Effectiveness and safety of follitropin alfa (Ovaleap®) for ovarian stimulation using a GnRH antagonist protocol in real-world clinical practice: a multicenter, prospective, open, non-interventional assisted reproductive technology study

Peter Sydow, Norbert Gmeinwieser, Katrin Pribbernow, Christoph Keck, Inka Wiegratz, Peter Sydow, Norbert Gmeinwieser, Katrin Pribbernow, Christoph Keck, Inka Wiegratz

Abstract

Background: The use of recombinant human follicle-stimulating hormone (r-hFSH) in ovarian stimulation protocols for infertility treatment in assisted reproductive technology (ART) clinical practice is well established. More recent advancements include the availability of biosimilar r-hFSH products, which expand the choices available to healthcare practitioners and patients. Better understanding of how such a product contributes to routine clinical practice is valuable to help prescribers make informed treatment choices. The objective of this study was to examine the effectiveness and safety of ovarian stimulation (OS) with follitropin alfa (Ovaleap®) for routine IVF or intracytoplasmic sperm injection treatment in gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) antagonist cycles in real-world ART clinical practice.

Methods: This non-interventional, multicenter, prospective study was initiated in 34 specialized reproductive medicine centers in Germany. Eligible women were 18-40 years old with a body mass index < 30 kg/m2, menstrual cycle 24-35 days and anti-Müllerian hormone ≥1 ng/mL, who were undergoing a first OS cycle exclusively with Ovaleap® during routine ART using a GnRH antagonist protocol. Primary effectiveness outcomes were number of retrieved oocytes after OS and clinical pregnancy rate (CPR). Secondary outcomes included fertilization rate, number of transferred embryos, live birth delivery rate, safety, and user satisfaction with the Ovaleap® pen.

Result(s): Of 507 women screened, 463 received at least 1 dose of Ovaleap® and 439 had Visit 2 data (per protocol population; PPP). The mean(±SD) number of retrieved oocytes was 11.8 ± 7.2 (PPP). The CPR among women with documented embryo transfer was 41.3% (158/383), resulting in a live birth delivery rate of 31.6% (138/437) among PPP patients with available follow-up information. Overall, 8.6% (40/463) of women reported ≥1 adverse drug reaction. Ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome occurred in 23 (5.0%) patients, rated mild in 14 (3.0%), moderate in 8 (1.7%), and severe in 1 (0.2%). Patients reported high user satisfaction and high convenience with use of the Ovaleap® pen.

Conclusion: The effectiveness and safety of OS with Ovaleap® in a GnRH antagonist protocol were extended to real-world ART clinical practice for the first time.

Trial registration: Registered on 22 June 2016 (retrospectively registered) at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02809989).

Keywords: Biosimilar; Follitropin alfa; GnRH antagonist; Ovaleap; Recombinant human follicle-stimulating hormone; User satisfaction.

Conflict of interest statement

PS: Received honoraria for consultancy, presentations, and involvement in clinical studies from Teva, Merck, and Ferring.

NG: Received personal fees from Pharmalog Institut für klinische Forschung GmbH, subcontracted service CRO of Teva GmbH Germany for this non-interventional study.

KP: Received honoraria for consultancy, presentations and involvement in clinical studies from Teva GmbH Germany/Pharmalog Institut für klinische Forschung GmbH.

CK: Received honoraria for consultancy and presentations from Teva GmbH Germany, Kade, Gedeon Richter, Exeltis, Merck Serono, Theramex.

IW: Received honoraria for consultancy, presentations, and involvement in clinical studies from Teva, Merck, Ferring, Theramex, MSD, Pharmalog.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Number of retrieved oocytes by age in patients in the per protocol population

