What are the clinical and indication differences between triptorelin and leuprolide?

Comment by InpharmD Researcher

Triptorelin and leuprolide are both gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) agonists approved for the treatment of prostate cancer and central precocious puberty (CPP). Evidence from prostate cancer studies demonstrates that both agents are equally effective in testosterone suppression, with no definitive advantage of one over the other (see Tables 1-2). In the management of CPP, both drugs show comparable efficacy in luteinizing hormone (LH) suppression and in preventing bone age advancements (see Tables 3-4). Furthermore, data evaluating off-label use in endometriosis indicate that both agents effectively reduce estradiol, follicle-stimulating hormone, and LH levels, although leuprolide may facilitate a quicker recovery of ovarian function. Ultimately, while both drugs are efficacious, variations in onset, duration, and side effect profiles may influence treatment selection depending on the specific condition.

Background

Leuprolide, goserelin, and triptorelin are luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone (LHRH) agonists used for the treatment of prostate cancer. The latest National Comprehensive Care Network (NCCN) guidelines for prostate cancer list the three agents as an option for androgen deprivation therapy (ADT), which includes localized and regional disease states along with castrate-sensitive metastatic cancer. A formal comparison between the three agents was not provided by the guidelines. [1]

A 2022 systematic review investigated the comparative efficacy and safety between different gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) agonists, including triptorelin, leuprolide, and goserelin, for prostate cancer. Overall, the findings suggest a similar safety and efficacy profile between the GnRH agonists, with goserelin being the most studied. Various intensities of castration suppression based on T levels were explored. Overall, 90%-100% of investigated patients are reported to have T level suppression of 50 ng/dL or lower with leuprorelin, triptorelin, and goserelin, at varying doses and formulations. The study by Shim et al. compares the three agents, demonstrating similar efficacy rates (see Table 1). [2]

For prostate-specific antigen (PSA) levels, goserelin demonstrated the highest rate of suppression to desired levels, followed by triptorelin. The data is less clear for leuprorelin. Goserelin also exhibits the most robust long-term data, demonstrating a 10-year overall survival (OS) rate of 87%, while triptorelin reports an 8-year OS of 84.6% (data for leuprolide unavailable). Adverse events appear to be comparable between GnRH agonists. Goserelin and leuprolide are available as ready-to-use prefilled syringes, while triptorelin is only available as a powder ready for reconstitution. In conclusion, the authors did not observe any novel data that alters the conclusive comparison between the three agents. While goserelin is the most investigated agent, there is no clear superiority established compared to the other two GnRH agonists. [2]

A 2018 comprehensive systematic review included direct comparative studies (N= 16) of GnRH agonists triptorelin, leuprorelin, and goserelin for the treatment of prostate cancer to evaluate meaningful clinical differences between these agents. Twelve out of 16 studies reported efficacy outcomes, whereas four studies evaluated safety, and five studies reported on the convenience of administration. Studies reporting on efficacy endpoints did not reveal significant differences in the ability of GnRH agonists to reduce levels of testosterone or prostate-specific antigen. Overall, in the absence of direct comparative data regarding the effects of ​​all three agents on PSA levels and limited survival data, drawing a differential conclusion seems to be difficult. Several studies suggested differences in short- or long-term testosterone control, the rate of injection site adverse events, and patient/healthcare professional perceptions. However, given the notable limitations of available studies, such as small sample sizes, open-label designs, and various formulations and measured endpoints, a definitive decision regarding the preference of one GnRH agonist over another can not be made from the existing evidence. [3]

