ArticleCureus2024
Cost-Effectiveness and Clinical Outcomes of Controlled Ovarian Stimulation With Follitropin Delta and Follitropin Alfa: A Retrospective Study.
Article in Cureus, 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.
- Progestin-only pretreatment enhances follicular synchronization and embryo development: a three-arm retrospective cohort study in GnRH antagonist cycles.Contraception and reproductive medicine · 2025Article
- Article
- Secretory Profile Analysis of Human Granulosa Cell Line Following Gonadotropin Stimulation.International journal of molecular sciences · 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
aimThis study compared the cost-effectiveness of two recombinant follicle-stimulating hormones (rFSH) formulations, Follitropin Delta and Follitropin Alfa, in controlled ovarian stimulation using cumulative live birth rates as an efficacy indicator. METHODOLOGY: This retrospective study was conducted across five clinics in Japan from April 2022 to December 2023, involving 446 first assisted reproductive technology (ART) cycles (200 with Follitropin Delta and 246 with Follitropin Alfa) were treated with rFSH monotherapy using either Follitropin Delta or Follitropin Alfa. We compared clinical outcomes such as cumulative pregnancy and live birth rates and analyzed cost-effectiveness using the cumulative live birth rates as the efficacy indicator and the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER).
resultsThe Follitropin Delta group had a significantly lower incidence of ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (15.90% vs. 27.00%,
conclusionsUsing Follitropin Delta for controlled ovarian stimulation in ART may be more cost-effective than Follitropin Alfa under Japan's Health Care Insurance System, offering higher cumulative live birth rates and minimal additional costs.
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.