Comparison of outcomes between pulsatile gonadotropin releasing hormone and combined gonadotropin therapy of spermatogenesis in patients with congenital hypogonadotropic hypogonadism.

IF 4.2 2区 医学 Q1 ENDOCRINOLOGY & METABOLISM
Yi Zheng, Heng-Zhou Bai, Gui-Cheng Zhao, Kun Tian, Jun-Tao Yue, Ding-Ming Li, Xiao-Hui Jiang
{"title":"Comparison of outcomes between pulsatile gonadotropin releasing hormone and combined gonadotropin therapy of spermatogenesis in patients with congenital hypogonadotropic hypogonadism.","authors":"Yi Zheng, Heng-Zhou Bai, Gui-Cheng Zhao, Kun Tian, Jun-Tao Yue, Ding-Ming Li, Xiao-Hui Jiang","doi":"10.1186/s12958-025-01370-7","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>To evaluate whether there was a difference in outcome between pulsatile gonadotropin releasing hormone (GnRH) therapy and human chorionic gonadotropin/human menopausal gonadotropin (hCG/HMG) therapy for induction of spermatogenesis in post-pubertal male patients with congenital hypogonadotropic hypogonadism (CHH).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This was a single-center retrospective cohort study conducted at the Andrology Center of a university hospital. A total of 155 postpubertal CHH patients who met the inclusion criteria underwent spermatogenic induction at the same andrology center. All patients used pulsatile GnRH therapy or hCG/HMG therapy for at least 6 months. The effects of spermatogenic induction therapy and testicular growth were evaluated. Logistic regression analysis was used to identify statistically significant factors which could predict the outcome of treatment.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>There was no difference in the efficiency of successfully inducing spermatogenesis between pulsatile GnRH therapy and hCG/HMG therapy (82.1% vs. 75.8%, P: 0.356), nor was there a difference in sperm concentration category (SCC) (P: 0.284). However, the mean time required for pulsatile GnRH therapy was shorter (12.34 vs. 14.74 months, P: 0.038). At the treatment endpoint, total testicular volume (TTV) was greater with pulsatile GnRH therapy compared with hCG/HMG therapy (15 vs. 12 ml, P: 0.010), and there was still no difference in SCC (P: 0.310). Multivariate logistic regression analysis showed that only baseline TTV was statistically significant predictor of induced spermatogenic success (odds ratio, OR: 1.156, 95% confidence interval, CI: 1.013, 1.319). The area under receiver operating characteristic curve was 0.635, a sensitivity of 0.661, and a specificity of 0.588. In addition, multiple linear regression analysis demonstrated that younger age at treatment initiation and higher baseline TTV were significantly associated with increased sperm concentration at the end of treatment.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Pulsatile GnRH therapy was similar to hCG/HMG therapy in inducing spermatogenesis in post-pubertal CHH patients, but it took less time and was more beneficial to testicular development. Larger baseline TTV may mean a better spermatogenic outcome. It was necessary for patients to have more information about spermatogenesis therapy in order to make reasonable medical decisions.</p><p><strong>Clinical trial registration number: </strong>Chinese Clinical Trial Registry. ChiCTR2400086876. Retrospectively registered on July 5, 2024.</p>","PeriodicalId":21011,"journal":{"name":"Reproductive Biology and Endocrinology","volume":"23 1","pages":"46"},"PeriodicalIF":4.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11927256/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Reproductive Biology and Endocrinology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12958-025-01370-7","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENDOCRINOLOGY & METABOLISM","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: To evaluate whether there was a difference in outcome between pulsatile gonadotropin releasing hormone (GnRH) therapy and human chorionic gonadotropin/human menopausal gonadotropin (hCG/HMG) therapy for induction of spermatogenesis in post-pubertal male patients with congenital hypogonadotropic hypogonadism (CHH).

Methods: This was a single-center retrospective cohort study conducted at the Andrology Center of a university hospital. A total of 155 postpubertal CHH patients who met the inclusion criteria underwent spermatogenic induction at the same andrology center. All patients used pulsatile GnRH therapy or hCG/HMG therapy for at least 6 months. The effects of spermatogenic induction therapy and testicular growth were evaluated. Logistic regression analysis was used to identify statistically significant factors which could predict the outcome of treatment.