A 2014 randomized clinical trial evaluated the side effects and hormonal changes associated with leuprorelin and triptorelin in Chinese women following conservative laparoscopic surgery for ovarian endometriosis. The study included 302 women with revised American Society for Reproductive Medicine (rASRM) stage III or IV ovarian endometriomas who underwent laparoscopic excision. Patients were randomized to receive either leuprorelin (n=151; group A) or triptorelin (n=151; group B), each administered intramuscularly at a dose of 3.75 mg on postoperative days 1-3 and then every 28-30 days for a total of three doses. Twenty-two patients dropped out, leaving 142 patients in the leuprorelin group and 138 in the triptorelin group who completed the study. Menopausal symptoms were assessed through a questionnaire, and serum sex hormone levels were measured throughout the study. At week 4 of treatment, most patients in the leuprorelin group reported no significant side effects. However, by week 9, common symptoms such as bone pain, hot flashes, sweating, and irregular bleeding were observed in both groups, with no significant differences between them. Notably, anxiety, depression, vaginal dryness, headache, and acne occurred at significantly higher rates in the triptorelin group compared to the leuprorelin group. At day 21, significant differences in hormonal levels were observed between the two groups: follicle-stimulating hormone (FSH; p= 0.003), luteinizing hormone (LH; p= 0.026), and estradiol (E2; p = 0.002) levels were all lower in the triptorelin group. At six weeks, FSH (p= 0.021) and E2 (p= 0.033) levels remained significantly higher in the leuprorelin group, while the difference in LH levels (p= 0.917) was no longer statistically significant. The authors concluded that leuprorelin results in a more gradual suppression of pituitary-ovarian function compared to triptorelin. This slower hormonal decline may account for the lower incidence of menopausal symptoms in the leuprorelin group. Therefore, leuprorelin acetate may be better tolerated than triptorelin in this patient population. [4]

Lastly, a prospective, double-blind crossover trial, published in 2000, compared the potency, side effects, and duration of action of triptorelin and leuprorelin acetate in treating pelvic endometriosis. The study included 54 patients, of which 6 were excluded from the final analysis due to various reasons (e.g., pregnancy, carcinoma diagnosis, or patient refusal). The remaining 27 patients were in the triptorelin-leuprorelin acetate (T-L) group, and 21 were in the leuprorelin acetate-triptorelin (L-T) group. Each patient received three doses of either 3.75 mg of triptorelin or 3.75 mg of leuprorelin acetate by intramuscular injection at 4-week intervals. The main outcomes assessed included menopausal symptoms, serum hormone levels (estradiol, FSH, LH), lipid profiles, and liver function tests. The potencies of the two drugs in lowering estradiol, FSH, and LH levels were comparable. Specifically, 70%-90% of patients in both groups had estradiol levels below the endometrial threshold before and after the crossover. In the T-L group, 53.9% of patients had FSH levels greater than 4 IU/L after three doses of leuprorelin acetate, compared to 27.0% after three doses of triptorelin (p<0.02). Liver function and lipid changes were also measured 4 weeks after the third dose of GnRH-a. Four parameters (total bilirubin, LDL-C, apo A-I, and apo B) showed significant increases after three doses of leuprorelin acetate in the L-T group, though all changes remained within normal ranges. The increase in total bilirubin was significantly higher in the L-T group (3.00 ± 3.58 mmol/L) compared to the T-L group (0.61 ± 2.08 mmol/L; p= 0.025). [5]

Regarding menopausal symptoms, no significant difference was noted between the two groups after the first three doses. The Kuppermann index, which measures menopausal symptom severity, increased similarly in both groups. In the first 4 weeks after the first dose of GnRH-a, 33.3% of patients in the T-L group and 42.9% in the L-T group experienced significant vaginal bleeding (requiring more than two pads per day), though this difference was not statistically significant. The return of ovarian activity was assessed by measuring serum estradiol, FSH, and LH levels, and the time taken for menstruation to return. Eight weeks after the last dose, 80.0% of patients in the L-T group had serum estradiol levels below the endometrial threshold, compared to 51.9% in the T-L group (p= 0.047). Additionally, 100% of patients in the L-T group had LH levels below 0.5 IU/L, compared to only 30% in the T-L group (p<0.01). Overall, the study found that while both drugs were equally potent in suppressing pituitary-ovarian function, triptorelin had a longer duration of action, allowing for less frequent administration. Leuprorelin acetate, however, led to a quicker recovery of ovarian activity, with earlier return of menstruation. Both drugs demonstrated comparable side effect profiles, though leuprorelin acetate was associated with more noticeable changes in liver function and lipid profiles. [5]

