Comparison of outcomes between pulsatile gonadotropin releasing hormone and combined gonadotropin therapy of spermatogenesis in patients with congenital hypogonadotropic hypogonadism

被引：0
作者：
Yi Zheng [1 ]
Heng-Zhou Bai [2 ]
Gui-Cheng Zhao [3 ]
Kun Tian [1 ]
Jun-Tao Yue [2 ]
Ding-Ming Li [3 ]
Xiao-Hui Jiang [1 ]
机构：
[1] Human Sperm Bank, West China Second University Hospital of Sichuan University, Sichuan, Chengdu
[2] Department of Andrology, West China Second University Hospital of Sichuan University, Sichuan, Chengdu
[3] Key Laboratory of Birth Defects and Related Diseases of Women and Children (Sichuan University), Ministry of Education, Sichuan, Chengdu
来源：
Reproductive Biology and Endocrinology | / 23卷 / 1期
关键词：
Congenital hypogonadotropic hypogonadism; Gonadotropin therapy; Pulsatile gonadotropin-releasing hormone therapy; Spermatogenesis;
D O I：
10.1186/s12958-025-01370-7
中图分类号：
学科分类号：
摘要：
Background: To evaluate whether there was a difference in outcome between pulsatile gonadotropin releasing hormone (GnRH) therapy and human chorionic gonadotropin/human menopausal gonadotropin (hCG/HMG) therapy for induction of spermatogenesis in post-pubertal male patients with congenital hypogonadotropic hypogonadism (CHH). Methods: This was a single-center retrospective cohort study conducted at the Andrology Center of a university hospital. A total of 155 postpubertal CHH patients who met the inclusion criteria underwent spermatogenic induction at the same andrology center. All patients used pulsatile GnRH therapy or hCG/HMG therapy for at least 6 months. The effects of spermatogenic induction therapy and testicular growth were evaluated. Logistic regression analysis was used to identify statistically significant factors which could predict the outcome of treatment. Results: There was no difference in the efficiency of successfully inducing spermatogenesis between pulsatile GnRH therapy and hCG/HMG therapy (82.1% vs. 75.8%, P: 0.356), nor was there a difference in sperm concentration category (SCC) (P: 0.284). However, the mean time required for pulsatile GnRH therapy was shorter (12.34 vs. 14.74 months, P: 0.038). At the treatment endpoint, total testicular volume (TTV) was greater with pulsatile GnRH therapy compared with hCG/HMG therapy (15 vs. 12 ml, P: 0.010), and there was still no difference in SCC (P: 0.310). Multivariate logistic regression analysis showed that only baseline TTV was statistically significant predictor of induced spermatogenic success (odds ratio, OR: 1.156, 95% confidence interval, CI: 1.013, 1.319). The area under receiver operating characteristic curve was 0.635, a sensitivity of 0.661, and a specificity of 0.588. In addition, multiple linear regression analysis demonstrated that younger age at treatment initiation and higher baseline TTV were significantly associated with increased sperm concentration at the end of treatment. Conclusion: Pulsatile GnRH therapy was similar to hCG/HMG therapy in inducing spermatogenesis in post-pubertal CHH patients, but it took less time and was more beneficial to testicular development. Larger baseline TTV may mean a better spermatogenic outcome. It was necessary for patients to have more information about spermatogenesis therapy in order to make reasonable medical decisions. Clinical trial registration number: Chinese Clinical Trial Registry. ChiCTR2400086876. Retrospectively registered on July 5, 2024. © The Author(s) 2025.
引用
收藏
相关论文
共 37 条
  • [1] Boehm U., Bouloux P.-M., Dattani M.T., de Roux N., Dode C., Dunkel L., Et al., Expert consensus document: European consensus statement on congenital hypogonadotropic hypogonadism–pathogenesis, diagnosis and treatment, Nat Rev Endocrinol, 11, 9, pp. 547-564, (2015)
  • [2] Fromantin M., Gineste J., Didier A., Rouvier J., [Impuberism and hypogonadism at induction into military service. Statistical study], Probl Actuels Endocrinol Nutr, 16, pp. 179-199, (1973)
  • [3] Laitinen E.M., Vaaralahti K., Tommiska J., Eklund E., Tervaniemi M., Valanne L., Et al., Incidence, phenotypic features and molecular genetics of Kallmann syndrome in Finland, Orphanet J Rare Dis, 6, (2011)
  • [4] Fraietta R., Zylberstejn D.S., Esteves S.C., Hypogonadotropic hypogonadism revisited, Clin (Sao Paulo), 68, 1, pp. 81-88, (2013)
  • [5] Layman L.C., Hypogonadotropic hypogonadism, Endocrinol Metab Clin North Am, 36, 2, pp. 283-296, (2007)
  • [6] Rastrelli G., Corona G., Mannucci E., Maggi M., Factors affecting spermatogenesis upon gonadotropin-replacement therapy: a meta-analytic study, Andrology, 2, 6, pp. 794-808, (2014)
  • [7] Alexander E.C., Faruqi D., Farquhar R., Unadkat A., Ng Yin K., Hoskyns R., Et al., Gonadotropins for pubertal induction in males with hypogonadotropic hypogonadism: systematic review and meta-analysis, Eur J Endocrinol, 190, 1, pp. S1-S11, (2024)
  • [8] Han T.S., Bouloux P.M.G., What is the optimal therapy for young males with hypogonadotropic hypogonadism?, Clin Endocrinol (Oxf), 72, 6, pp. 731-737, (2010)
  • [9] Mao J.-F., Liu Z.-X., Nie M., Wang X., Xu H.-L., Huang B.-K., Et al., Pulsatile gonadotropin-releasing hormone therapy is associated with earlier spermatogenesis compared to combined gonadotropin therapy in patients with congenital hypogonadotropic hypogonadism, Asian J Androl, 19, 6, pp. 680-685, (2017)
  • [10] Zhang L., Cai K., Wang Y., Ji W., Cheng Z., Chen G., Et al., The pulsatile gonadorelin pump induces earlier spermatogenesis than cyclical gonadotropin therapy in congenital hypogonadotropic hypogonadism men, Am J Mens Health, 13, 1, (2019)
1234