Skip to content

Study · Observational study · n = 3,180 · 2021

3 results

Clinical characteristics and treatment patterns with histrelin acetate subcutaneous implants vs. leuprolide injections in children with precocious puberty: a real-world study using a US claims database.

Silverman LA, Han X, Huang H, Near AM, Hu Y

Journal of pediatric endocrinology & metabolism : JPEM21 Jun 2021Cited by 4 (Europe PMC)

PMID34147047 (opens in a new tab)DOI10.1515/jpem-2020-0721 (opens in a new tab)PepBankPUB-34147047
Download PDFPubMedAsk about this study
Jump to 3 results

Summary

ObjectivesGonadotropin-releasing hormone analogs are the treatment of choice for central precocious puberty (CPP). This study characterizes patients treated with histrelin implant or leuprolide injection.MethodsA US claims database was used to identify patients aged ≤20 years with ≥1 histrelin or leuprolide claim (index treatment) between April 2010 and November 2017 and continuous enrollment ≥3 months before and ≥12 months after the index treatment date.ResultsOverall, 4,217 patients (histrelin, n=1,001; leuprolide, n=3,216) were identified. The percentage of patients with CPP diagnosis was greater in the histrelin (96.5%) vs. leuprolide (68.8%; p<0.0001) cohort. In patients with CPP (histrelin, n=966; leuprolide, n=2,214), mean age at treatment initiation was similar for histrelin (9.0 ± 2.0 years) and leuprolide (9.1 ± 2.3 years), with >50% of patients aged 6-9 years. Mean treatment duration was significantly longer for histrelin (26.7 ± 14.8 months) vs. leuprolide (14.1 ± 12.1 months; p<0.0001), and was longer in younger patient groups. More patients switched from leuprolide to histrelin (12.3%) than vice versa (3.6%; p<0.0001). Median annual total treatment costs were slightly lower for the histrelin cohort ($23,071 [interquartile range, $16,833-$31,050]) than the leuprolide cohort ($27,021 [interquartile range, $18,314-$34,995]; p<0.0001).ConclusionsPatients with CPP treated with histrelin had a longer duration of treatment, lower rates of index treatment discontinuation, and lower annual treatment costs vs. those treated with leuprolide.
CC BYText from Europe PMC. Highlighted sentences are the source of results.

Results from this study3

3 results from studies that gave the peptide. 3 results from people.

  1. 01HumanObservational studyOther

    In patients with CPP, histrelin treatment lasted 26.7 ± 14.8 months versus 14.1 ± 12.1 months with leuprolide (p<0.0001).

    In plain wordsIn patients with CPP, histrelin treatment lasted significantly longer than leuprolide treatment.

    Peptide
    Histrelin
    Outcome
    IncreaseTreatment duration
    Study

    n = 3,180

    Comparator
    Leuprolide injection
    Outcome group
    Treatment Duration · Pharmacology
    Studied dose
    Dose not stated · subcutaneousAs given in this study (human).

    Measurements

    Mean treatment duration
    26.7 months
    histrelin, patients with CPP
    SD of treatment duration
    14.8 months
    histrelin, patients with CPP
    Mean treatment duration
    14.1 months
    leuprolide, patients with CPP
    SD of treatment duration
    12.1 months
    leuprolide, patients with CPP

    Source sentences

    Summary
    Mean treatment duration was significantly longer for histrelin (26.7 ± 14.8 months) vs. leuprolide (14.1 ± 12.1 months; p<0.0001), and was longer in younger patient groups.
    2 context sentences
    Summary · context
    In patients with CPP (histrelin, n=966; leuprolide, n=2,214), mean age at treatment initiation was similar for histrelin (9.0 ± 2.0 years) and leuprolide (9.1 ± 2.3 years), with >50% of patients aged 6-9 years.
    Summary · context
    A US claims database was used to identify patients aged ≤20 years with ≥1 histrelin or leuprolide claim (index treatment) between April 2010 and November 2017 and continuous enrollment ≥3 months before and ≥12 months after the index treatment date.
  2. 02HumanObservational studyOther

    In patients with CPP, median annual costs were $23,071 for histrelin versus $27,021 for leuprolide (p<0.0001).