References:

[1] National Comprehensive Cancer Network. Prostate Cancer. Version 2.2025. Updated April 16, 2025. Accessed May 14, 2025. https://www.nccn.org/professionals/physician_gls/pdf/prostate.pdf
[2] Raja T, Sud R, Addla S, et al. Gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonists in prostate cancer: A comparative review of efficacy and safety. Indian J Cancer. 2022;59(Supplement):S142-S159. doi:10.4103/ijc.IJC_65_21
[3] Bolton EM, Lynch T. Are all gonadotrophin-releasing hormone agonists equivalent for the treatment of prostate cancer? A systematic review. BJU Int. 2018;122(3):371-383. doi:10.1111/bju.14168
[4] Li Z, Zhang HY, Zhu YJ, Hu YJ, Qu PP. A randomized study comparing the side effects and hormonal status of triptorelin and leuprorelin following conservative laparoscopic surgery for ovarian endometriosis in Chinese women. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2014;183:164-168. doi:10.1016/j.ejogrb.2014.10.022
[5] Cheung TK, Lo KW, Lam CW, Lau W, Lam PK. A crossover study of triptorelin and leuprorelin acetate [published correction appears in Fertil Steril 2000 Nov;74(5):1060]. Fertil Steril. 2000;74(2):299-305. doi:10.1016/s0015-0282(00)00598-7

Relevant Prescribing Information

INDICATIONS AND USAGE
TRELSTAR is a gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) agonist indicated for the treatment of advanced prostate cancer. [6]

INDICATIONS AND USAGE
TRIPTODUR is a GnRH agonist indicated for the treatment of pediatric patients 2 years and older with central precocious puberty (CPP). [7]

INDICATIONS AND USAGE
LUPRON DEPOT is a GnRH agonist indicated for: treatment of advanced prostate cancer. [8]

INDICATIONS AND USAGE
LUPRON DEPOT-PED is indicated for the treatment of pediatric patients with CPP. [9]

References:

[6] TRELSTAR (triptorelin pamoate kit). Prescribing information. Verity Pharmaceuticals Inc.; 2025.
[7] TRIPTODUR (triptorelin kit). Prescribing information. Azurity Pharmaceuticals, Inc.; 2024.
[8] LUPRON DEPOT (leuprolide acetate kit). Prescribing information. AbbVie Inc.; 2024.
[9] LUPRON DEPOT-PED (leuprolide acetate kit). Prescribing information. AbbVie Inc.; 2023.

Literature Review

A search of the published medical literature revealed 4 studies investigating the researchable question:

What are the clinical and indication differences between triptorelin and leuprolide?

Level of evidence

B - One high-quality study or multiple studies with limitations  Read more→



Please see Tables 1-4 for your response.


Effectiveness of three different luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone agonists in the chemical castration of patients with prostate cancer: Goserelin versus triptorelin versus leuprolide

Design

Single-center, retrospective chart review

N= 125

Objective

To investigate the changes in testosterone levels and rates of chemical castration following androgen-deprivation therapy (ADT) with goserelin, triptorelin, and leuprolide.

Study Groups

Goserelin (n= 59)

Triptorelin (n= 44)

Leuprolide (n= 22)

Inclusion Criteria

Histologically documented, locally advanced or metastatic prostate cancer treated with luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone (LHRH) agonists within the review period

Exclusion Criteria

Abnormal serum testosterone concentrations of <1.8 ng/mL or >8.8 ng/mL, hypophysectomy, adrenalectomy, orchiectomy, other malignancies, alcohol dependence, using medications that affect metabolism or secretion of steroid hormones, using corticosteroids, intermittent androgen blockade therapy, or with inappropriate follow-up

Methods

Included patients were receiving LHRH therapy with either goserelin acetate 11.34 mg, triptorelin acetate 11.25 mg, or leuprolide acetate 11.25 mg, administered at 3-month intervals over a 9-month period.

