Efficacy, safety, and immunogenicity of a biosimilar recombinant human follicle-stimulating hormone (Folitime®) vs. Gonal-f® in women undergoing ovarian stimulation for IVF: A randomized, multicenter, evaluator-blinded, non-inferiority study.

OBJECTIVE: We compared the efficacy, safety, and immunogenicity of a biosimilar recombinant human follicle-stimulating hormone (Folitime®) with Gonal-f® in women undergoing ovarian stimulation for in-vitro fertilization. METHODS: This randomized (1:1), multicenter, assessor-blinded, non-inferiority, parallel-group, controlled study conducted at four infertility clinics in Argentina included infertile normogonadotropic women with ages below 39 years, with menstrual cycles of 25/35 days and a body mass index of 18-32 kg/m2 undergoing assisted reproductive technology therapy. During a 5-day fixed-dose phase, the women received 225 IU/day of Folitime® (n=49) or Gonal-f® (n=44), followed by a dose-adaptation phase up to a maximum of 450 IU/day. The non-inferiority margin for oocyte retrieval was estimated at -4 oocytes (one-sided test). Immunogenicity was investigated on days 9 and 84, following the start of treatment. RESULTS: The mean number of oocytes retrieved was 12.6 (SD 7.4) in the Folitime® group and 13.4 (SD 6.9) in the Gonal-f® group (per protocol analysis, 95% confidence interval = -3.82; 2.33), within the non-inferiority margin. Pregnancy rate at week 10 was 24.4% among subjects treated with Folitime® and 19.5% for subjects treated with Gonal-f®. One serious adverse drug reaction-late mild ovarian hyper stimulation syndrome and deep venous thrombosis in the left deep jugular vein-occurred in a subject treated with Folitime®. None of the subjects developed antibodies against the study drugs. There were no unexpected safety findings. CONCLUSIONS: Folitime® is non-inferior to Gonal-f®, with no differences in the safety profile and has been approved as a biosimilar in Argentina.

Evaluation of the safety and efficacy of corifollitropin alfa combined with GnRH agonist triggering in oocyte donation cycles. A prospective longitudinal study.

OBJECTIVE: In order to help make the dream of parenthood come true for oocyte acceptors, it is essential that the procedure is not dangerous or unpleasant for oocyte donors. The aim of this study was to identify differences in safety, efficacy and patient acceptability between a traditional stimulation antagonist protocol with recombinant-FSH (rFSH) with hCG-triggering, compared with an innovative antagonist protocol with corifollitropin alfa (Elonva®) plus GnRH agonist triggering in oocyte donors. METHODS: A prospective longitudinal study was conducted at an in vitro fertilization center in Greece. The same eighty donors underwent two consecutive antagonist stimulation schemes. Primary outcomes were patient satisfaction (scored by a questionnaire) and delivery rate per donor. Secondary outcomes were mean number of cumulus-oocyte-complexes, metaphase II (MII) oocytes and ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS) rate. RESULTS: Donors reported better adherence and less discomfort with the corifollitropin alpha + GnRH agonist-triggering protocol (p<0.001). No significant differences were identified in the clinical pregnancy rate per donor (p=0.13), the delivery rates, the number of oocytes (p=0.35), the number of MII oocytes (p=0.50) and the number of transferred embryos, between the two protocols. However, the luteal phase duration was significantly shorter (p<0.001) in the corifollitropin alpha + GnRH agonist-triggering protocol. Moreover, three cases of moderate OHSS (3.75%) were identified after hCG triggering, whereas no case of OHSS occurred after GnRH agonist ovulation induction (p=0.25). CONCLUSION: The use of corifollitropin alpha combined with a GnRH agonist for triggering is a safe, effective and acceptable protocol for oocyte donors.

Individualized versus conventional ovarian stimulation for in vitro fertilization: a multicenter, randomized, controlled, assessor-blinded, phase 3 noninferiority trial.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the efficacy and safety of follitropin delta, a new human recombinant FSH with individualized dosing based on serum antimüllerian hormone (AMH) and body weight, with conventional follitropin alfa dosing for ovarian stimulation in women undergoing IVF. DESIGN: Randomized, multicenter, assessor-blinded, noninferiority trial (ESTHER-1). SETTING: Reproductive medicine clinics. PATIENT(S): A total of 1,329 women (aged 18-40 years). INTERVENTION(S): Follitropin delta (AMH <15 pmol/L: 12 µg/d; AMH ≥15 pmol/L: 0.10-0.19 µg/kg/d; maximum 12 µg/d), or follitropin alfa (150 IU/d for 5 days, potential subsequent dose adjustments; maximum 450 IU/d). MAIN OUTCOMES MEASURE(S): Ongoing pregnancy and ongoing implantation rates; noninferiority margins -8.0%. RESULT(S): Ongoing pregnancy (30.7% vs. 31.6%; difference -0.9% [95% confidence interval (CI) -5.9% to 4.1%]), ongoing implantation (35.2% vs. 35.8%; -0.6% [95% CI -6.1% to 4.8%]), and live birth (29.8% vs. 30.7%; -0.9% [95% CI -5.8% to 4.0%]) rates were similar for individualized follitropin delta and conventional follitropin alfa. Individualized follitropin delta resulted in more women with target response (8-14 oocytes) (43.3% vs. 38.4%), fewer poor responses (fewer than four oocytes in patients with AMH <15 pmol/L) (11.8% vs. 17.9%), fewer excessive responses (≥15 or ≥20 oocytes in patients with AMH ≥15 pmol/L) (27.9% vs. 35.1% and 10.1% vs. 15.6%, respectively), and fewer measures taken to prevent ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (2.3% vs. 4.5%), despite similar oocyte yield (10.0 ± 5.6 vs. 10.4 ± 6.5) and similar blastocyst numbers (3.3 ± 2.8 vs. 3.5 ± 3.2), and less gonadotropin use (90.0 ± 25.3 vs. 103.7 ± 33.6 µg). CONCLUSION(S): Optimizing ovarian response in IVF by individualized dosing according to pretreatment patient characteristics results in similar efficacy and improved safety compared with conventional ovarian stimulation. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT01956110.

Randomized, controlled, open-label, non-inferiority study of the CONSORT algorithm for individualized dosing of follitropin alfa.

In this randomized, controlled, open-label, phase IV study, ovarian response after a follitropin alfa starting dose determined by the CONSORT calculator was compared with a standard dose (150 IU). Normo-ovulatory women (aged 18-34 years) eligible for assisted reproductive techniques were recruited (23 centres: nine European countries and Chile); 200 women were randomized (CONSORT [n = 96]; standard dosing [n = 104]). Significantly lower mean daily (121.5 versus 167.4 IU; P < 0.001) and total (1288.5 versus 1810.0 IU; P < 0.001) doses of follitropin alfa were administered in the CONSORT group. Clinical pregnancy rates were CONSORT (36.0%) and standard dosing (35.5%); estimated difference (confidence interval 0.6%; -13.5 to 14.6). Ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome occurred in 6.3% and 12.5% of patients in the CONSORT and standard-dosing groups, respectively. The primary efficacy analysis found a significantly lower mean [SD] number of oocytes retrieved in the CONSORT (10.0 [5.6]; P = 0.037) versus standard-dosing group (11.8 [5.3]). Although the CONSORT calculator was statistically inferior to standard dosing in the number of oocytes retrieved, clinical pregnancy rates (fresh embryo transfers) were similar in both groups, and incidence of ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome was lower in the CONSORT group.