135 research outputs found
The relationship between anti-mullerian hormone in women receiving fertility assessments and age at menopause in subfertile women: evidence from large population studies
<p>Context: Anti-Müllerian hormone (AMH) concentration reflects ovarian aging and is argued to be a useful predictor of age at menopause (AMP). It is hypothesized that AMH falling below a critical threshold corresponds to follicle depletion, which results in menopause. With this threshold, theoretical predictions of AMP can be made. Comparisons of such predictions with observed AMP from population studies support the role for AMH as a forecaster of menopause.</p>
<p>Objective: The objective of the study was to investigate whether previous relationships between AMH and AMP are valid using a much larger data set.</p>
<p>Setting: AMH was measured in 27 563 women attending fertility clinics.</p>
<p>Study Design: From these data a model of age-related AMH change was constructed using a robust regression analysis. Data on AMP from subfertile women were obtained from the population-based Prospect-European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition (Prospect-EPIC) cohort (n = 2249). By constructing a probability distribution of age at which AMH falls below a critical threshold and fitting this to Prospect-EPIC menopausal age data using maximum likelihood, such a threshold was estimated.</p>
<p>Main Outcome: The main outcome was conformity between observed and predicted AMP.</p>
<p>Results: To get a distribution of AMH-predicted AMP that fit the Prospect-EPIC data, we found the critical AMH threshold should vary among women in such a way that women with low age-specific AMH would have lower thresholds, whereas women with high age-specific AMH would have higher thresholds (mean 0.075 ng/mL; interquartile range 0.038–0.15 ng/mL). Such a varying AMH threshold for menopause is a novel and biologically plausible finding. AMH became undetectable (<0.2 ng/mL) approximately 5 years before the occurrence of menopause, in line with a previous report.</p>
<p>Conclusions: The conformity of the observed and predicted distributions of AMP supports the hypothesis that declining population averages of AMH are associated with menopause, making AMH an excellent candidate biomarker for AMP prediction. Further research will help establish the accuracy of AMH levels to predict AMP within individuals.</p>
Is home-based monitoring of ovulution to time frozen embryo transfer a cost-effective alternative for hospital-based monitoring of ovulation? Study protocol of the multicentre, non-inferiority Antarctica-2 randomised controlled trial
STUDY QUESTION: The objective of this trial is to compare the effectiveness and costs of true natural cycle (true NC-) frozen embryo transfer (FET) using urinary LH tests to modified NC-FET using repeated ultrasound monitoring and ovulation trigger to time FET in the NC. Secondary outcomes are the cancellation rates of FET (ovulation before hCG or no dominant follicle, no ovulation by LH urine test, poor embryo survival), pregnancy outcomes (miscarriage rate, clinical pregnancy rates, multiple ongoing pregnancy rates, live birth rates, costs) and neonatal outcomes (including gestational age, birthweight and sex, congenital abnormalities or diseases of babies born). WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: FET is at the heart of modern IVF. To allow implantation of the thawed embryo, the endometrium must be prepared either by exogenous oestrogen and progesterone supplementation (artificial cycle (AC)-FET) or by using the NC to produce endogenous oestradiol before and progesterone after ovulation to time the transfer of the thawed embryo (NC-FET). During an NC-FET, women visit the hospital repeatedly and receive an ovulation trigger to time FET (i.e. modified (m)NC-FET or hospital-based monitoring). From the woman’s point of view, a more natural approach using home-based monitoring of the ovulation with LH urine tests to allow a natural ovulation to time FET may be desired (true NC-FET or home-based monitoring). STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: This is a multicentre, non-inferiority prospective randomised controlled trial design. Consenting women will undergo one FET cycle using either true NC-FET or mNC-FET based on randomisation. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS: Based on our sample size calculation, the study group will consist of 1464 women between 18 and 45 years old who are scheduled for FET. Women with anovulatory cycles, women who need ovulation induction and women with a contra indication for pregnancy will be excluded. The primary outcome is ongoing pregnancy. Secondary outcomes are cancellation rates of FET, pregnancy outcomes (including miscarriage rate, clinical pregnancy, multiple pregnancy rate and live birth rate). Costs will be estimated by counting resource use and calculating unit prices. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S): The study received a grant from the Dutch Organisation for Health Research and Development (ZonMw 843002807; www.zonmw.nl). ZonMw has no role in the design of the study, collection, analysis, and interpretation of data or writing of the manuscript. F.B. reports personal fees from member of the external advisory board for Merck Serono, grants from Research support grant Merck Serono, outside the submitted work. A.E.P.C. reports and Unrestricted grant of Ferring B.V. to the Center for Reproductive medicine, no personal fee. Author up-to-date on Hyperthecosis. Congress meetings 2019 with Ferring B.V. and Theramex B.V. M.G. reports Department research and educational grants from Guerbet, Merck and Ferring (location VUMC) outside the submitted work. E.R.G. reports personal fees from Titus Health Care, outside the submitted work. C.B.L. reports grants from Ferring, grants from Merck, from Guerbet, outside the submitted work. The other authors have none to declare. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: Dutch Trial Register (Trial NL6414 (NTR6590), https://www.trialregister.nl/). TRIAL REGISTRATION DATE: 23 July 2017 DATE OF FIRST PATIENT’S ENROLMENT: 10 April 201
Predicting menopausal age with anti-Müllerian hormone: A cross-validation study of two existing models
Objective This study aimed to cross-validate two comparable Weibull models of prediction of age at natural menopause from two cohorts, the Scheffer, van Rooij, de Vet (SRV) cohort and the Tehran Lipid and Glucose Study (TLGS) cohort. It summarizes advantages and disadvantages of the models and underlines the need for achieving correct time dependency in dynamic variables like anti-Müllerian hormone. Methods Models were fitted in the original datasets and then applied to the cross-validation datasets. The discriminatory capacity of each model was assessed by calculating C-statistics for the models in their own data and in the cross-validation data. Calibration of the models on the cross-validation data was assessed by measuring the slope, intercept and Weibull shape parameter. Results The C-statistic for the SRV model on the SRV data was 0.7 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.7-0.8) and on the TLGS data it was 0.8 (95% CI 0.8-0.9). For the TLGS model on the TLGS data, it was 0.9 (95% CI 0.8-0.9) and on the SRV data it was 0.7 (95% CI 0.6-0.8). After calibration of the SRV model on the TLGS data, the slope was 1, the intercept -0.3 and the shape parameter 1.1. The TLGS model on the SRV data had a slope of 0.3, an intercept of 12.7 and a shape parameter of 0.6. Conclusions Both models discriminate well between women that enter menopause early or late during follow-up. While the SRV model showed good agreement between the predicted risk of entering menopause and the observed proportion of women who entered menopause during follow-up (calibration) in the cross-validation dataset, the TLGS model showed poor calibration. © 2014 International Menopause Society
Endometrial scratching in women with one failed IVF/ICSI cycle-outcomes of a randomised controlled trial (SCRaTCH)
STUDY QUESTION: Does endometnal scratching in women with one failed IVF/ICSI treatment affect the chance of a live birth of the subsequent fresh IVF/ICSI cycle? SUMMARY ANSWER: In this study, 4.6% more live births were observed in the scratch group, with a likely certainty range between -0.7% and +9.9%. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: Since the first suggestion that endometrial scratching might improve embryo implantation during IVF/ICSI, many clinical trials have been conducted. However, due to limitations in sample size and study quality, it remains unclear whether endometrial scratching improves IVF/ICSI outcomes. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: The SCRaTCH trial was a non-blinded randomised controlled trial in women with one unsuccessful IVF/ICSI cycle and assessed whether a single endometrial scratch using an endometrial biopsy catheter would lead to a higher live birth rate after the subsequent IVF/ICSI treatment compared to no scratch. The study took place in 8 academic and 24 general hospitals. Participants were randomised between January 2016 and July 2018 by a web-based randomisation programme. Secondary outcomes included cumulative 12-month ongoing pregnancy leading to live birth rate. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS: Women with one previous failed IVF/ICSI treatment and planning a second fresh IVF/ICSI treatment were eligible. In total, 933 participants out of 1065 eligibles were included (participation rate 88%). MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: After the fresh transfer, 4.6% more live births were observed in the scratch compared to control group (110/465 versus 88/461, respectively, risk ratio (RR) 1.24 [95% CI 0.96-1.59]). These data are consistent with a true difference of between - 0.7% and 9.9% (95% CI), indicating that while the largest proportion of the 95% CI is positive, scratching could have no or even a small negative effect. Biochemical pregnancy loss and miscarriage rate did not differ between the two groups: in the scratch group 27/153 biochemical pregnancy losses and 14/126 miscarriages occurred, while this was 19/130 and 17/11 I for the control group (RR 1.21 (95% CI 0.71-2.07) and RR 0.73 (95% CI 0.38-1.40), respectively). After 12 months of follow-up, 5.1% more live births were observed in the scratch group (202/467 versus 178/466), of which the true difference most likely lies between -1.2% and +11.4% (95% CI). LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: This study was not blinded. Knowledge of allocation may have been an incentive for participants allocated to the scratch group to continue treatment in situations where they may otherwise have cancelled or stopped. In addition, this study was powered to detect a difference in live birth rate of 9%. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: The results of this study are an incentive for further assessment of the efficacy and clinical implications of endometrial scratching. If a true effect exists, it may be smaller than previously anticipated or may be limited to specific groups of women undergoing IVF/ICSI. Studying this will require larger sample sizes, which will be provided by the ongoing international individual participant data-analysis (PROSPERO CRD42017079120). At present, endometrial scratching should not be performed outside of clinical trials
Can hysterosalpingo-foam sonography replace hysterosalpingography as first-choice tubal patency test? A randomized non-inferiority trial
Funding Information: The FOAM study was an investigator-initiated study funded by ZonMw, The Netherlands organization for Health Research and Development (project number 837001504). ZonMw funded the whole project. IQ Medical Ventures provided the ExEm-foamVR kits free of charge. The funders had no role in study design, collection, analysis and interpretation of the data. The corresponding author had full access to all the data in the study and had final responsibility for the decision to submit for publication.Peer reviewedPublisher PD
The FOAM study : Is Hysterosalpingo foam sonography (HyFoSy) a cost-effective alternative for hysterosalpingography (HSG) in assessing tubal patency in subfertile women? Study protocol for a randomized controlled trial
This is an investigator initiated trial, VU medical center Amsterdam is the sponsor, contact information: prof. CJM de Groot, Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, De Boelelaan 1117, 1081 HV Amsterdam, The Netherlands, Tel: + 31-204444444. This study is funded by ZonMw, a Dutch organization for Health Research and Development, project number 837001504. ZonMW gives financial support for the whole project. IQ Medical Ventures provides the ExEm FOAM® kits. The funding bodies have no role in the design of the study; collection, analysis, and interpretation of data; and in writing the manuscript.Peer reviewedPublisher PD
A Validated Model of Serum Anti-Müllerian Hormone from Conception to Menopause
Background Anti-Müllerian hormone (AMH) is a product of growing ovarian follicles. The concentration of AMH in blood may also reflect the non-growing follicle (NGF) population, i.e. the ovarian reserve, and be of value in predicting reproductive lifespan. A full description of AMH production up to the menopause has not been previously reported. Methodology/Principal Findings By searching the published literature for AMH concentrations in healthy pre-menopausal females, and using our own data (combined ) we have generated and robustly validated the first model of AMH concentration from conception to menopause. This model shows that 34% of the variation in AMH is due to age alone. We have shown that AMH peaks at age 24.5 years, followed by a decline to the menopause. We have also shown that there is a neonatal peak and a potential pre-pubertal peak. Our model allows us to generate normative data at all ages. Conclusions/Significance These data highlight key inflection points in ovarian follicle dynamics. This first validated model of circulating AMH in healthy females describes a transition period in early adulthood, after which AMH reflects the progressive loss of the NGF pool. The existence of a neonatal increase in gonadal activity is confirmed for females. An improved understanding of the relationship between circulating AMH and age will lead to more accurate assessment of ovarian reserve for the individual woman.Publisher PDFPeer reviewe
Hysterosalpingo-foam sonography versus hysterosalpingography during fertility work-up: an economic evaluation alongside a randomized controlled trial
