ArticleJournal of assisted reproduction and genetics2017
Use of various gonadotropin and biosimilar formulations for in vitro fertilization cycles: results of a worldwide Web-based survey.
Article in Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Corifollitropin alfa versus daily recombinant FSH for ovarian stimulation in women of advanced maternal age: a cost-minimization analysis in an out-of-pocket setting.Frontiers in reproductive health · 2026Article
- Comparison of efficacy, safety, and economy of recombinant and urinary follicle-stimulating hormone in women with a predicted normal response undergoing assisted reproductive technology.Journal of ovarian research · 2025Article
- Comparative effectiveness of recombinant human follicle-stimulating hormone alfa (r-hFSH-alfa) versus highly purified urinary human menopausal gonadotropin (hMG HP) in assisted reproductive technology (ART) treatments: a non-interventional study in Germany.Reproductive biology and endocrinology : RB&E · 2021Article
- Human Recombinant FSH and Its Biosimilars: Clinical Efficacy, Safety, and Cost-Effectiveness in Controlled Ovarian Stimulation for In Vitro Fertilization.Pharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland) · 2020Review
- Effectiveness and safety of follitropin alfa (Ovaleap®) for ovarian stimulation using a GnRH antagonist protocol in real-world clinical practice: a multicenter, prospective, open, non-interventional assisted reproductive technology study.Reproductive biology and endocrinology : RB&E · 2020Observational
- Management Strategies for POSEIDON Groups 3 and 4.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2019Review
- Clinical Outcomes in Patients Receiving Originator Follitropin Alfa and Follitropin Alfa Biosimilars in Real-world Clinical Practice: A Retrospective Study.Journal of human reproductive sciencesArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 6 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThe purpose of this study was to identify trends in gonadotropin therapy in patients undergoing in vitro fertilization (IVF) treatment worldwide.
methodsRetrospective evaluation utilizing the results of a Web-based survey, IVF-Worldwide ( www.IVF-worldwide.com ) was performed.
resultsThree hundred fourteen centers performing a total of 218,300 annual IVF cycles were evaluated. Respondents representing 62.2% of cycles (n = 135,800) did not believe there was a difference between urinary and recombinant gonadotropins in terms of efficacy and live birth rate. Of the respondents, 67.3% (n = 146,800) reported no difference between recombinant and urinary formulations in terms of short-term safety and risk of ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome. In terms of long-term safety using human urinary gonadotropins, 50.6% (n = 110,400) of respondents believe there are potential long-term risks including prion disease. For 95.3% of units (n = 208,000), the clinician was the decision maker determining which specific gonadotropins are used for IVF. Of the units, 62.6% (n = 136,700) identified efficacy as the most important factor in deciding which gonadotropin to prescribe. While most (67.3%, n = 146,800) were aware of new biosimilar recombinant FSH products entering the market, 92% (n = 201,000) reported they would like more information. A fraction of respondents (25.6%, n = 55,900) reported having experience with these new products, and of these, 80.3% (n = 46,200) reported that they were similar in efficacy as previously used gonadotropins in a similar patient group.
conclusionsRespondents representing the majority of centers do not believe a difference exists between urinary and recombinant gonadotropins with respect to efficacy and live birth rates. While many are aware of new biosimilar recombinant FSH products entering the market, over 90% desire more information on these products.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.