The University of Southampton
University of Southampton Institutional Repository

Ovarian response prediction in GnRH antagonist treatment for IVF using anti-Müllerian hormone

Ovarian response prediction in GnRH antagonist treatment for IVF using anti-Müllerian hormone
Ovarian response prediction in GnRH antagonist treatment for IVF using anti-Müllerian hormone
STUDY QUESTION: What is the clinical value of anti-Müllerian hormone (AMH) for the prediction of high or low ovarian response in controlled ovarian stimulation for IVF using GnRH antagonist treatment?

SUMMARY ANSWER: AMH as a single test has substantial accuracy for ovarian response prediction in GnRH antagonist treatment for IVF, with a higher accuracy for predicting a high response than for low response.

WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: The role of AMH and other patient characteristics in ovarian response prediction has been studied extensively in long GnRH agonist protocols; however, little information is available regarding the clinical value in GnRH antagonists.

STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: This is an observational (retrospective) substudy as part of an ongoing cohort study. A total of 487 patients scheduled for IVF/ICSI between 2006 and 2011 were included in the study.

PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS: Patients with a regular cycle who underwent their first IVF/ICSI cycle with GnRH antagonist treatment while receiving a starting dose of 150 or 225 IU recombinant FSH were included in the study. Patients were divided into three subgroups according to the following ovarian response categories: high (>15 oocytes or cycle cancellation), normal (4-15 oocytes) and low (<4 oocytes or cycle cancellation). Serum samples collected prior to IVF treatment were used to determine serum AMH levels.

MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: According to the predefined ovarian response categories, 58 patients were classified as high, 326 as normal and 101 as low responders, and the ongoing pregnancy rates did not differ among groups (19.0, 22.1 and 16.8%, respectively, P = 0.9). For the prediction of high response, AMH had an area under the receiver-operating characteristic curve (AUC) of 0.87. Both female age and BMI had lower accuracy (AUC 0.66 and 0.58, respectively). For low response prediction, again AMH had a better accuracy (AUC 0.79) than female age and BMI (AUC 0.59 and 0.56, respectively). In a multivariate model, including the factors age, AMH, BMI, smoking, type and duration of subfertility, only BMI added some predictive value to AMH for both high and low response prediction. Clinical test characteristics demonstrated that using a specificity of ?90%, the detection rate of AMH for high and low response, corresponding with a test cut-off of 4.5 and 0.8 µg/l, was ?60 and ?45%, respectively.

LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: The impact of the antral follicle count (AFC) on ovarian response prediction in GnRH antagonists was not assessed; however, previously studies demonstrated that for GnRH antagonists, AMH has a better accuracy than AFC.

WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: The current study demonstrates that AMH is an adequate predictor for both high and low response in GnRH antagonist cycles, showing a similar accuracy to GnRH agonists, as reported previously. The optimization and individualization of GnRH antagonist protocols may be improved by using an AMH-tailored approach.

STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTERESTS: This study was funded by the Academic Institutional Resources of the Department of Reproductive Medicine of the UMC Utrecht. O.H., M.J.C.E, E.W.G.L and H.L.T. have nothing to declare. N.S.M. has received fees and/or grant support from the following companies (in alphabetic order): Anecova, Ferring, Informa, Merck Serono and MSD. B.C.J.M.F. has received fees and/or grant support from the following companies (in alphabetic order); Childhealth, CVON, Ferring, Ova-Science, PregLem, Roche and Watson laboratories. F.J.B. has received fees and/or grant support from the following companies (in alphabetic order); Merck Serono and MSD.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: www.clinicaltrials.gov, Protocol ID 13-109.
Hamdine, O.
5bb6c208-02f5-4210-a688-878ee41bafac
Eijkemans, M.J.
7a7d87b5-76e0-48b3-85f1-bc0f56942134
Lentjes, E.W.
29a81c35-654e-4b2e-afc7-1fb3f023422d
Torrance, H.L.
0f5cd815-11cb-47b6-b598-781e0a80ae3d
Macklon, N.S.
7db1f4fc-a9f6-431f-a1f2-297bb8c9fb7e
Fauser, B.C.
a74bd2e3-1d5e-43c1-a6e8-c67c4973f484
Broekmans, F.J.
17ce14de-42f9-43cb-98be-194dc9430888
Hamdine, O.
5bb6c208-02f5-4210-a688-878ee41bafac
Eijkemans, M.J.
7a7d87b5-76e0-48b3-85f1-bc0f56942134
Lentjes, E.W.
29a81c35-654e-4b2e-afc7-1fb3f023422d
Torrance, H.L.
0f5cd815-11cb-47b6-b598-781e0a80ae3d
Macklon, N.S.
7db1f4fc-a9f6-431f-a1f2-297bb8c9fb7e
Fauser, B.C.
a74bd2e3-1d5e-43c1-a6e8-c67c4973f484
Broekmans, F.J.
17ce14de-42f9-43cb-98be-194dc9430888

Hamdine, O., Eijkemans, M.J., Lentjes, E.W., Torrance, H.L., Macklon, N.S., Fauser, B.C. and Broekmans, F.J. (2014) Ovarian response prediction in GnRH antagonist treatment for IVF using anti-Müllerian hormone. Human Reproduction. (doi:10.1093/humrep/deu266). (PMID:25355590)

Record type: Article

Abstract

STUDY QUESTION: What is the clinical value of anti-Müllerian hormone (AMH) for the prediction of high or low ovarian response in controlled ovarian stimulation for IVF using GnRH antagonist treatment?