STUDY QUESTION: What are the costs and effects of tubal patency testing by hysterosalpingo-foam sonography (HyFoSy) compared to hysterosalpingography (HSG) in infertile women during the fertility work-up? SUMMARY ANSWER: During the fertility work-up, clinical management based on the test results of HyFoSy leads to slightly lower, though not statistically significant, live birth rates, at lower costs, compared to management based on HSG results. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: Traditionally, tubal patency testing during the fertility work-up is performed by HSG. The FOAM trial, formally a non-inferiority study, showed that management decisions based on the results of HyFoSy resulted in a comparable live birth rate at 12 months compared to HSG (46% versus 47%; difference −1.2%, 95% CI: −3.4% to 1.5%; P¼ 0.27). Compared to HSG, HyFoSy is associated with significantly less pain, it lacks ionizing radiation and exposure to iodinated contrast medium. Moreover, HyFoSy can be performed by a gynaecologist during a one-stop fertility work-up. To our knowledge, the costs of both strategies have never been compared. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: We performed an economic evaluation alongside the FOAM trial, a randomized multicenter study conducted in the Netherlands. Participating infertile women underwent, both HyFoSy and HSG, in a randomized order. The results of both tests were compared and women with discordant test results were randomly allocated to management based on the results of one of the tests. The follow-up period was twelve months. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS: We studied 1160 infertile women (18–41 years) scheduled for tubal patency testing. The primary outcome was ongoing pregnancy leading to live birth. The economic evaluation compared costs and effects of management based on either test within 12 months. We calculated incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs): the difference in total costs and chance of live birth. Data were analyzed using the intention to treat principle. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: Between May 2015 and January 2019, 1026 of the 1160 women underwent both tubal tests and had data available: 747 women with concordant results (48% live births), 136 with inconclusive results (40% live births), and 143 with discordant results (41% had a live birth after management based on HyFoSy results versus 49% with live birth after management based on HSG results). When comparing the two strategies—management based on HyfoSy results versus HSG results—the estimated chance of live birth was 46% after HyFoSy versus 47% after HSG (difference −1.2%; 95% CI: −3.4% to 1.5%). For the procedures itself, HyFoSy cost e136 and HSG e280. When costs of additional fertility treatments were incorporated, the mean total costs per couple were e3307 for the HyFoSy strategy and e3427 for the HSG strategy (mean difference e−119; 95% CI: e−125 to e−114). So, while HyFoSy led to lower costs per couple, live birth rates were also slightly lower. The ICER was e10 042, meaning that by using HyFoSy instead of HSG we would save e10 042 per each additional live birth lost. LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: When interpreting the results of this study, it needs to be considered that there was a considerable uncertainty around the ICER, and that the direct fertility enhancing effect of both tubal patency tests was not incorporated as women underwent both tubal patency tests in this study. WIDER IMPLICATION OF THE FINDINGS: Compared to clinical management based on HSG results, management guided by HyFoSy leads to slightly lower live birth rates (though not statistically significant) at lower costs, less pain, without ionizing radiation and iodinated contrast exposure. Further research on the comparison of the direct fertility-enhancing effect of both tubal patency tests is needed. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S): FOAM trial was an investigator-initiated study, funded by ZonMw, a Dutch organization for Health Research and Development (project number 837001504). IQ Medical Ventures provided the ExEm®-FOAM kits free of charge. The funders had no role in study design, collection, analysis, and interpretation of the data. K.D. reports travel-and speakers fees from Guerbet and her department received research grants from Guerbet outside the submitted work. H.R.V. received consulting—and travel fee from Ferring. A.M.v.P. reports received consulting fee from DEKRA and fee for an expert meeting from Ferring, both outside the submitted work. C.H.d.K. received travel fee from Merck. F.J.M.B. received a grant from Merck and speakers fee from Besins Healthcare. F.J.M.B. is a member of the advisory board of Merck and Ferring. J.v.D. reported speakers fee from Ferring. J.S. reports a research agreement with Takeda and consultancy for Sanofi on MR of motility outside the submitted work. M.v.W. received a travel grant from Oxford Press in the role of deputy editor for Human Reproduction and participates in a DSMB as independent methodologist in obstetrics studies in which she has no other role. B.W.M. received an investigator grant from NHMRC GNT1176437. B.W.M. reports consultancy for ObsEva, Merck, Guerbet, iGenomix, and Merck KGaA and travel support from Merck KGaA. V.M. received research grants from Guerbet, Merck, and Ferring and travel and speakers fees from Guerbet. The other authors do not report conflicts of interest. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: International Clinical Trials Registry Platform No. NTR4746
- …