Pouwer Annefloor W, Farquhar Cindy, Kremer Jan A M
Department of Gynaecology and Obstetrics, Rijnstate Hospital, Wagnerlaan 55, PO Box 9555, Arnhem, Netherlands, 6800 TA.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2015 Jul 14;2015(7):CD009577. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD009577.pub3.
Assisted reproduction techniques (ART), such as in vitro fertilisation (IVF) and intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI), can help subfertile couples to create a family. It is necessary to induce multiple follicles, which is achieved by follicle stimulating hormone (FSH) injections. Current treatment regimens prescribe daily injections of FSH (urinary FSH either with or without luteinizing hormone (LH) injections or recombinant FSH (rFSH)).Recombinant DNA technologies have produced a new recombinant molecule which is a long-acting FSH, named corifollitropin alfa (Elonva) or FSH-CTP. A single dose of long-acting FSH is able to keep the circulating FSH level above the threshold necessary to support multi-follicular growth for an entire week. The optimal dose of long-acting FSH is still being determined. A single injection of long-acting FSH can replace seven daily FSH injections during the first week of controlled ovarian stimulation (COS) and can make assisted reproduction more patient friendly.
To compare the effectiveness of long-acting FSH versus daily FSH in terms of pregnancy and safety outcomes in women undergoing IVF or ICSI treatment cycles.
We searched the following electronic databases, trial registers and websites from inception to June 2015: the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), the Cochrane Menstrual Disorders and Subfertility Group (MDSG) Specialized Register, MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, CINAHL, electronic trial registers for ongoing and registered trials, citation indexes, conference abstracts in the ISI Web of Knowledge, LILACS, Clinical Study Results (for clinical trial results of marketed pharmaceuticals), PubMed and OpenSIGLE. We also carried out handsearches.
We included all randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing long-acting FSH versus daily FSH in women who were part of a couple with subfertility and undertaking IVF or ICSI treatment cycles with a GnRH antagonist or agonist protocol.
Two review authors independently performed study selection, data extraction and assessment of risk of bias. We contacted trial authors in cases of missing data. We calculated risk ratios for each outcome, and our primary outcomes were live birth rate and ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS) rate. Our secondary outcomes were ongoing pregnancy rate, clinical pregnancy rate, multiple pregnancy rate, miscarriage rate, any other adverse event (including ectopic pregnancy, congenital malformations, drug side effects and infection) and patient satisfaction with the treatment. Trials reported all outcomes, except patient satisfaction with the treatment.
We included six RCTs with a total of 3753 participants and we graded the quality of the included studies as moderate. All studies included women with an indication for COS as part of an IVF/ICSI cycle with age ranging from 18 to 41 years. A comparison of long-acting FSH versus daily FSH did not show evidence of difference in effect on overall live birth rate (Risk ratio (RR) 0.95, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.84 to 1.07; 2363 participants, eight studies; I² statistic = 44%) or OHSS (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.74 to 1.37; 3753 participants, nine studies; I² statistic = 0%). We compared subgroups by dose of long-acting FSH. There was evidence of reduced live birth rate in women who received lower doses (60 to 120 μg) of long-acting FSH compared to daily FSH (RR 0.70, 95% CI 0.52 to 0.93; 645 participants, three studies; I² statistic = 0%). There was no evidence a difference between the groups in live births in the medium dose (150 to 180 μg) subgroup (RR 1.03, 95% CI 0.90 to 1.18; 1685 participants, four studies; I² statistic = 6%). There was no evidence of a difference between the groups in the clinical pregnancy rate (any dose), ongoing pregnancy rate (any dose), multiple pregnancy rate (any dose), miscarriage rate (low or medium dose), ectopic pregnancy rate (any dose), congenital malformation rate, congenital malformation rate; major or minor (low or medium dose).
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: The use of a medium dose (150 to 180 μg) of long-acting FSH is a safe treatment option and equally effective compared to daily FSH in women with unexplained subfertility. There was evidence of reduced live birth rate in women receiving a low dose (60 to 120 μg) of long-acting FSH compared to daily FSH. Further research is needed to determine whether long-acting FSH is safe and effective for use in hyper- or poor responders and in women with all causes of subfertility.
辅助生殖技术(ART),如体外受精(IVF)和卵胞浆内单精子注射(ICSI),可以帮助不孕夫妇组建家庭。诱导多个卵泡发育是必要的,这通过注射促卵泡激素(FSH)来实现。目前的治疗方案规定每日注射FSH(尿源性FSH,可联合或不联合黄体生成素(LH)注射,或重组FSH(rFSH))。重组DNA技术产生了一种新的重组分子,即长效FSH,名为注射用重组人促卵泡激素α(Elonva)或FSH-CTP。单剂量的长效FSH能够使循环中的FSH水平在整个一周内维持在支持多个卵泡生长所需的阈值之上。长效FSH的最佳剂量仍在确定中。在控制性卵巢刺激(COS)的第一周,单次注射长效FSH可以替代每日7次的FSH注射,并且可以使辅助生殖对患者更加友好。
比较长效FSH与每日FSH在接受IVF或ICSI治疗周期的女性中的妊娠和安全结局方面的有效性。
我们检索了以下电子数据库、试验注册库和网站,检索时间从数据库建立至2015年6月:Cochrane对照试验中心注册库(CENTRAL)、Cochrane月经紊乱与不育症小组(MDSG)专业注册库、MEDLINE、EMBASE、PsycINFO、CINAHL、正在进行和已注册试验的电子试验注册库、引文索引、ISI Web of Knowledge中的会议摘要、LILACS、临床研究结果(用于上市药品的临床试验结果)、PubMed和OpenSIGLE。我们还进行了手工检索。
我们纳入了所有比较长效FSH与每日FSH的随机对照试验(RCT),这些试验中的女性是不孕夫妇的一方,正在接受使用GnRH拮抗剂或激动剂方案的IVF或ICSI治疗周期。
两位综述作者独立进行研究选择、数据提取和偏倚风险评估。我们在数据缺失的情况下联系试验作者。我们计算了每个结局的风险比,我们的主要结局是活产率和卵巢过度刺激综合征(OHSS)率。我们的次要结局是持续妊娠率、临床妊娠率、多胎妊娠率、流产率、任何其他不良事件(包括异位妊娠、先天性畸形、药物副作用和感染)以及患者对治疗的满意度。试验报告了所有结局,但未报告患者对治疗的满意度。
我们纳入了6项RCT,共3753名参与者,我们将纳入研究的质量评为中等。所有研究纳入了作为IVF/ICSI周期一部分有COS指征的女性,年龄范围为18至41岁。比较长效FSH与每日FSH未显示对总体活产率(风险比(RR)0.95,95%置信区间(CI)0.84至1.07;2363名参与者,8项研究;I²统计量 = 44%)或OHSS(RR 1.00,95%CI 0.74至1.37;3753名参与者,9项研究;I²统计量 = 0%)有效果差异的证据。我们按长效FSH剂量对亚组进行了比较。有证据表明,与每日FSH相比,接受低剂量(60至120μg)长效FSH的女性活产率降低(RR 0.70,95%CI 0.52至0.93;645名参与者,3项研究;I²统计量 = 0%)。在中等剂量(150至180μg)亚组中,两组在活产方面没有差异的证据(RR 1.03,95%CI 0.90至1.18;1685名参与者,4项研究;I²统计量 =