SUMMARY ANSWER: AMH as a single test has substantial accuracy for ovarian response prediction in GnRH antagonist treatment for IVF, with a higher accuracy for predicting a high response than for low response.

WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: The role of AMH and other patient characteristics in ovarian response prediction has been studied extensively in long GnRH agonist protocols; however, little information is available regarding the clinical value in GnRH antagonists.

STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: This is an observational (retrospective) substudy as part of an ongoing cohort study. A total of 487 patients scheduled for IVF/ICSI between 2006 and 2011 were included in the study.

PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS: Patients with a regular cycle who underwent their first IVF/ICSI cycle with GnRH antagonist treatment while receiving a starting dose of 150 or 225 IU recombinant FSH were included in the study. Patients were divided into three subgroups according to the following ovarian response categories: high (>15 oocytes or cycle cancellation), normal (4-15 oocytes) and low (<4 oocytes or cycle cancellation). Serum samples collected prior to IVF treatment were used to determine serum AMH levels.

MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: According to the predefined ovarian response categories, 58 patients were classified as high, 326 as normal and 101 as low responders, and the ongoing pregnancy rates did not differ among groups (19.0, 22.1 and 16.8%, respectively, P = 0.9). For the prediction of high response, AMH had an area under the receiver-operating characteristic curve (AUC) of 0.87. Both female age and BMI had lower accuracy (AUC 0.66 and 0.58, respectively). For low response prediction, again AMH had a better accuracy (AUC 0.79) than female age and BMI (AUC 0.59 and 0.56, respectively). In a multivariate model, including the factors age, AMH, BMI, smoking, type and duration of subfertility, only BMI added some predictive value to AMH for both high and low response prediction. Clinical test characteristics demonstrated that using a specificity of ?90%, the detection rate of AMH for high and low response, corresponding with a test cut-off of 4.5 and 0.8 µg/l, was ?60 and ?45%, respectively.

LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: The impact of the antral follicle count (AFC) on ovarian response prediction in GnRH antagonists was not assessed; however, previously studies demonstrated that for GnRH antagonists, AMH has a better accuracy than AFC.

WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: The current study demonstrates that AMH is an adequate predictor for both high and low response in GnRH antagonist cycles, showing a similar accuracy to GnRH agonists, as reported previously. The optimization and individualization of GnRH antagonist protocols may be improved by using an AMH-tailored approach.

STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTERESTS: This study was funded by the Academic Institutional Resources of the Department of Reproductive Medicine of the UMC Utrecht. O.H., M.J.C.E, E.W.G.L and H.L.T. have nothing to declare. N.S.M. has received fees and/or grant support from the following companies (in alphabetic order): Anecova, Ferring, Informa, Merck Serono and MSD. B.C.J.M.F. has received fees and/or grant support from the following companies (in alphabetic order); Childhealth, CVON, Ferring, Ova-Science, PregLem, Roche and Watson laboratories. F.J.B. has received fees and/or grant support from the following companies (in alphabetic order); Merck Serono and MSD.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: www.clinicaltrials.gov, Protocol ID 13-109.

This record has no associated files available for download.

More information

e-pub ahead of print date: 29 October 2014
Published date: 29 October 2014
Organisations: Human Development & Health

Identifiers

Local EPrints ID: 370777
URI: http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/id/eprint/370777
PURE UUID: d0367bfe-2d0b-47d0-8c40-ccef9cc354e6

Catalogue record

Date deposited: 06 Nov 2014 12:05
Last modified: 14 Mar 2024 18:21

Export record

Altmetrics

Contributors

Author: O. Hamdine
Author: M.J. Eijkemans
Author: E.W. Lentjes
Author: H.L. Torrance
Author: N.S. Macklon
Author: B.C. Fauser
Author: F.J. Broekmans

Download statistics

Downloads from ePrints over the past year. Other digital versions may also be available to download e.g. from the publisher's website.

View more statistics

Atom RSS 1.0 RSS 2.0

Contact ePrints Soton: eprints@soton.ac.uk

ePrints Soton supports OAI 2.0 with a base URL of http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/cgi/oai2

This repository has been built using EPrints software, developed at the University of Southampton, but available to everyone to use.

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you continue without changing your settings, we will assume that you are happy to receive cookies on the University of Southampton website.

×