Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jun 7, 2025
Fertility Preservation Through Oocyte Vitrification: Clinical and Laboratory Perspectives
Published on: September 16, 2021
A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Gonadotropins Used for Ovarian Stimulation during Assisted Reproductive Technology
Isabelle Borget1,2, Mehdi Benchaib3,4,5, Philippine Poignant6
1Department of Biostatistics and Epidemiology, Gustave Roussy, Paris-Saclay University, Villejuif, France.
Objective:
Various gonadotropins are used for ovarian stimulation (OS). This study investigated the cost-effectiveness of different gonadotropins based on real-world data from the French National Health Database (SNDS) over a 7-year follow-up of assisted reproductive technology (ART) treatments.
Design:
Cost-effectiveness analysis of different gonadotropins based on real-world data from the SNDS was conducted.
Participants:
Women from SNDS undergoing OS leading to oocyte pick-up registered between January 31, 2013, and December 31, 2018 (N = 245,534 stimulations), and receiving either recombinant human follicle stimulating hormone (r-hFSH alfa originator; 110,439), its biosimilars (12,287), or urinaries (mainly highly purified human menopausal gonadotropin [HP-hMG; 65,654] and marginally highly purified urinary-human follicle stimulating hormone [7,821]) were included (follow-up: December 31, 2019).
Settings And Methods:
Clinical inputs for this model, including live birth (LB) and cumulative LB (CLB) were calculated from data as published in [Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol. 2023;88:102308]. A decision-tree model was developed comprising pregnancy and live birth rate (LBR) states for a complete ART cycle, including one fresh and ≤4 frozen/thawed embryo transfers and related costs. Cost inputs included those of drugs, ART procedure, pregnancy and delivery, and adverse events. Cost per LB and CLB and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) were assessed. Robustness of results was determined by comprehensive sensitivity analyses.
Results:
Overall, r-hFSH alfa originator was found to be associated with a lower cost per LB and per CLB (cost per LB: EUR 26,010; CLB: EUR 22,278) versus its biosimilars (cost per LB: EUR 28,037; CLB: EUR 23,807) and versus urinaries (cost per LB: EUR 26,636; CLB: EUR 23,335). Calculated ICERs with r-hFSH alfa for LB were EUR 5,538 and EUR 14,090, whereas for CLB were EUR 1,945 and EUR 13,742 versus biosimilars and urinaries, respectively. Cost-effectiveness acceptability curve showed that in a majority of iterations, r-hFSH alfa originator had a probability of being cost-effective at a hypothetical threshold of EUR 20,000/LB. Sensitivity analyses showed that the most important variable impacting the outcome in fresh transfers was the probability of birth for biosimilars and the probability of pregnancy for urinaries, while for cumulative transfers, it was the probability of pregnancy for biosimilars and the probability of birth for urinaries.
Limitations:
As the clinical data were obtained from a non-interventional study and not a randomized controlled trial, the results may still be susceptible to residual confounding or other biases.
Conclusions:
r-hFSH alfa originator is cost-effective compared to its biosimilars and to urinaries (mainly HP-hMG) and is associated with a lower cost per LB compared to these gonadotropins, where the main driver is the higher LB efficacy rate achieved with it.
