Cost-saving treatment strategies in in vitro fertilization: a combined economic evaluation of two large randomized clinical trials comparing highly purified human menopausal gonadotropin and recombinant follicle-stimulating hormone alpha

ObjectiveTo assess the cost-effectiveness of two gonadotropin treatments that are available in the United Kingdom in light of limited public funding and the fundamental role of costs in IVF treatment decisions.DesignAn economic evaluation based on two large randomized clinical trials in IVF patients using a simulation model.SettingFifty-three fertility clinics in 13 European countries and Israel.Patient(s)Women indicated for treatment with IVF (N = 986), aged 18–38, participating in double-blind, randomized controlled trials.Intervention(s)Highly purified menotropin (HP-hMG, Menopur) or recombinant follitropin alpha (rFSH, Gonal-F).Main Outcome Measure(s)Cost per IVF cycle and cost per live birth for HP-hMG and rFSH alpha.Result(s)HP-hMG was more effective and less costly versus rFSH for both IVF cost per live birth and for IVF cost per baby (incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was negative). The mean costs per IVF treatment for HP-hMG and rFSH were £2408 (95% confidence interval [CI], £2392, £2421) and £2660 (95% CI £2644, £2678), respectively. The mean cost saving of £253 per cycle using HP-hMG allows one additional cycle to be delivered for every 9.5 cycles.Conclusion(s)Treatment with HP-hMG was dominant compared with rFSH in the United Kingdom. Gonadotropin costs should be considered alongside live-birth rates to optimize outcomes using scarce health-care resources.