Non-equivalence of anti-Müllerian hormone automated assays—clinical implications for use as a companion diagnostic for individualised gonadotrophin dosing

published_or_final_versio

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

Does polycystic ovarian morphology influence the response to treatment with pulsatile GnRH in functional hypothalamic amenorrhea?

BACKGROUND: Pulsatile GnRH therapy is the gold standard treatment for ovulation induction in women having functional hypothalamic amenorrhea (FHA). The use of pulsatile GnRH therapy in FHA patients with polycystic ovarian morphology (PCOM), called “FHA-PCOM”, has been little studied in the literature and results remain contradictory. The aim of this study was to compare the outcomes of pulsatile GnRH therapy for ovulation induction between FHA and “FHA-PCOM” patients in order to search for an eventual impact of PCOM. METHODS: Retrospective study from August 2002 to June 2015, including 27 patients with FHA and 40 “FHA-PCOM” patients (85 and 104 initiated cycles, respectively) treated by pulsatile GnRH therapy for induction ovulation. RESULTS: The two groups were similar except for markers of PCOM (follicle number per ovary, serum Anti-Müllerian Hormone level and ovarian area), which were significantly higher in patients with “FHA-PCOM”. There was no significant difference between the groups concerning the ovarian response: with equivalent doses of GnRH, both groups had similar ovulation (80.8 vs 77.7 %, NS) and excessive response rates (12.5 vs 10.6 %, NS). There was no significant difference in on-going pregnancy rates (26.9 vs 20 % per initiated cycle, NS), as well as in miscarriage, multiple pregnancy or biochemical pregnancy rates. CONCLUSION: Pulsatile GnRH seems to be a successful and safe method for ovulation induction in “FHA-PCOM” patients. If results were confirmed by prospective studies, GnRH therapy could therefore become a first-line treatment for this specific population, just as it is for women with FHA without PCOM