Results: There was no difference in the efficiency of successfully inducing spermatogenesis between pulsatile GnRH therapy and hCG/HMG therapy (82.1% vs. 75.8%, P: 0.356), nor was there a difference in sperm concentration category (SCC) (P: 0.284). However, the mean time required for pulsatile GnRH therapy was shorter (12.34 vs. 14.74 months, P: 0.038). At the treatment endpoint, total testicular volume (TTV) was greater with pulsatile GnRH therapy compared with hCG/HMG therapy (15 vs. 12 ml, P: 0.010), and there was still no difference in SCC (P: 0.310). Multivariate logistic regression analysis showed that only baseline TTV was statistically significant predictor of induced spermatogenic success (odds ratio, OR: 1.156, 95% confidence interval, CI: 1.013, 1.319). The area under receiver operating characteristic curve was 0.635, a sensitivity of 0.661, and a specificity of 0.588. In addition, multiple linear regression analysis demonstrated that younger age at treatment initiation and higher baseline TTV were significantly associated with increased sperm concentration at the end of treatment.

Conclusion: Pulsatile GnRH therapy was similar to hCG/HMG therapy in inducing spermatogenesis in post-pubertal CHH patients, but it took less time and was more beneficial to testicular development. Larger baseline TTV may mean a better spermatogenic outcome. It was necessary for patients to have more information about spermatogenesis therapy in order to make reasonable medical decisions.

Clinical trial registration number: Chinese Clinical Trial Registry. ChiCTR2400086876. Retrospectively registered on July 5, 2024.

搏动性促性腺激素释放激素与联合促性腺激素治疗先天性促性腺功能减退患者生精效果的比较。
背景:评价搏动性促性腺激素释放激素(GnRH)治疗与人绒毛膜促性腺激素/人绝经期促性腺激素(hCG/HMG)治疗诱导青春期后男性先天性促性腺功能低下(CHH)患者精子发生的结果是否存在差异。方法:这是一项在大学医院男科中心进行的单中心回顾性队列研究。共有155名符合纳入标准的青春期后CHH患者在同一男科中心接受了生精诱导。所有患者均使用搏动GnRH治疗或hCG/HMG治疗至少6个月。观察生精诱导治疗对睾丸生长的影响。采用Logistic回归分析,找出能预测治疗结果的有统计学意义的因素。结果:搏动GnRH治疗与hCG/HMG治疗诱导精子发生成功率无差异(82.1% vs. 75.8%, P: 0.356),精子浓度类别(SCC)无差异(P: 0.284)。然而,搏动GnRH治疗所需的平均时间较短(12.34个月对14.74个月,P: 0.038)。在治疗终点,搏动GnRH治疗的睾丸总体积(TTV)高于hCG/HMG治疗(15 ml vs 12 ml, P: 0.010), SCC仍无差异(P: 0.310)。多因素logistic回归分析显示,只有基线TTV是诱导生精成功的统计学显著预测因子(优势比OR: 1.156, 95%可信区间CI: 1.013, 1.319)。受试者工作特征曲线下面积为0.635,灵敏度为0.661,特异性为0.588。此外,多元线性回归分析表明,治疗开始时较年轻和较高的基线TTV与治疗结束时精子浓度增加显著相关。结论:促性腺激素脉动治疗与促性腺激素/促性腺激素联合治疗在诱导青春期后CHH患者精子发生方面具有相似的效果,但促性腺激素脉动治疗所需时间更短,更有利于睾丸发育。较大的基线TTV可能意味着更好的生精结果。患者有必要了解更多有关生精治疗的信息,以便做出合理的医疗决定。临床试验注册号:中国临床试验注册中心。ChiCTR2400086876。追溯登记于2024年7月5日。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Reproductive Biology and Endocrinology
Reproductive Biology and Endocrinology 医学-内分泌学与代谢
CiteScore
7.90
自引率
2.30%
发文量
161
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Reproductive Biology and Endocrinology publishes and disseminates high-quality results from excellent research in the reproductive sciences. The journal publishes on topics covering gametogenesis, fertilization, early embryonic development, embryo-uterus interaction, reproductive development, pregnancy, uterine biology, endocrinology of reproduction, control of reproduction, reproductive immunology, neuroendocrinology, and veterinary and human reproductive medicine, including all vertebrate species.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信