Duration

Review period: between January 2009 and December 2015

Treatment duration: 9 months

Outcome Measures

Mean serum testosterone level and the number of chemically castrated patients at different levels of serum testosterone 

Baseline Characteristics

 

Goserelin (n= 59)

Triptorelin (n= 44)

Leuprolide (= 22)  

Age, years

76.2 75.0 77.5  

Body mass index, kg/m2

23.3 22.4 23.8  

PSA before castration, ng/mL

123.3  193.4 90.4  

Testosterone before castration, ng/mL

4.3 4.1 4.7  

Prostate volume, mL

54.7 42.0 52.1  

Gleason score

≤6

7

≥8

 

15.3%

18.6%

66.1%

 

6.8%

11.4%

81.8%

 

13.6%

13.6%

72.7% 

 

Distant metastasis

91.5% 88.6%  86.4%   

Patients with MAB

55.9% 56.8%  18.2%   

PSA, prostate-specific antigen; MAB, maximal androgen blockade

Results

Endpoint

Goserelin (n= 59)

Triptorelin (n= 44)

Leuprolide (= 22)

p-Value

Serum testosterone level, ng/dL*

3 months

6 months

9 months

 

11.9 ± 12.1

9.9 ± 6.5

12.7 ± 13.6

 

7.0 ± 7.6

5.9 ± 4.3

5.7 ± 4.2

 

9.7 ± 9.4

8.6 ± 6.6

8.0 ± 7.9

 

-

-

-

Chemically castrated patients at different levels of serum testosterone at 9 months

50 ng/dL

20 ng/dL

10 ng/dL

 

58 (98.3%)

55 (93.2%)

32 (54.2%)

 

44 (100%)

44 (100%)

41 (93.2%)

 

22 (100%)

21 (95.5%)

19 (86.4%)

 

0.768

0.283

<0.001

Adverse events, n

Skeletal-related events

Flushing

Osteoporosis

Cardiovascular

 

5

3

1

1

 

1

1

0

0

 

1

2

0

0

 

-

-

-

*The serum testosterone levels over time were significantly different in patients treated with triptorelin and those treated with goserelin (p< 0.001), but the differences between leuprolide and goserelin (p= 0.087) and triptorelin and leuprolide (p= 0.106) were not significant

Adverse Events

See the "Results" section above

Study Author Conclusions

A castration threshold of <50 ng/dL serum testosterone may not be the optimal value because of evidence of a survival advantage with maintaining a much lower testosterone level in patients with prostate cancer. Triptorelin showed the lowest mean testosterone level up to 9 months of treatment and the highest percentage of chemical castration when the serum testosterone threshold was <10 ng/dL. Triptorelin may be the most potent castrating agent, but the benefit of maintaining the testosterone level at such a low level is yet to be discovered.

InpharmD Researcher Critique

The study is inherently limited by its retrospective design and small sample size. Although triptorelin had the lowest castration serum testosterone threshold, no survival benefit of a lower castration serum testosterone threshold was demonstrated in the study. 

References:

Shim M, Bang WJ, Oh CY, Lee YS, Cho JS. Effectiveness of three different luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone agonists in the chemical castration of patients with prostate cancer: Goserelin versus triptorelin versus leuprolide. Investig Clin Urol. 2019;60(4):244-250. doi:10.4111/icu.2019.60.4.244

 

Comparative efficacy of triptorelin pamoate and leuprolide acetate in men with advanced prostate cancer

Design

Parallel-group, randomized, controlled, multicenter study

N= 284

Objective

To compare the efficacy of monthly administrations of the luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone agonists triptorelin pamoate and leuprolide acetate to induce and maintain castrate levels of serum testosterone in men with advanced prostate cancer

Study Groups

Triptorelin (n= 140)

Leuprolide (n= 144)

Inclusion Criteria

Histologically confirmed advanced prostate cancer (stage C or D); bone scan within the previous 3 months; serum testosterone concentration of >5 nmol/L; Karnofsky performance index of >40; expected survival of ≥12 months; no other malignancy (except dermatological) for 5 years

