Urofollitropin and ovulation induction.

Abstract

Anovulation is a common cause of female infertility. Treatment for women with anovulation is aimed at induction of ovulation. Ovulation induction with follicle-stimulating hormone (FSH) is indicated in women with WHO type II anovulation in whom treatment with clomifene citrate (clomifene) has failed. The majority of these women have polycystic ovary syndrome. The major disadvantages of ovulation induction with FSH are the risk of ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome and the risk of higher order multiple pregnancies. To reduce the rate of complications due to multiple follicular development, FSH should be administered using a chronic low-dose protocol with small dose increments. In women with WHO type I anovulation, an exogenous supply of luteinizing hormone (LH) is required to achieve an adequate follicular response to FSH treatment. Thus, ovulation induction with FSH is not the treatment of choice in these women. FSH is a hormone that stimulates follicle growth and oocyte maturation. Endogenous FSH is produced by the pituitary gland and exists as a family of isohormones exhibiting distinct oligosaccharide structures. FSH for exogenous administration is derived from urine or is produced as recombinant FSH. The commercially available FSH products all contain different mixtures of FSH isoforms. To determine the effectiveness of urofollitropin (urinary-derived FSH), a comparison with the other available gonadotropins was made (i.e. recombinant FSH and human menopausal gonadotropin). Urofollitropin and recombinant FSH appear to be equally effective and well tolerated for ovulation induction. Human menopausal gonadotropin is comparably effective to urofollitropin in terms of pregnancy outcomes. It remains unclear whether human menopausal gonadotropins have a higher risk of overstimulation and ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome compared to urofollitropin in women with polycystic ovary syndrome. In practice, recombinant products are more convenient to use but are also more expensive. Therefore, if availability is not an issue but costs are, there is still a place for the use of urofollitropins for ovulation induction.