Skip to main content
NCBI home page
Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics logoLink to Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics
. 2000 Feb;17(2):107–112. doi: 10.1023/A:1009418017662

A Randomized Prospective Cross-Over Study of Highly Purified Follicle-Stimulating Hormone and Human Menopausal Gonadotrophin for Ovarian Hyperstimulation in Women Aged 37–41 Years

S Bassil 1,✉, C Wyns 3, J Donnez 3
PMCID: PMC3455161  PMID: 10806590

Abstract

Purpose: In the present study, we investigated the benefitsof highly purified FSH (H.P. FSH) in comparison with humanmenopausal gonadotrophin (hMG) in IVF patients aged37–41 years.

Methods: Twenty patients experienced within a period offour months both preparations in subsequent cycles througha prospective randomized cross-over design. A standardhormonal treatment consisting of a flare-up protocol usinggonadotrophin-releasing hormone agonist (GnRHa) incombination with the same starting dose of H.P. FSH or hMGwas used in all cycles.

Results: Cycles stimulated with H.P. FSH resulted in asignificantly higher mean number (10.3 ± 3) of ovocytesretrieved with a significantly shorter (13 ± 2.3 days)duration of stimulation compared to cycles treated with hMG[mean number of oocytes 7.3. ± 5 (P < 0.01) and meanduration of stimulation 14.7 ± 3.9 days (P < 0.02)]. Nodetrimental effect of basal or exogenous LH on oocytequality was observed in our study.

Conclusions: In our experience, H.P. FSH preparationsseemed to be more effective than hMG preparations forovarian stimulation in this group of women aged 37–41years.

Keywords: cross-over, FSH, hMG, IVF

Full Text

The Full Text of this article is available as a PDF (38.1 KB).

