Literature DB >> 15471926

Repeated clomiphene citrate challenge testing in the prediction of outcome in IVF: a comparison with basal markers for ovarian reserve.

D J Hendriks1, F J M Broekmans, L F J M M Bancsi, F H de Jong, C W N Looman, E R Te Velde.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to investigate the predictive accuracy and clinical value of performing either a single or a repeated clomiphene citrate challenge test (CCCT) in predicting poor response in IVF, compared to that of currently used basal ovarian reserve markers.
METHODS: Sixty-three patients undergoing their first IVF treatment were prospectively included. After measurement of basal markers on cycle day 3 (cd3) [FSH, inhibin B and antral follicle count (AFC)], a CCCT was performed. FSH and inhibin B levels were measured on day 10 (cd10). A second CCCT was performed after a washout period of one cycle. In all patients the tests were followed by an IVF treatment. Poor response (<4 oocytes or cancellation due to impaired (<3 follicles) or absent follicular growth) was used as primary outcome measure.
RESULTS: Both the single as well as the repeated CCCT markers had a rather good discriminative potential for the prediction of poor response (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (ROCAUC): FSH cd10=0.79, inhibin B cd10=0.79, mean FSH cd10=0.82 and mean inhibin B cd10=0.88). This compared well with the performance of the basal markers (FSH 0.82, inhibin B 0.72 and AFC 0.83). In a multivariate analysis on only the basal variables, FSH cd3 and AFC were selected (ROCAUC 0.89). Only stepwise forward analysis on the repeated CCCT variables revealed a better discriminating potential for the prediction of poor response (ROCAUC 0.92). At a specificity level of approximately 0.97, sensitivity and the positive predictive value were marginally improved in the CCCT models.
CONCLUSIONS: Performing a CCCT (single or repeated) has a rather good ability to predict poor response in IVF. However, it appears that the predictive accuracy and clinical value of the CCCT is not clearly better than that of basal FSH in combination with an AFC. Therefore, the use of the CCCT as a predictor of outcome in IVF should not be advocated.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2004        PMID: 15471926     DOI: 10.1093/humrep/deh553

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Hum Reprod        ISSN: 0268-1161            Impact factor:   6.918


  12 in total

Review 1.  Ovarian reserve evaluation: state of the art.

Authors:  Bruno Ramalho de Carvalho; Ana Carolina Japur de Sá Rosa e Silva; Júlio César Rosa e Silva; Rosana Maria dos Reis; Rui Alberto Ferriani; Marcos Felipe Silva de Sá
Journal:  J Assist Reprod Genet       Date:  2008-08-05       Impact factor: 3.412

2.  The Gynecologist Has a Unique Role in Providing Oncofertility Care to Young Cancer Patients.

Authors:  Francesca E Duncan; Jennifer K Jozefik; Alison M Kim; Jennifer Hirshfeld-Cytron; Teresa K Woodruff
Journal:  US Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2011-01-01

Review 3.  Female hypogonadism: evaluation of the hypothalamic-pituitary-ovarian axis.

Authors:  Micol S Rothman; Margaret E Wierman
Journal:  Pituitary       Date:  2008       Impact factor: 4.107

Review 4.  A new approach to ovarian reserve testing.

Authors:  Wenjie Sun; Barbara J Stegmann; Melinda Henne; William H Catherino; James H Segars
Journal:  Fertil Steril       Date:  2008-04-22       Impact factor: 7.329

5.  Ovarian reserve assessment for infertility investigation.

Authors:  Bruno Ramalho de Carvalho; David Barreira Gomes Sobrinho; Andréa Duarte Damasceno Vieira; Manoela Porto Silva Resende; Antônio César Paes Barbosa; Adelino Amaral Silva; Hitomi Miura Nakagava
Journal:  ISRN Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2012-01-26

6.  Antral follicle size in the downregulated cycle and its relation to in vitro fertilization outcome.

Authors:  Nabaneeta Padhy; M Latha; B Sathya; Thangam R Varma
Journal:  J Hum Reprod Sci       Date:  2009-07

7.  Comparison of Ovarian volume and Antral follicle count with Endocrine tests for prediction of responsiveness in ovulation induction protocols.

Authors:  Atoosa Adibi; Farahnaz Mardanian; Somaye Hajiahmadi
Journal:  Adv Biomed Res       Date:  2012-10-31

8.  Biomarkers of Ovarian Reserve.

Authors:  William E Roudebush; Wendy J Kivens; Jessica M Mattke
Journal:  Biomark Insights       Date:  2008-04-16

9.  Ovarian volume and antral follicle count for the prediction of low and hyper responders with in vitro fertilization.

Authors:  Janet Kwee; Mariet E Elting; Roel Schats; Joseph McDonnell; Cornelis B Lambalk
Journal:  Reprod Biol Endocrinol       Date:  2007-03-15       Impact factor: 5.211

10.  Prediction and diagnosis of poor ovarian response: the dilemma.

Authors:  Ahmed Badawy; Alaa Wageah; Mohamed El Gharib; Ezz Eldin Osman
Journal:  J Reprod Infertil       Date:  2011-10
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.