References

    1. Howles CM. Recombinant gonadotrophins in reproductive medicine: the gold standard of today. Reprod BioMed Online. 2006;12:11–13. doi: 10.1016/S1472-6483(10)60973-X.
    1. Howles CM. Genetic engineering of human FSH (Gonal-F®) Hum Reprod Update. 1996;2:172–191. doi: 10.1093/humupd/2.2.172.
    1. Harrison S, Wolf T, Abuzeid MI. Administration of recombinant follicle stimulating hormone in a woman with allergic reaction to menotropin: a case report. Gynecol Endocrinol. 2000;14:149–152. doi: 10.3109/09513590009167674.
    1. van Wely M, Kwan I, Burt AL, Thomas J, Vail A, Van der Veen F, Al-Inany HG. Recombinant versus urinary gonadotrophin for ovarian stimulation in assisted reproductive technology cycles. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2011;2:cd005354.
    1. European Medicines Agency. Ovaleap (follitropin alfa) [assessment report]. 31 July 2013. Available at: . Accessed 31 Jan 2020.
    1. Weise M, Bielsky MC, De Smet K, Ehmann F, Ekman N, Narayanan G, Heim HK, Heinonen E, Ho K, Thorpe R, et al. Biosimilars-why terminology matters. Nat Biotechnol. 2011;29:690–693. doi: 10.1038/nbt.1936.
    1. European Medicines Agency Committee for Medical Products for Human Use. Guideline on non-clinical and clinical development of similar biological medicinal products containing recombinant human follicle stimulating hormone (r-hFSH). 21 February 2013. Available at: . Accessed 31 Jan 2020.
    1. Winstel R, Wieland J, Gertz B, Mueller A, Allgaier H. Manufacturing of recombinant human follicle-stimulating hormone Ovaleap® (XM17), comparability with Gonal-f®, and performance/consistency. Drugs R D. 2017;17:305–312. doi: 10.1007/s40268-017-0182-z.
    1. de Mora F, Fauser B. Biosimilars to recombinant human FSH medicines: comparable efficacy and safety to the original biologic. Reprod BioMed Online. 2017;35:81–86. doi: 10.1016/j.rbmo.2017.03.020.
    1. Bosch E, Howles C. No difference in clinical outcomes using follitropin alfa (biosimilar) compared to follitropin alfa or follitropin beta for controlled ovarian stimulation (cos) in oocyte donation-recipient cycles [abstract] Fertil Steril. 2018;110(4 suppl):e336. doi: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2018.07.941.
    1. Strowitzki T, Kuczynski W, Mueller A, Bias P. Randomized, active-controlled, comparative phase 3 efficacy and safety equivalence trial of Ovaleap® (recombinant human follicle-stimulating hormone) in infertile women using assisted reproduction technology (ART) Reprod Biol Endocrinol. 2016;14:1. doi: 10.1186/s12958-015-0135-8.
    1. Strowitzki T, Kuczynski W, Mueller A, Bias P. Safety and efficacy of Ovaleap® (recombinant human follicle-stimulating hormone) for up to 3 cycles in infertile women using assisted reproductive technology: a phase 3 open-label follow-up to main study. Reprod Biol Endocrinol. 2016;14:31. doi: 10.1186/s12958-016-0164-y.
    1. Christianson MS, Shoham G, Tobler KJ, Zhao Y, Monseur B, Leong M, Shoham Z. Use of various gonadotropin and biosimilar formulations for in vitro fertilization cycles: results of a worldwide web-based survey. J Assist Reprod Genet. 2017;34:1059–1066. doi: 10.1007/s10815-017-0952-0.
    1. Al-Inany HG, Youssef MA, Ayeleke RO, Brown J, Lam WS, Broekmans FJ. Gonadotrophin-releasing hormone antagonists for assisted reproductive technology. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2016;4:CD001750.
    1. Wang R, Lin S, Wang Y, Qian W, Zhou L. Comparisons of GnRH antagonist protocol versus GnRH agonist long protocol in patients with normal ovarian reserve: a systematic review and meta-analysis. PLoS One. 2017;12:e0175985. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0175985.
    1. Toftager M, Bogstad J, Bryndorf T, Lossl K, Roskaer J, Holland T, Praetorius L, Zedeler A, Nilas L, Pinborg A. Risk of severe ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome in GnRH antagonist versus GnRH agonist protocol: RCT including 1050 first IVF/ICSI cycles. Hum Reprod. 2016;31:1253–1264. doi: 10.1093/humrep/dew051.
