BACKGROUND: Biological markers of ovarian reserve have the potential to advance research on fecundability, infertility and reproductive aging. Anti-Müllerian hormone (AMH) has emerged as a clinically useful measure of ovarian reserve, but the requirement for venous blood is an obstacle to application in non-clinical settings. This paper validates a new method for quantifying AMH in dried blood spot (DBS) samples--drops of whole blood collected on filter paper following a simple finger stick. METHODS: Matched serum and DBS samples were obtained from n=101 women of reproductive age, and AMH values were compared using regression analyses and scatter plots. The precision, reliability, linearity, recovery and lower detection limit of the DBS assay were evaluated, as well as the stability of AMH in DBS across a range of storage conditions. RESULTS: There was a strong agreement between AMH concentrations measured in DBS and serum samples across the entire assay range. Analysis of within-assay (percent coefficient of variation, 4.7-6.5%) and between-assay (3.5-7.2%) variability indicated a high level of assay precision and reliability, respectively. The minimum detectable dose of AMH was 0.065 ng/ml. Concentrations of AMH remained stable in DBS samples stored for 2 weeks at room temperature, and for 4 weeks when refrigerated. CONCLUSIONS: The DBS assay performs at a level that is comparable to serum-based methods, with the advantage of lower burdens and costs associated with blood collection that may be advantageous for research in clinical as well as non-clinical settings on the causes and consequences of variation in ovarian reserve.
BACKGROUND: Biological markers of ovarian reserve have the potential to advance research on fecundability, infertility and reproductive aging. Anti-Müllerian hormone (AMH) has emerged as a clinically useful measure of ovarian reserve, but the requirement for venous blood is an obstacle to application in non-clinical settings. This paper validates a new method for quantifying AMH in dried blood spot (DBS) samples--drops of whole blood collected on filter paper following a simple finger stick. METHODS: Matched serum and DBS samples were obtained from n=101 women of reproductive age, and AMH values were compared using regression analyses and scatter plots. The precision, reliability, linearity, recovery and lower detection limit of the DBS assay were evaluated, as well as the stability of AMH in DBS across a range of storage conditions. RESULTS: There was a strong agreement between AMH concentrations measured in DBS and serum samples across the entire assay range. Analysis of within-assay (percent coefficient of variation, 4.7-6.5%) and between-assay (3.5-7.2%) variability indicated a high level of assay precision and reliability, respectively. The minimum detectable dose of AMH was 0.065 ng/ml. Concentrations of AMH remained stable in DBS samples stored for 2 weeks at room temperature, and for 4 weeks when refrigerated. CONCLUSIONS: The DBS assay performs at a level that is comparable to serum-based methods, with the advantage of lower burdens and costs associated with blood collection that may be advantageous for research in clinical as well as non-clinical settings on the causes and consequences of variation in ovarian reserve.
Authors: Anne Z Steiner; Amy H Herring; James S Kesner; Juliana W Meadows; Frank Z Stanczyk; Steven Hoberman; Donna D Baird Journal: Obstet Gynecol Date: 2011-04 Impact factor: 7.661
Authors: S Lie Fong; P J Lugtenburg; I Schipper; A P N Themmen; F H de Jong; P Sonneveld; J S E Laven Journal: Hum Reprod Date: 2008-01-23 Impact factor: 6.918
Authors: Thomas W Kelsey; Phoebe Wright; Scott M Nelson; Richard A Anderson; W Hamish B Wallace Journal: PLoS One Date: 2011-07-15 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Kelli S Hall; Shelby T Rentmeester; Yuan Zhao; Allison N Hankus; Yidan Pei; Halley Em Riley; Candace McCloud; Bradley D Pearce Journal: Front Womens Health Date: 2020-02-03
Authors: Samantha Davidson; Sara Jahnke; Alesia M Jung; Jefferey L Burgess; Elizabeth T Jacobs; Dean Billheimer; Leslie V Farland Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2022-05-14 Impact factor: 4.614
Authors: Leman Yel; Christopher J Rabbat; Charlotte Cunningham-Rundles; Jordan S Orange; Troy R Torgerson; James W Verbsky; Yeong Wang; Maoyong Fu; Terry S Robins; Marc S Edwards; Jesper Nymann-Andersen Journal: J Clin Immunol Date: 2015-08-16 Impact factor: 8.317
Authors: Erin Silliman; Esther H Chung; Elizabeth Fitzpatrick; Julie A Jolin; Michelle Brown; James Hotaling; Aaron K Styer; Anatte E Karmon Journal: Reprod Biol Endocrinol Date: 2022-09-01 Impact factor: 4.982