Literature DB >> 14607557

Economic evaluation of highly purified menotropin compared with recombinant follicle-stimulating hormone in assisted reproduction.

Adam Lloyd1, Richard Kennedy, Julia Hutchinson, Will Sawyer.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To determine the cost of achieving pregnancy with different gonadotropin preparations.
DESIGN: Cost-minimization analysis of a prospective randomized clinical trial.
SETTING: Twenty-two centers in six countries. PATIENT(S): Women 18 to 36 years of age with infertility for more than 1 year who were undergoing IVF or ICSI. INTERVENTION(S): Highly purified hMG or recombinant FSH. RESULT(S): Mean cost of achieving an ongoing pregnancy. The mean cost per patient treatment cycle was estimated to be pound 2423 with highly purified hMG (95% CI, pound 2356 to pound 2495) and pound 2745 with recombinant FSH (95% CI, pound 2658 to pound 2830). The ongoing pregnancy rate was 22% with highly purified hMG and 19% with recombinant FSH. The cost per ongoing pregnancy was pound 10781 with highly purified hMG (95% CI, pound 9056 to pound 12919) and pound 14284 with recombinant FSH (95% CI, pound 11883 to pound 17891). CONCLUSION(S): Highly purified hMG and recombinant FSH are equally effective, but highly purified hMG is less expensive per cycle. Using highly purified hMG instead of recombinant FSH would translate into a 13% increase in the number of cycles that could be offered.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2003        PMID: 14607557     DOI: 10.1016/s0015-0282(03)02185-x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Fertil Steril        ISSN: 0015-0282            Impact factor:   7.329


  6 in total

1.  Recombinant follitropin alfa/lutropin alfa in fertility treatment.

Authors:  Ahmed Gibreel; Siladitya Bhattacharya
Journal:  Biologics       Date:  2010-02-04

2.  In vitro fertilisation with recombinant follicle stimulating hormone requires less IU usage compared with highly purified human menopausal gonadotrophin: results from a European retrospective observational chart review.

Authors:  Geoffrey H Trew; Adam P Brown; Samantha Gillard; Stuart Blackmore; Christine Clewlow; Paul O'Donohoe; Radoslaw Wasiak
Journal:  Reprod Biol Endocrinol       Date:  2010-11-08       Impact factor: 5.211

Review 3.  Contemporary pharmacological manipulation in assisted reproduction.

Authors:  Judith A F Huirne; Cornelis B Lambalk; Andre C D van Loenen; Roel Schats; Peter G A Hompes; Bart C J M Fauser; Nick S Macklon
Journal:  Drugs       Date:  2004       Impact factor: 9.546

4.  What Does Unexpected Suboptimal Response During Ovarian Stimulation Suggest, an Overlooked Group?

Authors:  Bijun Wang; Wenxia Liu; Yi Liu; Wen Zhang; Chenchen Ren; Yichun Guan
Journal:  Front Endocrinol (Lausanne)       Date:  2021-12-22       Impact factor: 5.555

5.  Economic evaluation of highly purified human menotropin or recombinant follicle-stimulating hormone for controlled ovarian stimulation in high-responder patients: analysis of the Menopur in Gonadotropin-releasing Hormone Antagonist Single Embryo Transfer-High Responder (MEGASET-HR) trial.

Authors:  Jared C Robins; Andrew F Khair; Eric A Widra; Michael M Alper; Winnie W Nelson; Eric D Foster; Anshul Sinha; Masakazu Ando; Patrick W Heiser; Gaurang S Daftary
Journal:  F S Rep       Date:  2020-11-10

6.  Comparative economic study of the use of corifollitropin alfa and daily rFSH for controlled ovarian stimulation in older patients: Cost-minimization analysis based on the PURSUE study.

Authors:  Gorka Barrenetxea; Juan Antonio García-Velasco; Belén Aragón; Jordi Osset; Max Brosa; Noemí López-Martínez; Buenaventura Coroleu
Journal:  Reprod Biomed Soc Online       Date:  2018-02-21
  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.