Individualized recombinant human follicle-stimulating hormone dosing using the CONSORT calculator in assisted reproductive technology: a large, multicenter, observational study of routine clinical practice.

PURPOSE: This postmarketing surveillance survey was conducted to investigate the utility of the CONsistency in r-FSH Starting dOses for individualized tReatmenT (CONSORT) calculator for individualizing recombinant human follicle-stimulating hormone (r-hFSH) starting doses for controlled ovarian stimulation (COS) in routine clinical practice. METHODS: This was a 3-year, open-label, observational study evaluating data from women undergoing COS for assisted reproductive technology at 31 German fertility centers. Physicians stated their recommended r-hFSH starting dose, then generated a CONSORT-recommended r-hFSH starting dose. Physicians could prescribe any r-hFSH starting dose. The primary objective was to compare the r-hFSH starting dose recommended by the physician with the CONSORT-calculated dose and that prescribed. Statistical analyses were conducted post hoc. RESULTS: Data were collected from 2,579 patients; the mean (standard deviation [SD]) age was 30.5 (2.93) years (range: 19-40 years). The mean (SD) CONSORT-calculated r-hFSH starting dose was significantly lower than the physician-recommended dose (134.5 [38.0] IU versus 164.6 [47.1] IU; P<0.0001); the mean (SD) starting dose prescribed was 162.2 (48.4) IU. CONSORT-calculated doses were prescribed for 27.3% (number [n] =677) of patients, and non-CONSORT-calculated doses prescribed for 72.7% (n=1,800). The mean (SD) number of oocytes retrieved per patient was 10.6 (6.15) and 11.4 (6.66) in the CONSORT and non-CONSORT groups, respectively; the mean (SD) number of embryos transferred per patient was 1.98 (0.41) and 2.03 (0.45), respectively. Clinical pregnancy rates per COS cycle were 38.8% (CONSORT) and 34.8% (non-CONSORT) (P=0.142); clinical pregnancy rates per embryos transferred were 45.0% and 39.5%, respectively (P=0.049). Miscarriage occurred in 14.8% of all clinical pregnancies ( CONSORT: 12.5%; non- CONSORT: 15.3%). The rate of grade 3 ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS) was 0.3% (n=2) in the CONSORT group and 0.6% (n=11) in the non-CONSORT group. OHSS led to hospitalization in 0.81% (n=21) of cases (CONSORT group: 0.74% [n=5]; non-CONSORT group: 0.83% [n=15]). CONCLUSION: Physician-recommended r-hFSH starting doses were generally higher than those calculated by CONSORT; most patients were prescribed a higher starting dose than that recommended by CONSORT.

A large, multicentre, observational, post-marketing surveillance study of the 2:1 formulation of follitropin alfa and lutropin alfa in routine clinical practice for assisted reproductive technology.

BACKGROUND: Follicle-stimulating hormone (FSH) and luteinizing hormone (LH) both have a role to play in follicular development during the natural menstrual cycle. LH supplementation during controlled ovarian stimulation (COS) for assisted reproductive technology (ART) is used for patients with hypogonadotropic hypogonadism. However, the use of exogenous LH in COS in normogonadotropic women undergoing ART is the subject of debate. The aim of this study was to investigate characteristics of infertile women who received the 2:1 formulation of follitropin alfa and lutropin alfa (indicated for stimulation of follicular development in women with severe LH and FSH deficiency) in German clinical practice. METHODS: A 3-year, multicentre, open-label, observational/non-interventional, post-marketing surveillance study of women (21-45 years) undergoing ART. Primary endpoint: reason for prescribing the 2:1 formulation of follitropin alfa and lutropin alfa. Secondary variables included: COS duration/dose; oocytes retrieved; fertilization; clinical pregnancy; ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS). RESULTS: In total, 2220 cycles were assessed; at least one reason for prescribing the 2:1 formulation was given in 1834/2220 (82.6%) cycles. Most common reasons were: poor ovarian response (POR) (39.4%), low baseline LH (17.8%), and age (13.8%). COS: mean dose of the 2:1 formulation on first day, 183.1/91.5 IU; mean duration, 10.8 days. In 2173/2220 (97.9%) cycles, human chorionic gonadotrophin was administered. Oocyte pick-up (OPU) was attempted in 2108/2220 (95.0%) cycles; mean (standard deviation) 8.0 (5.4) oocytes retrieved/OPU cycle. Fertilization (≥1 oocyte fertilized) rates: in vitro fertilization (IVF), 391/439 (89.1%) cycles; intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI)/IVF + ICSI, 1524/1613 (94.5%) cycles. Clinical pregnancy rate: all cycles, 25.9%; embryo transfer cycles, 31.3%. OHSS: hospitalization for OHSS, 8 (0.36%) cycles, Grade 2, 60 (2.7%), and Grade 3, 1 (0.05%). CONCLUSIONS: In German routine clinical practice, the most common reasons for using the 2:1 formulation of follitropin alfa and lutropin alfa for women undergoing ART were POR, low baseline LH, and age. Severe OHSS incidence was low and similar to that reported previously.

A 2:1 formulation of follitropin alfa and lutropin alfa in routine clinical practice: a large, multicentre, observational study.

BACKGROUND: A 2:1 (150 IU:75 IU) follitropin alfa:lutropin alfa formulation has been developed. A 3-year post-marketing surveillance study is ongoing in Germany to explore the use of this formulation in routine clinical practice. MATERIALS AND METHODS: An 11-month interim analysis of data from assisted reproductive technology (ART) cycles only is described. RESULTS: Data were available from 857 patients undergoing 919 cycles of ART at 19 centres. Most patients (58.7%) were aged ≥ 35 years, and many (41.3%) were undergoing their first ART cycle. Main reasons cited by physicians for prescribing this formulation were poor response in a previous treatment cycle (n = 303) and low basal luteinizing hormone (LH) level (n = 107). Mean (standard deviation) duration of ovarian stimulation was 10.8 (2.6) days. In 90.7% of cycles, the 2:1 formulation was administered throughout the stimulation period. Most frequent LH daily dose was 75 IU. Embryo transfer was conducted in 741 cycles; clinical pregnancy rate per transfer was 27.5%. Three cases of ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome developed in three patients (3/741 [0.4%] cycles); one required hospitalization. No other major safety events were reported. CONCLUSION: This interim analysis shows that use of the 2:1 formulation for ovarian stimulation during routine ART procedures is effective in achieving clinical pregnancies and is associated with a positive safety profile.