REFERENCES

  • 1.Stanger J, Yovich J. Reduced in vitro fertilization of human ovocyte from patients with raised basal luteinizing hormone levels during the follicular phase. Br J Obstet Gynaecol. 1985;92:885–393. doi: 10.1111/j.1471-0528.1985.tb01113.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 2.Daya S, Gunby J, Hughes E, Collins J, Sagle M. Randomized controlled trial of follicle stimulating hormone versus human menopausal gonadotrophin in in-vitro fertilization. Hum Reprod. 1995;10:1392–1396. doi: 10.1093/humrep/10.6.1392. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3.Homburg R, Armar NA, Eshel A, Adams J, Jacobs HJ. Influence of serum luteinising hormone concentration on ovulation, conception and early pregnancy loss in polycystic ovary syndrome. Br Med J. 1988;297:1024–1026. doi: 10.1136/bmj.297.6655.1024. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Regan L, Owen EJ, Jacobs HS. Hypersecretion of luteinizing hormone, infertility and miscarriage. Lancet. 1990;336:1141–1144. doi: 10.1016/0140-6736(90)92765-a. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5.Rojas F, Moretti-Rojas I, Balmaceda J, Asch R. Delayed occurrence of an LH surge after hCG administration during ovarian stimulation with gonadotropins: Effect of LHRH treatment. Hum Reprod. 1989;4:643–646. doi: 10.1093/oxfordjournals.humrep.a136958. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Fleming R, Coutts JRT. Induction of multiple follicular growth in normally menstruating women with endogenous gonadotrophin suppression. Fertil Steril. 1986;45:226–230. doi: 10.1016/s0015-0282(16)49159-4. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 7.Howles C, MacNamee M, Edwards R. Follicular development and early luteal function of conception and non-conceptual cycles after human in vitro fertilization: endocrine correlates. Hum Reprod. 1987;2:17–21. doi: 10.1093/oxfordjournals.humrep.a136482. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Muasher S. Controversies in assisted reproduction: Treatment of low responders. J Assist Reprod Genet. 1993;10:112–114. doi: 10.1007/BF01207730. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Craft Factors affecting the outcome of assisted conception. Br Med Bull. 1990;46:769–782. doi: 10.1093/oxfordjournals.bmb.a072430. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 10.Spandorfer S, Avrech O, Colombero L, Palermo G, Rosenwaks Z. Effect of parental age on fertilization and pregnancy characteristics in couples treated by intracytoplasmic sperm injection. Hum Reprod. 1998;13:334–338. doi: 10.1093/humrep/13.2.334. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 11.Bergh C, Howles CM, Borg K, Hamberger L, Josefsson B, Nilsson L, Wikland M. Recombinant human follicle stimulating hormone (r-hFSH; 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. doi: 10.1093/humrep/12.10.2133. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 12.Giudice E, Crisci C, Eshkal A, Papoian R. Composition of commercial gonadotrophin preparations extracted from human post-menopausal urine: characterisation of non-gonadotrophin proteins. Hum Reprod. 1994;9:2291–2299. doi: 10.1093/oxfordjournals.humrep.a138440. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 13.Bassil S, Wyns C, Toussaint-Demylle D, Abdelnour W, Donnez J. Predictive factors of multiple pregnancy in in vitro fertilization. J Reprod Medicine. 1997;42:761–766. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 14.Edelstein M, Brzyski R, Jones R, Simonetti S, Muasher S. Equivalency of human menopausal gonadotropin and follicle-stimulating hormone stimulation after gonadotropin-releasing hormone suppression. Fertil Steril. 1990;53:103–106. doi: 10.1016/s0015-0282(16)53224-5. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 15.Tanbo T, Dale PO, Ejekshus E, Haring E, Abyholm T. Stimulation with human menopausal gonadotropin versus follicle stimulating hormone after pituitary suppression in polycystic ovarian syndrome. Fertile Steril. 1990;53:798–803. doi: 10.1016/s0015-0282(16)53512-2. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 16.Westergaard L, Erb K, Laursen S, Rasmussen P, Rex S. effect of human menopausal gonadotrophin and highly purified, urine-derived stimulating hormone on the outcome of in-vitro fertilization in down-regulated normogonadotrophic women. Hum Reprod. 1996;11:1209–1213. doi: 10.1093/oxfordjournals.humrep.a019357. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 17.Daya S, Gunby J, Hughes E, Collins J, Sagle M. Folliclestimulating hormone versus human menopausal gonadotrophin for in-vitro fertilization cycles: A meta-analysis. Fertil Steril. 1995;64:347–354. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 18.Balasch J, Fabregues F, Creus M, Moreno V, Puerto B, Penarrubia J, Carmona F, Vanrell JA. Pure and highly purified follicle-stimulating hormone alone or in combination with human menopausal gonadotrophin for ovarian stimulation after pituitary suppression in in-vitro fertilization. Hum Reprod. 1996;11:2400–2404. doi: 10.1093/oxfordjournals.humrep.a019123. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 19.Söderström-Antilla V, Foudila T, Hovatta O. A randomized comparative study of highly purified follicle stimulating hormone and human menopausal gonadotrophin for ovarian hyperstimulation in an oocyte donation programme. Hum Reprod. 1996;11:1864–1870. doi: 10.1093/oxfordjournals.humrep.a019508. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 20.Diecfalusy E, Harlin J. Clinical-pharmacological studies on human menopausal gonadotrophin. Hum Reprod. 1988;3:21–27. doi: 10.1093/oxfordjournals.humrep.a136646. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 21.Fleming R, Chung CC, Yates RW, Coutts JR. Purified urinary follicle stimulating hormone induces different hormone profiles compared with menotrophins, dependent upon the route of administration and endogenous luteinizing hormone activity. Hum Reprod. 1996;11:1854–1858. doi: 10.1093/oxfordjournals.humrep.a019506. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 22.Jacobs HS, Porter R, Eshel A, Craft I. I. In: LHRH and its Analogues: Contraception and Therapeutic Application II. Vichery BH, Nestor IJ, editors. Lancaster: M.T.P. Press; 1987. pp. 303–319. [Google Scholar]
  • 23.Scott R, Hofmann G, Oehninger S, Muasher S. Intercycle variability of Day 3 follicle-stimulating hormone levels and its effect on stimulation quality in in vitro fertilization. Fertil Steril. 1990;54:297–302. doi: 10.1016/s0015-0282(16)53707-8. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 24.Staessen C, Nagy ZP, Liu J, Janssenwillen C, Camus M, Devroey P, Van Sterirteghem A. One year's experience with elective transfer of two good quality embryos in the human in-vitro fertilization and intracytoplasmic sperm injection programmes. Hum Reprod. 1995;10:3305–3312. doi: 10.1093/oxfordjournals.humrep.a135908. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 25.Khan K, Daya S, Collin J, Walter S. Empirical evidence of bias in infertility research: Overestimation of treatment effect in crossover trials using pregnancy as the outcome measure. Fertil Steril. 1996;65:939–945. doi: 10.1016/s0015-0282(16)58265-x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 26.te Velde E, Looman C. Crossover design versus parallel studies in infertility research. Fertil Steril. 1998;69:357–358. doi: 10.1016/s0015-0282(97)00491-3. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics are provided here courtesy of Springer Science+Business Media, LLC

RESOURCES