Exclusion Criteria

Previous hormonal therapy for prostate cancer; hypophysectomy; adrenalectomy; another neoplastic lesion or brain metastases; known or suspected vertebral metastases with risk of spinal compression; renal or liver failure; use of an experimental drug within 3 months before the study; hypersensitivity to test materials; use of recreational drug; alcohol dependence; current use of medications that affect metabolism or secretion of androgenic hormones; use of corticosteroids except topical application, anticoagulants, heparin and coumarin derivatives; inability to comply fully with the protocol

Methods

Men with advanced prostate cancer were randomly assigned to receive triptorelin 3.75 mg or leuprolide 7.5 mg. The agent was injected intramuscularly every 28 days for nine injections. Blood samples were obtained for the measurement of serum testosterone and LH concentrations before treatment, and thereafter every 28 days, beginning on day 1 and ending on day 253. PSA levels were measured on days 1, 85, 169, and 253. Bone pain was assessed by a visual analogue scale and QoL by a recognized instrument at specified intervals

Duration

9 months

Outcome Measures

Primary: Percentages of men whose serum testosterone concentrations declined to and were maintained at or below castrate levels

Secondary: Luteinizing hormone levels, bone pain, prostate specific antigen levels, quality of life, testosterone pharmacodynamics, survival, and safety variables

Baseline Characteristics   Triptorelin (n= 137) Leuprolide (n= 140)

Mean age, years (range)

70.5 (47–88) 71.6 (49–89)

Mean weight, kg (range)

76.2 (40–120) 75.5 (40–120)
Duration of disease, months

7.8 (0–155)

4.7 (0–85)

Stage of disease

C

D

62.0%

38.0%

60.7%

39.3%

Karnofsky performance status

50–70

80

90

100

 

16 (12%)

16 (12%)

61 (44%)

44 (32%)

 

18 (13%)

20 (14%)

64 (46%)

38 (27%)

Previous illness

Renal or urogenital

Gastrointestinal

Musculoskeletal

 

54 (39%)

38 (28%)

27 (20%)

 

60 (43%)

30 (21%)

34 (24%)

Concomitant illness

Cardiovascular

Musculoskeletal

Renal or urogenital

Other

 

70 (51%)

59 (43%)

63 (46%)

29 (21%)

 

71 (51%)

63 (45%)

58 (41%)

42 (30%)

Concomitant drugs

Analgesics

Anti-inflammatory or anti-rheumatological

Systemic antibacterial

Antihypertensives

Diuretics

 

83 (61%)

74 (54%)

52 (38%)

50 (37%)

42 (31%)

 

86 (61%)

67 (48%)

57 (41%)

53 (38%)

44 (31%)

Mean testosterone, nmol/L

12.07

12.03
Results Endpoint

Triptorelin (n= 137)

Leuprolide (n= 140) p-value
Castration at 29 days

91.2%

99.3% <0.05
Castration at 57 days

97.7%

97.1% NS

Maintenance 2–9 months, average

98.8% 97.3% NS

Maintenance 2–9 months, cumulative

96.2% 91.2% NS

9-month survival rate*

97.0% 90.5% 0.033

*Secondary endpoints were equivalent between treatment groups, except for the 9-month survival rate, which was significantly higher for triptorelin compared to leuprolide.

Adverse Events

The incidences of overall and system-specific adverse events were similar between treatment groups except for respiratory system disorders, which occurred in 14.3% in the triptorelin and 23.6% in the leuprolide group (p= 0.045). The most frequently mentioned adverse events were hot flushes, skeletal pain, headache, and constipation

Study Author Conclusions Triptorelin reduced testosterone concentrations less rapidly, but maintained castration as effectively as leuprolide. There was no evidence that the slower onset of castration caused deleterious effects. The higher 9-month survival rate in the triptorelin group is intriguing, but long-term data are required to determine the clinical significance of this observation
Critique The study was well-designed with a robust sample size and clear endpoints. However, the slower onset of castration with triptorelin compared to leuprolide may be a concern for some patients. The study did not evaluate long-term outcomes beyond 9 months, which limits understanding of the long-term efficacy and safety of triptorelin compared to leuprolide. Additionally, the study was limited to a specific population, which may affect the generalizability of the results
References:

Heyns CF, Simonin MP, Grosgurin P, Schall R, Porchet HC; South African Triptorelin Study Group. Comparative efficacy of triptorelin pamoate and leuprolide acetate in men with advanced prostate cancer. BJU Int. 2003;92(3):226-231. doi:10.1046/j.1464-410x.2003.04308.x

Efficacy of leuprolide acetate versus triptorelin pamoate administered every 3 months for treatment of central precocious puberty
Design

Retrospective cohort study

N= 116

Objective

To assess the efficacy of CPP treatment with triptorelin pamoate and leuprolide acetate administered at 3-month intervals

Study Groups

Leuprolide acetate (n= 71)

Triptorelin pamoate (n= 45)

Inclusion Criteria

Girls with CPP, defined as breast growth before age 8 and baseline LH >0.3 IU/L or peak LH >5 IU/L after GnRH stimulation test

Exclusion Criteria

History of using exogenous hormones and congenital adrenal hyperplasia

Methods

Retrospective analysis of 116 girls with CPP treated with either 11.25 mg leuprolide acetate or 11.25 mg triptorelin pamoate every 3 months. Anthropometric measurements and LH suppression were evaluated at 6 months post-treatment.

Duration

December 2008 to December 2022

Outcome Measures

Lutenizing hormone (LH) suppression, predicted adult height (PAH), degree of bone age (BA) advancement

Baseline Characteristics Characteristic

Leuprolide acetate (n= 71)

Triptorelin pamoate (n= 45) p-Value
Age of onset (yr)

7.35 ± 0.69

7.47 ± 0.58 0.38
Weight kg

33.03 ± 8.71

32.41 ± 8.07 0.70
Height (cm)

134.46 ± 8.18

133.43 ± 6.99 0.49
BMI (kg/m2)

17.99 ± 2.98

17.99 ± 3.11 0.99
Bone age (yr)

10.48 ± 1.45

10.02 ± 1.56 0.12
Results Variable

Leuprolide acetate (n= 71)

Triptorelin pamoate (n= 45) p-Value
LH level (IU/L)

1.85 ± 0.73

2.08 ± 1.27 0.45
% LH < 4 IU/L

100%

84.45% 0.07
Estradiol level (pg/mL)

7.05 ± 4.25

6.34 ± 3.00 0.55

PAH-average bone age

PAH-accelerated bone age

158.90 ± 5.60

163.09 ± 5.80

158.31 ± 6.87

161.89 ± 8.11

0.75

0.56

BA/chronological age

BA-chronlogical age

1.09 ± 0.20

0.88 ± 2.13

1.12 ± 0.14

1.23 ± 1.35

0.66

0.47

Adverse Events

No specific adverse events reported

Study Author Conclusions

Both 3-month leuprolide acetate and triptorelin pamoate regimens demonstrate comparable effectiveness in LH suppression and preventing bone age progression in girls with CPP. PAH is improved with no significant disparities between the two regimens.

Critique

The study's retrospective design may lead to missing data and variability in data points, limiting the ability to compare groups. Additionally, the use of basal LH >0.3 IU/L for CPP diagnosis may not be fully specific. The study does not evaluate final adult height as patients have not yet reached this stage.

References:

Thaneetrakool T, Aroonparkmongkol S, Numsriskulrat N, Supornsilchai V, Wacharasindhu S, Srilanchakon K. Efficacy of leuprolide acetate versus triptorelin pamoate administered every 3 months for treatment of central precocious puberty. Clin Exp Pediatr. 2025;68(1):91-96. doi:10.3345/cep.2024.00822

 

Leuprolide and triptorelin treatment in children with idiopathic central precocious puberty: an efficacy/tolerability comparison study
Design

Retrospective observational study

N= 110

Objective

To investigate and compare the efficacy and tolerability profile of leuprolide and triptorelin in CPP patients

