SynthesisJournal of assisted reproduction and genetics2024
The pregnancy outcomes among women receiving individualized algorithm dosing with follitropin delta: a systematic review of randomized controlled trials.
Synthesis in Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Restoration of spermatogenesis in a male with prolactinoma-induced hypogonadotropic hypogonadism using follitropin delta and recombinant choriogonadotropin alfa: a case report.Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics · 2026Article
- Article
- Comparative efficacy of r-hFSH Alfa + r-LH versus r-hFSH delta + hMG in poor ovarian responders.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo investigate whether the ovarian stimulation with follitropin delta in an individualized algorithm-based manner is inferior to recombinant human-follicle stimulating's follitropin alfa or follitropin beta conventional dosing regarding a series of established primary endpoints.
methodsWe conducted a registered systematic review (CRD42024512792) on PubMed-MEDLINE, Web of Science™, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and Scopus. Our search was designed to cover all relevant literature, particularly randomized controlled trials. We critically and comparatively analyzed the outcomes for each primary endpoint based on the intervention, reflected by the positive βhCG test, clinical pregnancy, vital pregnancy, ongoing pregnancy, live birth, live birth at 4 weeks, and multiple pregnancies.
resultsSix randomized controlled trials were included in the quality assessment as priority manuscripts, revealing an 83.3% low risk of bias. Follitropin delta led to non-significant differences in each parameter of interest from positive βhCG test (691; 53.44% vs. 602; 46.55%), ongoing pregnancies (603; 53.79% vs. 518; 46.20%), clinical and vital pregnancies (1,073; 52.80% vs. 959; 47.19%), to live birth and at 4 weeks (595; 54.14% vs. 504; 45.85%) with only 2 losses, and even multiple pregnancies (8; 66.66% vs. 4; 33.33%). However, follitropin delta was well-tolerated among hypo- and hyper-responders without significant risk of ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome and/or preventive interventions in contrast with follitropin alfa or follitropin beta.
conclusionThe personalized individualized-based algorithm dosing with follitropin delta is non-inferior to conventional follitropin alfa or follitropin beta. It is as effective in promoting a similar response in women without significant comparable adverse effects.
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.