Anne Marie Z Jukic1, Donna D Baird2, Allen J Wilcox2, Clarice R Weinberg3, Anne Z Steiner4. 1. Department of Chronic Disease Epidemiology, Yale School of Public Health, New Haven, CT. 2. Epidemiology Branch, National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, Durham, NC. 3. Biostatistics and Computational Biology Branch, National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, Durham, NC. 4. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The aim of the study was to examine the associations between 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25(OH)D) and biomarkers of ovarian reserve in a large community-based sample of women. METHODS: In 2010 to 2016, women aged 30 to 44 years without any known fertility problems were recruited from the Chapel Hill, NC area for a prospective time-to-pregnancy cohort study. At enrollment 561 women provided a blood sample that was used to measure 25(OH)D, anti-Müllerian hormone (AMH), follicle-stimulating hormone, and inhibin-B. Unadjusted associations were estimated with Spearman correlation coefficients. Multivariable linear regression was used to estimate associations of 25(OH)D with ovarian reserve biomarkers, after adjusting for age, race, body mass index, smoking history, and recent use of hormonal birth control. RESULTS: The mean 25(OH)D was 36 ng/mL (SD = 11 ng/mL). 25(OH)D was not correlated with AMH, follicle-stimulating hormone, or inhibin-B (all r < 0.03). Multivariable results with continuous hormonal outcomes were also null. For dichotomous outcomes, there was a tendency for insufficient 25(OH)D (<30 ng/mL) to be associated with low AMH (<0.7 ng/mL) (odds ratio [95% CI]: 1.8 [0.9-4]). CONCLUSIONS: For the most part, 25(OH)D was not associated with ovarian reserve biomarkers in a group of women trying to become pregnant. We found some evidence that low 25(OH)D (<30 ng/mL) was associated with low AMH, but this should be confirmed in studies with a higher prevalence of low 25(OH)D.
OBJECTIVE: The aim of the study was to examine the associations between 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25(OH)D) and biomarkers of ovarian reserve in a large community-based sample of women. METHODS: In 2010 to 2016, women aged 30 to 44 years without any known fertility problems were recruited from the Chapel Hill, NC area for a prospective time-to-pregnancy cohort study. At enrollment 561 women provided a blood sample that was used to measure 25(OH)D, anti-Müllerian hormone (AMH), follicle-stimulating hormone, and inhibin-B. Unadjusted associations were estimated with Spearman correlation coefficients. Multivariable linear regression was used to estimate associations of 25(OH)D with ovarian reserve biomarkers, after adjusting for age, race, body mass index, smoking history, and recent use of hormonal birth control. RESULTS: The mean 25(OH)D was 36 ng/mL (SD = 11 ng/mL). 25(OH)D was not correlated with AMH, follicle-stimulating hormone, or inhibin-B (all r < 0.03). Multivariable results with continuous hormonal outcomes were also null. For dichotomous outcomes, there was a tendency for insufficient 25(OH)D (<30 ng/mL) to be associated with low AMH (<0.7 ng/mL) (odds ratio [95% CI]: 1.8 [0.9-4]). CONCLUSIONS: For the most part, 25(OH)D was not associated with ovarian reserve biomarkers in a group of women trying to become pregnant. We found some evidence that low 25(OH)D (<30 ng/mL) was associated with low AMH, but this should be confirmed in studies with a higher prevalence of low 25(OH)D.
Authors: Rebecca J Ferrell; Kathleen A O'Connor; Darryl J Holman; Eleanor Brindle; Rebecca C Miller; Germán Rodriguez; James A Simon; Phyllis K Mansfield; James W Wood; Maxine Weinstein Journal: Menopause Date: 2007 Jan-Feb Impact factor: 2.953
Authors: Nicola A Dennis; Lisa A Houghton; Gregory T Jones; Andre M van Rij; Kirstie Morgan; Ian S McLennan Journal: J Clin Endocrinol Metab Date: 2012-04-16 Impact factor: 5.958
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: Ilse A J van Rooij; Isolde den Tonkelaar; Frank J M Broekmans; Caspar W N Looman; Gabrielle J Scheffer; Frank H de Jong; Axel P N Themmen; Egbert R te Velde Journal: Menopause Date: 2004 Nov-Dec Impact factor: 2.953
Authors: José Luis Mansur; Beatriz Oliveri; Evangelina Giacoia; David Fusaro; Pablo René Costanzo Journal: Nutrients Date: 2022-05-01 Impact factor: 6.706
Authors: Huichu Li; Jaime E Hart; Shruthi Mahalingaiah; Rachel C Nethery; Trang VoPham; Elizabeth Bertone-Johnson; Francine Laden Journal: Environ Res Date: 2021-08-21 Impact factor: 6.498