Utilization of sperm cryopreservation in patients with testicular cancer.

PURPOSE: We assessed factors that affect the utilization of sperm cryopreservation before 2021, when patients covered expenses, and the influence on quality of life. METHODS: Between 2011 and 2021, testicular cancer survivors (TCS) at our clinic completed a questionnaire, including EORTC QLQ-TC26, covering sperm cryopreservation, sociodemographic details, post-treatment births, and artificial insemination. RESULTS: After 5.7 ± 3.0 years, 279 participants (64%) responded to the questionnaire. Among them, 33% (91/279) of testicular cancer survivors chose sperm cryopreservation prior to treatment, with 11% (10/91) using it for insemination. Conversely, 2% (3/188) without cryopreservation reported unfulfilled desire to have children. Univariate analysis showed TCS with cryopreservation were younger (30.6 ± 7.1 (35 (21-59)) vs. 42.4 ± 10.9 (48 (22-81)) years; p = 0.001), had a lower BMI (24.2 ± 3.3 vs. 26.6 ± 4.6 kg/m2; p = 0.009) and a lower Charlson Score (> 3: 36% vs. 60%; p < 0.001). Multivariate analysis revealed older age (≥ 37 years: OR 13.1 (5.5-31.2), p < 0.001) and lower education (middle school or less: OR 3.3 (1.6-6.9), p = 0.001) as independent factors associated with not undergoing cryopreservation. Regarding quality of life, multivariate analysis identified a lower infertility anxiety score (OR 4.3 (2.0-9.0), p < 0.001) and higher age (≥ 44 years: OR 5.4 (2.6-11.3); p < 0.001) as predictors for the absence of prior cryopreservation. CONCLUSIONS: Age and education seem to impact the choice of undergoing paid sperm cryopreservation. Urologists should inform testicular cancer patients about costs and coverage. Importantly, the occurrence of unmet desires for parenthood is minimal among those who forego cryopreservation.

Comparative effectiveness of recombinant human follicle-stimulating hormone alfa (r-hFSH-alfa) versus highly purified urinary human menopausal gonadotropin (hMG HP) in assisted reproductive technology (ART) treatments: a non-interventional study in Germany.

BACKGROUND: This study compared the effectiveness of recombinant human follicle-stimulating hormone alfa (r-hFSH-alfa; GONAL-f®) with urinary highly purified human menopausal gonadotropin (hMG HP; Menogon HP®), during assisted reproductive technology (ART) treatments in Germany. METHODS: Data were collected from 71 German fertility centres between 01 January 2007 and 31 December 2012, for women undergoing a first stimulation cycle of ART treatment with r-hFSH-alfa or hMG HP. Primary outcomes were live birth, ongoing pregnancy and clinical pregnancy, based on cumulative data (fresh and frozen-thawed embryo transfers), analysed per patient (pP), per complete cycle (pCC) and per first complete cycle (pFC). Secondary outcomes were pregnancy loss (analysed per clinical pregnancy), cancelled cycles (analysed pCC), total drug usage per oocyte retrieved and time-to-live birth (TTLB; per calendar week and per cycle). RESULTS: Twenty-eight thousand six hundred forty-one women initiated a first treatment cycle (r-hFSH-alfa: 17,725 [61.9%]; hMG HP: 10,916 [38.1%]). After adjustment for confounding variables, treatment with r-hFSH-alfa versus hMG HP was associated with a significantly higher probability of live birth (hazard ratio [HR]-pP [95% confidence interval (CI)]: 1.10 [1.04, 1.16]; HR-pCC [95% CI]: 1.13 [1.08, 1.19]; relative risk [RR]-pFC [95% CI]: 1.09 [1.05, 1.15], ongoing pregnancy (HR-pP [95% CI]: 1.10 [1.04, 1.16]; HR-pCC [95% CI]: 1.13 [1.08, 1.19]; RR-pFC [95% CI]: 1.10 [1.05, 1.15]) and clinical pregnancy (HR-pP [95% CI]: 1.10 [1.05, 1.14]; HR-pCC [95% CI]: 1.14 [1.10, 1.19]; RR-pFC [95% CI]: 1.10 [1.06, 1.14]). Women treated with r-hFSH-alfa versus hMG HP had no statistically significant difference in pregnancy loss (HR [95% CI]: 1.07 [0.98, 1.17], were less likely to have a cycle cancellation (HR [95% CI]: 0.91 [0.84, 0.99]) and had no statistically significant difference in TTLB when measured in weeks (HR [95% CI]: 1.02 [0.97, 1.07]; p = 0.548); however, r-hFSH-alfa was associated with a significantly shorter TTLB when measured in cycles versus hMG HP (HR [95% CI]: 1.07 [1.02, 1.13]; p = 0.003). There was an average of 47% less drug used per oocyte retrieved with r-hFSH-alfa versus hMG HP. CONCLUSIONS: This large (> 28,000 women), real-world study demonstrated significantly higher rates of cumulative live birth, cumulative ongoing pregnancy and cumulative clinical pregnancy with r-hFSH-alfa versus hMG HP.

Safety of Follitropin Alfa/Lutropin Alfa for Stimulation of Follicular Development.

INTRODUCTION: Recombinant human luteinizing hormone (r-hLH) is used in a fixed-ratio combination with recombinant human follicle-stimulating hormone (r-hFSH) for the stimulation of follicular development. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this article was to conduct a review of safety data to evaluate the risks of r-hFSH/r-hLH treatment. METHODS: Data were retrieved from the Global Safety Database (Merck KGaA, Darmstadt, Germany) including reports from healthcare professionals, patients, health authorities, clinical trials, non-interventional studies, and the literature. Reports of important risks (identified and potential) as per the risk management plan applicable at the time of data retrieval were obtained up to December 2017. The estimated patient exposure to r-hFSH/r-hLH in the post-marketing setting was 427,012 treatment cycles. Nine hundred patients received r-hFSH/r-hLH during company-sponsored clinical trials (pre- and post-marketing). RESULTS: We identified 72 case reports describing important risks related to r-hFSH/r-hLH use, including 46 cases of ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (10.8 per 100,000 treatment cycles) and 24 of hypersensitivity reaction (5.6 per 100,000 treatment cycles). No thromboembolic events were reported. One congenital anomaly, not suspected to be related to r-hFSH/r-hLH use, was reported during a clinical trial; the event was resolved by corrective surgery. Two fatal cases were identified; one case of recurrent malignant melanoma (suspected to be related to r-hFSH/r-hLH use) and one case resulting from complications of ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome. CONCLUSION: Cumulative reporting rates of important identified and potential risks of r-hFSH/r-hLH during a 10-year surveillance period demonstrate the benefit-risk balance is positive. This post-marketing surveillance and continued surveillance of safety events should provide reassurance about the use of r-hFSH/r-hLH in clinical practice.