Evidence map›Paper›PMID 20846363›Full record

SynthesisReproductive biology and endocrinology : RB&E2010

Recombinant human follicle-stimulating hormone produces more oocytes with a lower total dose per cycle in assisted reproductive technologies compared with highly purified human menopausal gonadotrophin: a meta-analysis.

Philippe Lehert, Joan C Schertz, Diego Ezcurra

Open access · goldAbstract readComparative StudyMeta-AnalysisReview
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Reproductive biology and endocrinology : RB&E, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 29 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
29citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
5.2field-weighted citation impact, top 5% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

29 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 68 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Management Strategies for POSEIDON Group 2.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2020
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Management Strategies for POSEIDON Groups 3 and 4.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2019
    Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 2 institutions in 3 countries.

Philippe LehertDepartment of Statistics, Faculty of Economics FUCAM, Louvain Academy, 151, chaussée de Binche, B-7000 Mons, Belgium.
Joan C Schertz
Diego Ezcurra
Merck (Germany) · DEMerck Serono (Switzerland) · CH

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundHuman menopausal gonadotrophins and recombinant human follicle stimulating hormone are the two main gonadotrophin products utilized for controlled ovarian stimulation in assisted reproductive technologies. In this meta-analysis, the number of oocytes was designated as the most relevant endpoint directly resulting from ovarian stimulation, and therefore where the drug effect may be estimated with the best sensitivity.

methodsAll published randomized controlled trials on ovarian stimulation comparing the two gonadotrophin products were evaluated. Internal validity was determined using Chalmers' validated scale. If trials did not meet the established quality criteria, a sensitivity analysis assessed the stability of the results. The comparison of continuous variables was conducted following the weighted mean difference and the standardized mean difference (Cohen's effect size) with the random model. Given the known relationship of baseline conditions on treatment endpoints, results were adjusted for age, body mass index and type of infertility.

resultsSixteen studies involving 4040 patients were included. Treatment with human menopausal gonadotrophins resulted in fewer oocytes (-1.54; 95% CI: -2.53 to -0.56; P < 0.0001) compared to recombinant human follicle-stimulating hormone. When adjusting for baseline conditions, the mean difference estimate was -2.10 (95% CI: -2.83 to -1.36; P < 0.001). A higher total dose of human menopausal gonadotrophin was necessary (mean difference, 235.46 IU [95% CI: 16.62 to 454.30; P = 0.03]; standardized mean difference, 0.33 [95% CI: 0.08 to 0.58; P = 0.01]). The pregnancy absolute risk difference (RD [hMG-r-hFSH]) for fresh transfers was 3% (P = 0.051), and the relative risk 1.10 (P = 0.06). When adjusted for baseline conditions, the relative risk was 1.04 (P = 0.49) and absolute difference was 0.01 (P = 0.34), respectively.

conclusionsBecause baseline conditions are predictive of outcome, meta-analytic results are more sensitive when these variables are considered. Using an endpoint closely associated with the stimulation period, sufficient sensitivity is achieved to compare gonadotrophin treatments. As the largest meta-analysis published to date on this subject, treatment with human menopausal gonadotrophins is characterized by fewer oocytes and a higher total dose. When considering only fresh transfers, pregnancy rates were similar.

Indexed as

Reproductive Techniques, AssistedCell CountDose-Response Relationship, DrugFemaleFertility Agents, FemaleFollicle Stimulating Hormone, HumanHumansInfertilityMenotropinsMenstrual CycleOocytesOvulation InductionPregnancyRecombinant ProteinsTreatment OutcomeFertility Agents, FemaleFollicle Stimulating Hormone, HumanMenotropinsRecombinant Proteins

Identifiers

PMID20846363
PMCPMC2954883
OpenAlexW2133496625

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.