Use of various gonadotropin and biosimilar formulations for in vitro fertilization cycles: results of a worldwide Web-based survey

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to identify trends in gonadotropin therapy in patients undergoing in vitro fertilization (IVF) treatment worldwide. Methods: Retrospective evaluation utilizing the results of a Web-based survey, IVF-Worldwide (www.IVF-worldwide.com) was performed. Results: Three hundred fourteen centers performing a total of 218,300 annual IVF cycles were evaluated. Respondents representing 62.2% of cycles (n = 135,800) did not believe there was a difference between urinary and recombinant gonadotropins in terms of efficacy and live birth rate. Of the respondents, 67.3% (n = 146,800) reported no difference between recombinant and urinary formulations in terms of short-term safety and risk of ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome. In terms of long-term safety using human urinary gonadotropins, 50.6% (n = 110,400) of respondents believe there are potential long-term risks including prion disease. For 95.3% of units (n = 208,000), the clinician was the decision maker determining which specific gonadotropins are used for IVF. Of the units, 62.6% (n = 136,700) identified efficacy as the most important factor in deciding which gonadotropin to prescribe. While most (67.3%, n = 146,800) were aware of new biosimilar recombinant FSH products entering the market, 92% (n = 201,000) reported they would like more information. A fraction of respondents (25.6%, n = 55,900) reported having experience with these new products, and of these, 80.3% (n = 46,200) reported that they were similar in efficacy as previously used gonadotropins in a similar patient group. Conclusions: Respondents representing the majority of centers do not believe a difference exists between urinary and recombinant gonadotropins with respect to efficacy and live birth rates. While many are aware of new biosimilar recombinant FSH products entering the market, over 90% desire more information on these products.