ReviewFrontiers in endocrinology2025
The influence of the pharmaceutical industry on the development of gonadotrophins and ovarian stimulation protocols in assisted reproductive technologies.
Review in Frontiers in endocrinology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: This review examines the evolution of gonadotrophins in ovarian stimulation (OS) protocols for assisted reproductive techniques (ART). Since the advent of Methods: A comprehensive literature search was carried out in multiple databases to select articles/reviews on historical developments, manufacturing and analytical techniques, regulatory frameworks and clinical trials undertaken to assess gonadotrophin production, formulation processes and their integration into clinical practice. The analysis included mainly evidence from pharmaceutical sponsored randomised controlled trials (RCTs) as well as single arm, registration or post approval studies. Studies on new molecular entities were reviewed. Systematic reviews and meta-analyses, national registries were consulted. Laboratory developments, regulatory challenges, economic constraints, were considered. Results: Over the past four decades, ART has seen remarkable improvements, including increased live birth rates in women of advanced ovarian age, reduced multiple births, and the advent of patient-friendly pen devices. Innovations such as recombinant FSH (rFSH) and biosimilars have expanded treatment options. However, the high cost of drug development as well as the complexity of the ART process have contributed to underpowered trials and reliance on meta-analyses, which often fail to account for confounding factors. Discussion: While gonadotrophins have been shown to be effective for OS, unresolved issues, such as the role of supplementing LH activity in OS protocols, highlight the need for more robust trials. Collaboration between stakeholders is essential to standardise trial designs, define key outcomes and minimise bias. Emerging technologies, including AI and genetic testing, offer opportunities to refine embryo assessment and implantation outcomes, thus improving trial design. A renewed focus on rigorous, transparent trials and interdisciplinary collaboration is essential to advance patient care and address unmet challenges in ART treatment. Beyond gonadotrophins, alternative therapeutic avenues to improve oocyte competence and implantation success warrant exploration.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.