Study Groups

Leuprolide (n= 48)

Triptorelin (n= 62)

Inclusion Criteria

Female patients with CPP defined by breast development before age 8, Estradiol (E2) levels >20 pg/ml, LH/FSH >1, and uterine length >36 mm

Exclusion Criteria

Patients with negative results in the GnRH stimulation test or with clinical conditions such as neurological/neurosurgical and genetic disease, brain tumor, trauma, infection, hypothalamic-pituitary congenital malformations, and non-idiopathic CPP

Methods

Patients received leuprolide or triptorelin every 28 days by intramuscular injection at a dosage of 3.75 mg. Treatment continued until bone age maturation. Side effects were monitored through follow-up every 6 months by telephone interview

Duration

January 2018 to December 2020

Outcome Measures

Efficacy and tolerability profile of leuprolide and triptorelin; relationship between side effects and initial bone age

Baseline Characteristics  

Leuprolide (n= 48)

Triptorelin (n= 62) p-value

Age, years (IQR)

7.5 (7.1–7.8) 7.5 (7.1–7.8) 0.784

Weight, kg (IQR)

27.8 (24.0–30.8) 28.7 (24.8–32.7) 0.273

Height, cm (IQR)

127.9 (122.8–132.8) 127.5 (121.9–132.1) 0.607

PAH, cm (IQR)

150.3 (145.6–154.7) 149.4 (145.8–155.4) 0.938

Bone age, years (IQR)

9.6 (9.0–10.3) 9.4 (8.6–10.5) 0.971

FSH baseline, mUI/mL (IQR)

2.85 (1.67–3.77) 3.11 (2.00–5.27) 0.263

LH baseline, mUI/mL  (IQR)

0.22 (0.10–0.44) 0.35 (0.30–1.42) <0.001

LH peak, mUI/mL (IQR)

6.0 (4.0–13.3) 10.6 (6.5–23.3) 0.006

Abbreviations: FSH= follicle-stimulating hormone; IQR= interquartile range; LH= luteinizing hormone at baseline; PAH= predicted adult height

Results

Endpoint

Leuprolide (n= 48) Triptorelin (n= 62) p-value

Duration of therapy, days (IQR)

971 (790–1,171) 792 (760–1,003) <0.001

Absolute change (IQR)

Weight, kg

Height, cm

PAH, cm

Bone age, years

 

12.0 (9.0–15.7)

15.6 (12.7–16.8)

5.3 (1.4–9.9)

2.0 (1.4–2.5)

 

10.5 (7.8–14.0)

16.1 (12.0–19.4)

4.2 (3.5–9.8)

1.8 (1.5–2.0)

 

0.203

0.542

0.908

0.308

Patients with side effects

19 (39.6%) 27 (43.6%) 0.558

At the end of the survey, 41 patients (85.4%) in the leuprolide group and 23 patients (37.1%) in the triptorelin group reached bone age maturation and discontinued treatment.

No significant differences were observed between the groups in age, weight, height, predicted adult height, or bone age at the end of treatment. Similarly, there were no significant differences in the absolute changes of these parameters.

Adverse Events

Headache (22.7%), increased appetite (15.5%), mood swings (14.5%), nausea (5.5%), pain at the injection site (3.6%), vomiting (1.8%)

Study Author Conclusions

Leuprolide and triptorelin treatment appear to be effective and safe without significant difference between the two drugs in terms of efficacy and tolerability, making both good options for treating CPP

Critique

The study provides valuable insights into the efficacy and tolerability of leuprolide and triptorelin in treating CPP. However, its retrospective nature and single-center design may limit the generalizability of the findings. The relatively small sample size and the fact that not all patients reached bone maturation by the study's end are additional limitations.

References:

Valenzise M, Nasso C, Scarfone A, et al. Leuprolide and triptorelin treatment in children with idiopathic central precocious puberty: an efficacy/tolerability comparison study. Front Pediatr. 2023;11:1170025. Published 2023 May 17. doi:10.3389/fped.2023.1170025