Cost-Effectiveness and Clinical Outcomes of Controlled Ovarian Stimulation With Follitropin Delta and Follitropin Alfa: A Retrospective Study

Overview

Journal Cureus

Date 2025 Jan 27

PMID 39867102

Authors

Masato Kobanawa

Nanako Iwami

Masachi Hanaoka

Kunihiro Enatsu

Takuhiko Ichiyama

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Aim: This 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).

Results: The Follitropin Delta group had a significantly lower incidence of ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (15.90% vs. 27.00%, = 0.045) and higher cumulative pregnancy rates than the Follitropin Alfa group (87.30% vs. 76.20 %; = 0.03) after propensity score matching (PSM). Although cumulative live birth rates showed no significant differences (85.70% vs. 76.20%, = 0.08) and Follitropin Delta demonstrated higher cost than Follitropin AlfaFollitropin Alfa (832,036 yen and 826,936 yen), ICER indicated low costs per percentage of live births (538.58 yen/%: 95% confidence interval [CI]: 275.34-12,568.69 yen).

Conclusions: Using 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.

References

Howles C, Saunders H, Alam V, Engrand P . Predictive factors and a corresponding treatment algorithm for controlled ovarian stimulation in patients treated with recombinant human follicle stimulating hormone (follitropin alfa) during assisted reproduction technology (ART) procedures. An.... Curr Med Res Opin. 2006; 22(5):907-18. DOI: 10.1185/030079906X104678. View

Gardner D, Schoolcraft W . Culture and transfer of human blastocysts. Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol. 1999; 11(3):307-11. DOI: 10.1097/00001703-199906000-00013. View

Sekhon L, Shaia K, Santistevan A, Hunter Cohn K, Lee J, Yurttas Beim P . The cumulative dose of gonadotropins used for controlled ovarian stimulation does not influence the odds of embryonic aneuploidy in patients with normal ovarian response. J Assist Reprod Genet. 2017; 34(6):749-758. PMC: 5445047. DOI: 10.1007/s10815-017-0909-3. View

Popovic-Todorovic B, Loft A, Lindhard A, Bangsboll S, Andersson A, Nyboe Andersen A . A prospective study of predictive factors of ovarian response in 'standard' IVF/ICSI patients treated with recombinant FSH. A suggestion for a recombinant FSH dosage normogram. Hum Reprod. 2003; 18(4):781-7. DOI: 10.1093/humrep/deg181. View

Vlaisavljevic V, Apter S, Capalbo A, DAngelo A, Gianaroli L, Griesinger G . The Maribor consensus: report of an expert meeting on the development of performance indicators for clinical practice in ART. Hum Reprod Open. 2021; 2021(3):hoab022. PMC: 8254491. DOI: 10.1093/hropen/hoab022. View

Polyzos N, Drakopoulos P, Parra J, Pellicer A, Santos-Ribeiro S, Tournaye H . Cumulative live birth rates according to the number of oocytes retrieved after the first ovarian stimulation for in vitro fertilization/intracytoplasmic sperm injection: a multicenter multinational analysis including ∼15,000 women. Fertil Steril. 2018; 110(4):661-670.e1. DOI: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2018.04.039. View

Vaughan D, Leung A, Resetkova N, Ruthazer R, Penzias A, Sakkas D . How many oocytes are optimal to achieve multiple live births with one stimulation cycle? The one-and-done approach. Fertil Steril. 2016; 107(2):397-404.e3. DOI: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2016.10.037. View

Maheshwari A, McLernon D, Bhattacharya S . Cumulative live birth rate: time for a consensus?. Hum Reprod. 2015; 30(12):2703-7. DOI: 10.1093/humrep/dev263. View

Lispi M, Humaidan P, Bousfield G, DHooghe T, Ulloa-Aguirre A . Follicle-Stimulating Hormone Biological Products: Does Potency Predict Clinical Efficacy?. Int J Mol Sci. 2023; 24(10). PMC: 10218858. DOI: 10.3390/ijms24109020. View

10.

Fragoulakis V, Pescott C, Smeenk J, van Santbrink E, Oosterhuis G, Broekmans F . Economic Evaluation of Three Frequently Used Gonadotrophins in Assisted Reproduction Techniques in the Management of Infertility in the Netherlands. Appl Health Econ Health Policy. 2016; 14(6):719-727. DOI: 10.1007/s40258-016-0259-9. View

11.

Shen X, Guo Y, Liu Y, Song W, Li G, Jin H . Effects of total gonadotropin dose on embryo quality and clinical outcomes with AMH stratification in IVF cycles: a retrospective analysis of 12,588 patients. Eur J Med Res. 2024; 29(1):167. PMC: 10929233. DOI: 10.1186/s40001-024-01768-w. View

12.

Golan A, Weissman A . Symposium: Update on prediction and management of OHSS. A modern classification of OHSS. Reprod Biomed Online. 2009; 19(1):28-32. DOI: 10.1016/s1472-6483(10)60042-9. View

13.

Koechling W, Plaksin D, Croston G, Jeppesen J, Macklon K, Andersen C . Comparative pharmacology of a new recombinant FSH expressed by a human cell line. Endocr Connect. 2017; 6(5):297-305. PMC: 5510450. DOI: 10.1530/EC-17-0067. View

14.

Qiao J, Zhang Y, Liang X, Ho T, Huang H, Kim S . A randomised controlled trial to clinically validate follitropin delta in its individualised dosing regimen for ovarian stimulation in Asian IVF/ICSI patients. Hum Reprod. 2021; 36(9):2452-2462. PMC: 8373472. DOI: 10.1093/humrep/deab155. View

15.

Barash O, Hinckley M, Rosenbluth E, Ivani K, Weckstein L . High gonadotropin dosage does not affect euploidy and pregnancy rates in IVF PGS cycles with single embryo transfer. Hum Reprod. 2017; 32(11):2209-2217. DOI: 10.1093/humrep/dex299. View

16.

Irani M, Canon C, Robles A, Maddy B, Gunnala V, Qin X . No effect of ovarian stimulation and oocyte yield on euploidy and live birth rates: an analysis of 12 298 trophectoderm biopsies. Hum Reprod. 2020; 35(5):1082-1089. DOI: 10.1093/humrep/deaa028. View

17.

Howles C . Genetic engineering of human FSH (Gonal-F). Hum Reprod Update. 1996; 2(2):172-91. DOI: 10.1093/humupd/2.2.172. View

18.

Drakopoulos P, Errazuriz J, Santos-Ribeiro S, Tournaye H, Vaiarelli A, Pluchino N . Cumulative live birth rates in in-vitro fertilization. Minerva Ginecol. 2018; 71(3):207-210. DOI: 10.23736/S0026-4784.18.04347-2. View

19.

Nyboe Andersen A, Nelson S, Fauser B, Garcia-Velasco J, Klein B, Arce J . Individualized versus conventional ovarian stimulation for in vitro fertilization: a multicenter, randomized, controlled, assessor-blinded, phase 3 noninferiority trial. Fertil Steril. 2016; 107(2):387-396.e4. DOI: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2016.10.033. View

20.

Haaf T, Hahn A, Lambrecht A, Grossmann B, Schwaab E, Khanaga O . A high oocyte yield for intracytoplasmic sperm injection treatment is associated with an increased chromosome error rate. Fertil Steril. 2008; 91(3):733-8. DOI: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2008.01.012. View