z-logo
open-access-imgOpen Access
Review of the safety, efficacy, costs and patient acceptability of recombinant follicle-stimulating hormone for injection in assisting ovulation induction in infertile women
Author(s) -
Madelon van Wely,
Marleen Nahuis,
Fulco van der Veen,
Ben W. Mol,
Jur Oosterhuis,
Peter Hompes
Publication year - 2009
Publication title -
international journal of women s health
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.136
H-Index - 45
ISSN - 1179-1411
DOI - 10.2147/ijwh.s4729
Subject(s) - anovulation , ovulation induction , medicine , follicle stimulating hormone , ovulation , gynecology , endocrinology , hormone , luteinizing hormone , polycystic ovary , insulin resistance , insulin
Anovulation is a common cause of female subfertility. Treatment of anovulation is aimed at induction of ovulation. In women with clomiphene-citrate resistant WHO group II anovulation, one of the treatment options is ovulation induction with exogenous follicle-stimulating hormone (FSH or follitropin). FSH is derived from urine or is produced as recombinant FSH. Two forms of recombinant FSH are available - follitropin alpha and follitropin beta. To evaluate the efficacy, safety, costs and acceptability of recombinant FSH, we performed a review to compare recombinant FSH with urinary-derived FSH products. Follitropin alpha, beta and urinary FSH products appeared to be equally effective in terms of pregnancy rates. Patient safety was also found to be comparable, as the incidence of side effects including multiple pregnancies was similar for all FSH products. In practice follitropin alpha and beta may be more convenient to use due to the ease of self-administration, but they are also more expensive than the urinary products.

The content you want is available to Zendy users.

Already have an account? Click here to sign in.
Having issues? You can contact us here
Accelerating Research

Address

John Eccles House
Robert Robinson Avenue,
Oxford Science Park, Oxford
OX4 4GP, United Kingdom