    In plain wordsIn patients with CPP, median annual treatment costs were lower with histrelin than with leuprolide.

    Peptide
    Histrelin
    Outcome
    DecreaseAnnual total treatment costs
    Study

    n = 3,180

    Comparator
    Leuprolide injection
    Outcome group
    Healthcare costs and utilization · Whole body
    Studied dose
    Dose not stated · subcutaneousAs given in this study (human).

    Measurements

    Median annual costs
    23,071 USD
    histrelin
    Lower quartile annual costs
    16,833 USD
    histrelin
    Upper quartile annual costs
    31,050 USD
    histrelin
    Median annual costs
    27,021 USD
    leuprolide
    Lower quartile annual costs
    18,314 USD
    leuprolide
    Upper quartile annual costs
    34,995 USD
    leuprolide

    Source sentences

    Summary
    Median annual total treatment costs were slightly lower for the histrelin cohort ($23,071 [interquartile range, $16,833-$31,050]) than the leuprolide cohort ($27,021 [interquartile range, $18,314-$34,995]; p<0.0001).
    2 context sentences
    Summary · context
    In patients with CPP (histrelin, n=966; leuprolide, n=2,214), mean age at treatment initiation was similar for histrelin (9.0 ± 2.0 years) and leuprolide (9.1 ± 2.3 years), with >50% of patients aged 6-9 years.
    Summary · context
    A US claims database was used to identify patients aged ≤20 years with ≥1 histrelin or leuprolide claim (index treatment) between April 2010 and November 2017 and continuous enrollment ≥3 months before and ≥12 months after the index treatment date.
  3. 03HumanObservational studyOther

    In US claims data for patients aged 20 years or younger, 3.6% switched from histrelin to leuprolide versus 12.3% from leuprolide to histrelin (p<0.0001).

    In plain wordsIn US claims data, fewer patients switched from histrelin to leuprolide than from leuprolide to histrelin.

    Peptide
    Histrelin
    Outcome
    DecreaseSwitching treatment
    Study

    n: not reported in source

    Comparator
    Switching from leuprolide to histrelin
    Outcome group
    Patterns of use · Pharmacology
    Studied dose
    Dose not stated · subcutaneousAs given in this study (human).

    Measurements

    Switched from histrelin to leuprolide
    3.6%
    claims patients with index histrelin
    Switched from leuprolide to histrelin
    12.3%
    claims patients with index leuprolide

    Source sentences

    Summary
    More patients switched from leuprolide to histrelin (12.3%) than vice versa (3.6%; p<0.0001).
    2 context sentences
    Summary · context
    In patients with CPP (histrelin, n=966; leuprolide, n=2,214), mean age at treatment initiation was similar for histrelin (9.0 ± 2.0 years) and leuprolide (9.1 ± 2.3 years), with >50% of patients aged 6-9 years.
    Summary · context
    A US claims database was used to identify patients aged ≤20 years with ≥1 histrelin or leuprolide claim (index treatment) between April 2010 and November 2017 and continuous enrollment ≥3 months before and ≥12 months after the index treatment date.

AI wrote and checked these results. AI can make mistakes, so check important results against the source.

Version history

PepBank keeps every version of the data on this study. Status changes from Retraction Watch, Europe PMC and Crossref are listed with their source.

  1. Version 3Current

    28 Oct 2026, 02:03 UTC

    Study results updated

  2. Version 2

    27 Oct 2026, 16:37 UTC

    Study data updated · source update from Europe PMC

  3. Version 1

    27 Oct 2026, 16:35 UTC

    First added · source update from Europe PMC

Subjects

Terms as the source lists them.

PepBank is a research reference. Talk to a doctor before you use any peptide.