Ana Raquel Neves1, Christophe Blockeel2, Georg Griesinger3, Juan Antonio Garcia-Velasco4, Antonio La Marca5, Ignacio Rodriguez6, Panagiotis Drakopoulos2, Manuel Alvarez6, Herman Tournaye2, Nikolaus P Polyzos7. 1. Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology and Reproductive Medicine, Dexeus University Hospital, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Coimbra Hospital and University Centre, Faculty of Medicine, University of Coimbra, Clinical Academic Center of Coimbra, Rua Augusta 17, Barcelona, Coimbra 08028, 3000-045, Spain, Portugal. 2. Centre for Reproductive Medicine, UZ Brussel, Faculty of Medicine and Pharmacy, Department of Surgical and Clinical Science, Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Laarbeeklaan 101, Brussels 1090, Belgium. 3. Department of Reproductive Medicine and Gynecological Endocrinology, University Hospital of Schleswig-Holstein, Campus Luebeck, Ratzeburger Allee 160, Luebeck, Germany. 4. IVI Madrid, Rey Juan Carlos University, IdiPAZ, Madrid. 5. Mother-Infant Department, Institute of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Modena and Reggio Emilia, Policlinico di Modena, Largo del Pozzo, Modena 41100, Italy. 6. Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology and Reproductive Medicine, Dexeus University Hospital, Barcelona 08028, Spain. 7. Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology and Reproductive Medicine, Dexeus University Hospital, Department of Clinical Medicine, Faculty of Health, Aarhus University, Barcelona, Aarhus 08028, 8000, Spain, Denmark. Electronic address: nikpol@dexeus.com.
Abstract
RESEARCH QUESTION: What is the performance of anti-Müllerian hormone (AMH) as measured by the Elecsys® AMH assay in predicting ovarian response in women treated with 150 µg corifollitropin alfa (CFA)? DESIGN: Multicentre, prospective study conducted between December 2015 and April 2018. Women were aged 18-43 years, had regular menstrual bleeding, a body mass index of 17-35 kg/m2 and weighed 60 kg or over. EXCLUSION CRITERIA: previous oophorectomy, history of ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome, a previous IVF and intracytoplasmic sperm injection cycle producing over 30 follicles measuring 11 mm or wider, basal antral follicle count (AFC) over 20 or polycystic ovarian syndrome. All women were treated with 150 μg CFA followed by recombinant FSH (150-300 IU/day) in a fixed gonadotrophin releasing hormone antagonist protocol. RESULTS: Of the 219 patients enrolled, 22.8% had low ovarian response (three or fewer oocytes), 66.2% had normal response and 11% had high ovarian response (15 or more oocytes). The AMH and AFC presented an area under the curve of 0.883 (95% CI 0.830 to 0.936) and 0.879 (95% CI 0.826 to 0.930), respectively, for low ovarian response; and an AUC of 0.865 (95% CI 0.793 to 0.935) and 0.822 (95% CI 0.734 to 0.909) for high ovarian response. An AMH cut-off of 1.0 ng/ml provided a sensitivity of 92.0% and a specificity of 66.9% in the prediction of low ovarian response; a cut-off of 2.25 ng/ml predicted high ovarian response with a sensitivity of 54.2% and a specificity of 91.8%. CONCLUSIONS: The automated Elecsys® AMH assay predicts ovarian response in a CFA antagonist protocol. The best predictors of ovarian response in CFA-treated patients were AMH and AFC.
RESEARCH QUESTION: What is the performance of anti-Müllerian hormone (AMH) as measured by the Elecsys® AMH assay in predicting ovarian response in women treated with 150 µg corifollitropin alfa (CFA)? DESIGN: Multicentre, prospective study conducted between December 2015 and April 2018. Women were aged 18-43 years, had regular menstrual bleeding, a body mass index of 17-35 kg/m2 and weighed 60 kg or over. EXCLUSION CRITERIA: previous oophorectomy, history of ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome, a previous IVF and intracytoplasmic sperm injection cycle producing over 30 follicles measuring 11 mm or wider, basal antral follicle count (AFC) over 20 or polycystic ovarian syndrome. All women were treated with 150 μg CFA followed by recombinant FSH (150-300 IU/day) in a fixed gonadotrophin releasing hormone antagonist protocol. RESULTS: Of the 219 patients enrolled, 22.8% had low ovarian response (three or fewer oocytes), 66.2% had normal response and 11% had high ovarian response (15 or more oocytes). The AMH and AFC presented an area under the curve of 0.883 (95% CI 0.830 to 0.936) and 0.879 (95% CI 0.826 to 0.930), respectively, for low ovarian response; and an AUC of 0.865 (95% CI 0.793 to 0.935) and 0.822 (95% CI 0.734 to 0.909) for high ovarian response. An AMH cut-off of 1.0 ng/ml provided a sensitivity of 92.0% and a specificity of 66.9% in the prediction of low ovarian response; a cut-off of 2.25 ng/ml predicted high ovarian response with a sensitivity of 54.2% and a specificity of 91.8%. CONCLUSIONS: The automated Elecsys® AMH assay predicts ovarian response in a CFA antagonist protocol. The best predictors of ovarian response in CFA-treated patients were AMH and AFC.