REPRODUCTION: Comparison of Recombinant and Urinary Follicle-Stimulating Hormone Preparations in Short-Term Gonadotropin Releasing Hormone Agonist Protocol for In Vitro Fertilization-Embryo Transfer. J Assist Reprod Genet 18, 193–198 (2001). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1009408029509 Issue date: DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1009408029509

Text is read by the "Ask this paper" AI Q&A widget below. Extraction quality varies by source — PMC NXML preserves structure cleanly, OA-HTML may include some navigation residue, and OA-PDF can have broken hyphenation. The publisher copy (via DOI) is the canonical version.

My notes (saved in your browser only)

⚙ Ask this paper AI returns verbatim quotes from the full text · source: oa-doi-fallback ⓘ

Answers must be backed by verbatim quotes from this paper's full text. Hallucinated quotes are dropped automatically; if no verbatim passage answers the question, we say so. How this works

Citation neighborhood (no data yet)

We don't have any in-corpus citations linked to this paper yet. The paper's references may be in our DB but unresolved to ``paper_id`` (resolution happens at ingest when the cited DOI matches a row we already have). Run the cross-source citation reconcile pass to retry.

Source provenance

europepmc
last seen: 2026-07-16T06:15:11.481547+00:00