    1. German Federal Ministry of Justice and Consumer Protection. Medicinal Products Act (Arzneimittelgesetz – AMG), 12 December 2005. Federal Law Gazette Part I, p.3394. Updated 4 April 2016 (Federal Law Gazette I p. 569). Available at: . Accessed 31 Jan 2020.
    1. Somkuti SG, Schertz JC, Moore M, Ferrande L, Kelly E. Gonal-F prefilled pen in OI study 24785 group. Patient experience with follitropin alfa prefilled pen versus previously used injectable gonadotropins for ovulation induction in oligoanovulatory women. Curr Med Res Opin. 2006;22:1981–1996. doi: 10.1185/030079906X132604.
    1. Blumenauer V, Czeromin U, Fehr D, Fiedler K, Gnoth C, Krussel JS, Kupka MS, Ott A, Tandler-Schneider A. Deutsches IVF Register (DIR) Annual 2017. J Reproduktionsmed Endokrinol. 2018;15:216–249.
    1. Lambalk CB, Banga FR, Huirne JA, Toftager M, Pinborg A, Homburg R, van der Veen F, van Wely M. GnRH antagonist versus long agonist protocols in IVF: a systematic review and meta-analysis accounting for patient type. Hum Reprod Update. 2017;23:560–579. doi: 10.1093/humupd/dmx017.
    1. Haahr T, Dosouto C, Alviggi C, Esteves SC, Humaidan P, et al. Front Endocrinol (Lausanne) 2019;10:614. doi: 10.3389/fendo.2019.00614.
    1. D·I·R Deutsches IVF-Register (D·I·R). Kurz und knapp – Die Jahre 2017 und 2018 im Deutschen IVF-Register (D·I·R) [Article in German]. J Reproduktionsmed Endokrinol. 2019;16(6) Available at: . Accessed 31 Jan 2020.
    1. Devroey P, Pellicer A, Nyboe Andersen A, Arce JC, Menopur in GnRH Antagonist Cycles with Single Embryo Transfer Trial Group A randomized assessor-blind trial comparing highly purified hMG and recombinant FSH in a GnRH antagonist cycle with compulsory single-blastocyst transfer. Fertil Steril. 2012;97:561–571. doi: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2011.12.016.
    1. Nyboe Andersen A, Nelson SM, Fauser BC, Garcia-Velasco JA, Klein BM, Arce JC. Individualized versus conventional ovarian stimulation for in vitro fertilization: a multicenter, randomized, controlled, assessor-blinded, phase 3 noninferiority trial. Fertil Steril. 2017;107:387–396. doi: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2016.10.033.
    1. Andersen AN, Devroey P, Arce JC. Clinical outcome following stimulation with highly purified hMG or recombinant FSH in patients undergoing IVF: a randomized assessor-blind controlled trial. Hum Reprod. 2006;21:3217–3227. doi: 10.1093/humrep/del284.
    1. European and Israeli Study Group on Highly Purified Menotropin versus Recombinant Follicle-Stimulating Hormone Efficacy and safety of highly purified menotropin versus recombinant follicle-stimulating hormone in in vitro fertilization/intracytoplasmic sperm injection cycles: a randomized, comparative trial. Fertil Steril. 2002;78:520–528. doi: 10.1016/S0015-0282(02)03250-8.
    1. Frydman R, Howles CM, Truong F. A double-blind, randomized study to compare recombinant human follicle stimulating hormone (FSH; Gonal-F) with highly purified urinary FSH (Metrodin HP) in women undergoing assisted reproductive techniques including intracytoplasmic sperm injection. The French Multicentre Trialists. Hum Reprod. 2000;15:520–525. doi: 10.1093/humrep/15.3.520.
    1. Schats R, Sutter PD, Bassil S, Kremer JA, Tournaye H, Donnez J. Ovarian stimulation during assisted reproduction treatment: a comparison of recombinant and highly purified urinary human FSH. On behalf of the Feronia and Apis study group. Hum Reprod. 2000;15:1691–1697. doi: 10.1093/humrep/15.8.1691.
    1. Westergaard LG, Erb K, Laursen SB, Rex S, Rasmussen PE. Human menopausal gonadotropin versus recombinant follicle-stimulating hormone in normogonadotropic women down-regulated with a gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonist who were undergoing in vitro fertilization and intracytoplasmic sperm injection: a prospective randomized study. Fertil Steril. 2001;76:543–549. doi: 10.1016/S0015-0282(01)01973-2.
    1. The Latin-American Puregon IVF Study Group A double-blind clinical trial comparing a fixed daily dose of 150 and 250 IU of recombinant follicle-stimulating hormone in women undergoing in vitro fertilization. Fertil Steril. 2001;76:950–956. doi: 10.1016/S0015-0282(01)02844-8.
