Scott M Nelson1, Stamatina Iliodromiti2, Richard Fleming2, Richard Anderson3, Alex McConnachie4, Claudia-Martina Messow4. 1. School of Medicine, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, United Kingdom. Electronic address: scott.nelson@glasgow.ac.uk. 2. School of Medicine, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, United Kingdom. 3. Medical Research Council Centre for Reproductive Health (R.A.A.), Queens Medical Research Institute, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, United Kingdom. 4. Robertson Centre for Biostatistics, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, United Kingdom.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To develop an optimal model and age-specific centiles for the decline in antimüllerian hormone (AMH) as measured by the new Beckman Coulter AMH Generation II (Gen II) assay and compare this to the previous nomogram derived for the Diagnostics Systems Laboratory (DSL) assay. DESIGN: Multicenter retrospective population study, with validation of linear, biphasic linear, differential, power, and quadratic equations. SETTING: Two clinical pathology laboratories. PATIENT(S): A new cohort of 10,984 women aged 25 to 45 years old attending infertility clinics, randomly divided into a training cohort of 5,492 women and a validation cohort of 5,492 women, and an existing cohort of 9,601 women, who had contributed to the development and validation of a nomogram for AMH measured by the DSL assay. INTERVENTION(S): Serum measurement of AMH as determined by the Beckman Coulter AMH Generation II assay in 10,984 women. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): Optimal model for the decline in AMH as measured by the AMH Gen II assay with age, with age-specific 5th, 10th, 25th, 50th, 75th, 90th, and 95th percentiles. RESULT(S): A quadratic model defined as (2.431 + 0.089 * Age + -0.003 * Age(2)) fitted the decline in AMH with age. The anticipated 40% increase in age-specific population values relative to the previously validated DSL assay nomogram was not observed. CONCLUSION(S): Age-specific reference ranges for the AMH gen II assay suggest a systematic shift in assay calibration since initial evaluation and commercial release of the AMH Gen II assay.
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVE: To develop an optimal model and age-specific centiles for the decline in antimüllerian hormone (AMH) as measured by the new Beckman Coulter AMH Generation II (Gen II) assay and compare this to the previous nomogram derived for the Diagnostics Systems Laboratory (DSL) assay. DESIGN: Multicenter retrospective population study, with validation of linear, biphasic linear, differential, power, and quadratic equations. SETTING: Two clinical pathology laboratories. PATIENT(S): A new cohort of 10,984 women aged 25 to 45 years old attending infertility clinics, randomly divided into a training cohort of 5,492 women and a validation cohort of 5,492 women, and an existing cohort of 9,601 women, who had contributed to the development and validation of a nomogram for AMH measured by the DSL assay. INTERVENTION(S): Serum measurement of AMH as determined by the Beckman Coulter AMH Generation II assay in 10,984 women. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): Optimal model for the decline in AMH as measured by the AMH Gen II assay with age, with age-specific 5th, 10th, 25th, 50th, 75th, 90th, and 95th percentiles. RESULT(S): A quadratic model defined as (2.431 + 0.089 * Age + -0.003 * Age(2)) fitted the decline in AMH with age. The anticipated 40% increase in age-specific population values relative to the previously validated DSL assay nomogram was not observed. CONCLUSION(S): Age-specific reference ranges for the AMH gen II assay suggest a systematic shift in assay calibration since initial evaluation and commercial release of the AMH Gen II assay.
Authors: Carolina P Rezende; Ana L Rocha; Cynthia Dela Cruz; Lavinia E Borges; Helen L Del Puerto; Fernando M Reis Journal: J Assist Reprod Genet Date: 2014-07-12 Impact factor: 3.412
Authors: K A Kissell; M R Danaher; E F Schisterman; J Wactawski-Wende; K A Ahrens; K Schliep; N J Perkins; L Sjaarda; J Weck; S L Mumford Journal: Hum Reprod Date: 2014-06-12 Impact factor: 6.918
Authors: Allison A Eubanks; Carrie J Nobles; Micah J Hill; Alan H DeCherney; Keewan Kim; Lindsey A Sjaarda; Neil J Perkins; Aijun Ye; Jessica R Zolton; Robert M Silver; Enrique F Schisterman; Sunni L Mumford Journal: Reprod Toxicol Date: 2020-09-09 Impact factor: 3.143
Authors: Sunni L Mumford; Richard S Legro; Michael P Diamond; Christos Coutifaris; Anne Z Steiner; William D Schlaff; Ruben Alvero; Gregory M Christman; Peter R Casson; Hao Huang; Nanette Santoro; Esther Eisenberg; Heping Zhang; Marcelle I Cedars Journal: J Clin Endocrinol Metab Date: 2016-05-26 Impact factor: 5.958
Authors: Lisa M Pastore; Mindy S Christianson; James Stelling; William G Kearns; James H Segars Journal: J Assist Reprod Genet Date: 2017-10-02 Impact factor: 3.412
Authors: Agnese Barnabei; Lidia Strigari; Paolo Marchetti; Valentina Sini; Liana De Vecchis; Salvatore Maria Corsello; Francesco Torino Journal: Oncologist Date: 2015-09-04