| Literature DB >> 30300541 |
Hui Long, Yanhong Nie, Li Wang, Yong Lu, Yan Wang, Yijun Cai, Zhen Liu, Miaomiao Jia, Qifeng Lyu, Yanping Qifeng, Qiang Sun.
Abstract
AMH as a promising predictor of ovarian response has been studied extensively in women undergoing assisted reproductive technology treatment, but little is known about its prediction value in monkeys undergoing ovarian stimulation. In the current study, a total of 380 cynomolgus monkeys ranging from 5 to 12 years received 699 ovarian stimulation cycles. Serum samples were collected for AMH measure with enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay. It was found that serum AMH levels were positive correlated with the number of retrieved oocytes (P < 0.01) in the first, second and third stimulation cycles. In the first cycles, area under the curve (ROCAUC) of AMH is 0.688 for low response and 0.612 for high response respectively, indicating the significant prediction values (P = 0.000 and P = 0.005). The optimal AMH cutoff value was 9.68 ng/mL for low ovarian response and 15.88 ng/mL for high ovarian response prediction. In the second stimulation cycles, the significance of ROCAUC of AMH for high response rather than the low response was observed (P = 0.001 and P = 0.468). The optimal AMH cutoff value for high ovarian response was 15.61 ng/mL. In the third stimulation cycles, AMH lost the prediction value with no significant ROCAUC. Our data demonstrated that AMH, not age, is a cycle-dependent predictor for ovarian response in form of oocyte yields, which would promote the application of AMH in assisted reproductive treatment (ART) of female cynomolgus monkeys. AMH evaluation would optimize candidate selection for ART and individualize the ovarian stimulation strategies, and consequentially improve the efficiency in monkeys.Entities:
Year: 2018 PMID: 30300541 PMCID: PMC6176281 DOI: 10.1530/EC-18-0189
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Endocr Connect ISSN: 2049-3614 Impact factor: 3.335
Characteristics of age, AMH and oocyte retrieval in different cycles.
| First cycle ( | Second cycle ( | Third cycle ( | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age (years) | 8.2 ± 2.5 | 8.4 ± 2.4 | 8.9 ± 2.6 | 0.089 |
| AMH (ng/mL) | 15.3 ± 5.0 | 15.5 ± 4.8 | 15.8 ± 4.4 | 0.706 |
| Retrieved oocytes | 33.6 ± 20.5 | 31.3 ± 12.3 | 27.6 ± 18.9## | 0.048* |
| MII oocytes | 13.2 ± 10.9 | 12.3 ± 10.6 | 10.4 ± 10.0 | 0.112 |
Values are presented as mean ± s.d. P value by one-way ANOVA. *P < 0.05. Compared with the second cycle, ##P < 0.001.
AMH, anti-Mullerian hormone; MII, metaphase II.
Correlation analyses among age, AMH, the number of retrieved oocytes and metaphase II oocytes in different ovarian stimulation cycles.
| Age (years) | AMH (ng/mL) | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Pearson correlation coefficient ( | Pearson correlation coefficient ( | |||
| Age (5–12 years) | – | 0.151 | 0.002** | |
| First cycle ( | ||||
| No. of retrieved oocytes | −0.028 | 0.583 | 0.344 | 0.000** |
| No. of MII oocytes | −0.062 | 0.231 | 0.262 | 0.000** |
| Second cycle ( | ||||
| No. of retrieved oocytes | −0.034 | 0.594 | 0.259 | 0.000** |
| No. of MII oocytes | 0.020 | 0.753 | 0.179 | 0.004** |
| Third cycle ( | ||||
| No. of retrieved oocytes | −0.219 | 0.072 | 0.316 | 0.009** |
| No. of MII oocytes | −0.160 | 0.192 | 0.211 | 0.083 |
Pearson correlation analysis was performed. **P < 0.01.
AMH, anti-Mullerian hormone; MII, metaphase II.
Potential of AMH to predict low and high response in different ovarian stimulation cycles.
| Cycle | Low response | High response | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROCAUC | 95% CI | ROCAUC | 95% CI | |||
| First | 0.688 | (0.604, 0.771) | 0.000*** | 0.612 | (0.541, 0.683) | 0.005** |
| Second | 0.535 | (0.435, 0.636) | 0.468 | 0.673 | (0.584, 0.761) | 0.001** |
| Third | 0.642 | (0.499, 0.784) | 0.077 | 0.618 | (0.418, 0.818) | 0.102 |
P value means significance of ROCAUC compared with 0.5. **P < 0.01. ***P < 0.001.
AMH, anti-Mullerian hormone
Figure 1AMH receiver operator characteristic (ROC) curves for low and high ovarian response predictions in the first and second cycle respectively.