    1. Rettenbacher M, Andersen AN, Garcia-Velasco JA, Sator M, Barri P, Lindenberg S, van der Ven K, Khalaf Y, Bentin-Ley U, Obruca A, et al. A multi-Centre phase 3 study comparing efficacy and safety of Bemfola® versus Gonal-f® in women undergoing ovarian stimulation for IVF. Reprod BioMed Online. 2015;30:504–513. doi: 10.1016/j.rbmo.2015.01.005.
    1. Toftager M, Bogstad J, Lossl K, Praetorius L, Zedeler A, Bryndorf T, Nilas L, Pinborg A. Cumulative live birth rates after one ART cycle including all subsequent frozen-thaw cycles in 1050 women: secondary outcome of an RCT comparing GnRH-antagonist and GnRH-agonist protocols. Hum Reprod. 2017;32:556–567.
    1. Naether OG, Tandler-Schneider A, Bilger W. Individualized recombinant human follicle-stimulating hormone dosing using the CONSORT calculator in assisted reproductive technology: a large, multicenter, observational study of routine clinical practice. Drug Healthc Patient Saf. 2015;7:69–76. doi: 10.2147/DHPS.S77320.
    1. Polyzos NP, Drakopoulos P, Parra J, Pellicer A, Santos-Ribeiro S, Tournaye H, Bosch E, Garcia-Velasco J. 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 approximately 15,000 women. Fertil Steril. 2018;110:661–670. doi: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2018.04.039.
    1. Drakopoulos P, Blockeel C, Stoop D, Camus M, de Vos M, Tournaye H, Polyzos NP. Conventional ovarian stimulation and single embryo transfer for IVF/ICSI. How many oocytes do we need to maximize cumulative live birth rates after utilization of all fresh and frozen embryos? Hum Reprod. 2016;31:370–376.
    1. Howles CM. The development of ovarian stimulation for IVF. In: Kovacs G, Brinsden PR, DeCherney AH, editors. In-vitro fertilization: the pioneers' history (Chapter 25) Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2018. pp. 202–207.
    1. Reichman DE, Goldschlag D, Rosenwaks Z. Value of antimullerian hormone as a prognostic indicator of in vitro fertilization outcome. Fertil Steril. 2014;101:1012–1018. doi: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2013.12.039.
    1. Arce JC, La Marca A, Mirner Klein B, Nyboe Andersen A, Fleming R. Antimullerian hormone in gonadotropin releasing-hormone antagonist cycles: prediction of ovarian response and cumulative treatment outcome in good-prognosis patients. Fertil Steril. 2013;99:1644–1653. doi: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2012.12.048.
    1. European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology. ART fact sheet. Last updated: 18 February 2018. Available at: . Accessed 31 Jan 2020.
    1. Boivin J, Domar AD, Shapiro DB, Wischmann TH, Fauser BC, Verhaak C. Tackling burden in ART: an integrated approach for medical staff. Hum Reprod. 2012;27:941–950. doi: 10.1093/humrep/der467.
    1. Brandes M, van der Steen JO, Bokdam SB, Hamilton CJ, de Bruin JP, Nelen WL, Kremer JA. When and why do subfertile couples discontinue their fertility care? A longitudinal cohort study in a secondary care subfertility population. Hum Reprod. 2009;24:3127–3135. doi: 10.1093/humrep/dep340.
    1. Verberg MF, Eijkemans MJ, Heijnen EM, Broekmans FJ, de Klerk C, Fauser BC, Macklon NS. Why do couples drop-out from IVF treatment? A prospective cohort study. Hum Reprod. 2008;23:2050–2055. doi: 10.1093/humrep/den219.
    1. Buhler K. Managing infertility with the follitropin alfa prefilled pen injector - patient considerations. Ther Clin Risk Manag. 2015;11:995–1001. doi: 10.2147/TCRM.S64222.
    1. Landfeldt E, Jablonowska B, Norlander E, Persdotter-Eberg K, Thurin-Kjellberg A, Wramsby M, Strom O. Patient preferences for characteristics differentiating ovarian stimulation treatments. Hum Reprod. 2012;27:760–769. doi: 10.1093/humrep/der449.
    1. Bühler K, Naether O. A 2:1 formulation of follitropin alfa and lutropin alfa in routine clinical practice: a large, multicentre, observational study. Gynecol Endocrinol. 2011;27:650–654. doi: 10.3109/09513590.2010.511014.

Source: PubMed

Sponsorer og samarbejdspartnere

Medicinske tilstande

Narkotikainterventioner

3
Abonner