STUDY QUESTION: What is the daily variation in serum inhibin B (InhB) and anti-Müllerian hormone (AMH) in relation to the LH surge in women of reproductive age. SUMMARY ANSWER: AMH is secreted in a biphasic follicular/luteal pattern in women with higher AMH secretion, while InhB secretion is episodic in the early to mid-follicular phase and immediately after the LH surge but not in the luteal phase. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: In women of reproductive age with a mean serum AMH >1 ng/ml, levels are highest in Days 2-7 of the cycle. InhB concentrations are highest in the follicular phase of the cycle. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: In this cohort study conducted in an academic center, blood samples were collected daily from 20 women during one normal menstrual cycle. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS: Regularly menstruating 30- to 40-year-old women had daily serum InhB, AMH, LH and FSH levels measured. Intracycle variability of InhB and AMH were assessed after aligning to the LH surge. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: When classified into quartiles of AMH concentration, the lowest AMH levels did not vary across the cycle; the highest AMH levels showed a mid-follicular increase, mid-cycle decrease and mid-luteal increase. A surge of InhB was noted following the LH surge in 16/20 cycles. Episodic increases in InhB occurred in 17/20 cycles prior to the LH surge. In the luteal phase, InhB decreased or became undetectable and did not demonstrate episodic secretion. Old and new assays for AMH and InhB were compared in all samples, with the AMH assays demonstrating good correlation (Rsq = 0.9625) but the InhB assays showing less correlation (Rsq = 0.4903). LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: The study population is small and in the mid-to-late reproductive age group. Single daily sampling may not detect more frequent variability (i.e. pulses) in hormone levels. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: These data suggest different regulatory mechanisms for InhB and AMH secretion, and confirm an 'aging ovary' pattern of AMH and InhB secretion, which is consistent with decreased ovarian reserve. We also demonstrated comparability of the AMH Gen II assay with the previous version in standard usage but our data raised concerns about comparability of the InhB Gen II assay. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S): General Clinical Research Center for phlebotomy work has been supported in part by NIH grant UL1RR024986. Recruitment and data analyses were supported by the Center for Integrated Approaches to Complex Diseases (SD Harlow, Director). The authors report no conflicts of interest. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: N/A.
STUDY QUESTION: What is the daily variation in serum inhibin B (InhB) and anti-Müllerian hormone (AMH) in relation to the LH surge in women of reproductive age. SUMMARY ANSWER: AMH is secreted in a biphasic follicular/luteal pattern in women with higher AMH secretion, while InhB secretion is episodic in the early to mid-follicular phase and immediately after the LH surge but not in the luteal phase. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: In women of reproductive age with a mean serum AMH >1 ng/ml, levels are highest in Days 2-7 of the cycle. InhB concentrations are highest in the follicular phase of the cycle. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: In this cohort study conducted in an academic center, blood samples were collected daily from 20 women during one normal menstrual cycle. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS: Regularly menstruating 30- to 40-year-old women had daily serum InhB, AMH, LH and FSH levels measured. Intracycle variability of InhB and AMH were assessed after aligning to the LH surge. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: When classified into quartiles of AMH concentration, the lowest AMH levels did not vary across the cycle; the highest AMH levels showed a mid-follicular increase, mid-cycle decrease and mid-luteal increase. A surge of InhB was noted following the LH surge in 16/20 cycles. Episodic increases in InhB occurred in 17/20 cycles prior to the LH surge. In the luteal phase, InhB decreased or became undetectable and did not demonstrate episodic secretion. Old and new assays for AMH and InhB were compared in all samples, with the AMH assays demonstrating good correlation (Rsq = 0.9625) but the InhB assays showing less correlation (Rsq = 0.4903). LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: The study population is small and in the mid-to-late reproductive age group. Single daily sampling may not detect more frequent variability (i.e. pulses) in hormone levels. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: These data suggest different regulatory mechanisms for InhB and AMH secretion, and confirm an 'aging ovary' pattern of AMH and InhB secretion, which is consistent with decreased ovarian reserve. We also demonstrated comparability of the AMH Gen II assay with the previous version in standard usage but our data raised concerns about comparability of the InhB Gen II assay. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S): General Clinical Research Center for phlebotomy work has been supported in part by NIH grant UL1RR024986. Recruitment and data analyses were supported by the Center for Integrated Approaches to Complex Diseases (SD Harlow, Director). The authors report no conflicts of interest. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: N/A.
Authors: C K Welt; K A Martin; A E Taylor; G M Lambert-Messerlian; W F Crowley; J A Smith; D A Schoenfeld; J E Hall Journal: J Clin Endocrinol Metab Date: 1997-08 Impact factor: 5.958
Authors: N P Groome; P J Illingworth; M O'Brien; R Pai; F E Rodger; J P Mather; A S McNeilly Journal: J Clin Endocrinol Metab Date: 1996-04 Impact factor: 5.958
Authors: N A Klein; P J Illingworth; N P Groome; A S McNeilly; D E Battaglia; M R Soules Journal: J Clin Endocrinol Metab Date: 1996-07 Impact factor: 5.958
Authors: Annemarie de Vet; Joop S E Laven; Frank H de Jong; Axel P N Themmen; Bart C J M Fauser Journal: Fertil Steril Date: 2002-02 Impact factor: 7.329
Authors: N P Groome; P J Illingworth; M O'Brien; I Cooke; T S Ganesan; D T Baird; A S McNeilly Journal: Clin Endocrinol (Oxf) Date: 1994-06 Impact factor: 3.478
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: Clarisa R Gracia; Sanghyuk S Shin; Maureen Prewitt; Janna S Chamberlin; Lori R Lofaro; Kristin L Jones; Marta Clendenin; Katherine E Manzanera; Dennis L Broyles Journal: J Assist Reprod Genet Date: 2018-03-14 Impact factor: 3.412
Authors: Hermine I Brunner; Clovis A Silva; Andreas Reiff; Gloria C Higgins; Lisa Imundo; Calvin B Williams; Carol A Wallace; Nadia E Aikawa; Shannen Nelson; Marisa S Klein-Gitelman; Susan R Rose Journal: Arthritis Rheumatol Date: 2015-05 Impact factor: 10.995
Authors: Bob Z Sun; Tairmae Kangarloo; Judith M Adams; Patrick M Sluss; Corrine K Welt; Donald W Chandler; David T Zava; John A McGrath; David M Umbach; Janet E Hall; Natalie D Shaw Journal: J Clin Endocrinol Metab Date: 2019-02-01 Impact factor: 5.958
Authors: Michael Schenk; Julia Maria Kröpfl; Barbara Obermayer-Pietsch; Elisabeth Feldmeier; Gregor Weiss Journal: J Assist Reprod Genet Date: 2017-03-21 Impact factor: 3.412
Authors: Laura Melado; Barbara Lawrenz; Junard Sibal; Emmanuel Abu; Carol Coughlan; Alfredo T Navarro; Human Mousavi Fatemi Journal: Front Endocrinol (Lausanne) Date: 2018-11-27 Impact factor: 5.555