1
|
Conforti A, Tüttelmann F, Alviggi C, Behre HM, Fischer R, Hu L, Polyzos NP, Chuderland D, Rama Raju GA, D’Hooghe T, Simoni M, Sunkara SK, Longobardi S. Effect of Genetic Variants of Gonadotropins and Their Receptors on Ovarian Stimulation Outcomes: A Delphi Consensus. Front Endocrinol (Lausanne) 2022; 12:797365. [PMID: 35178027 PMCID: PMC8844496 DOI: 10.3389/fendo.2021.797365] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/18/2021] [Accepted: 12/15/2021] [Indexed: 01/20/2023] Open
Abstract
Background A Delphi consensus was conducted to evaluate the influence of single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) in genes encoding gonadotropin and gonadotropin receptors on clinical ovarian stimulation outcomes following assisted reproductive technology (ART) treatment. Methods Nine experts plus two Scientific Coordinators discussed and amended statements plus supporting references proposed by the Scientific Coordinators. The statements were distributed via an online survey to 36 experts, who voted on their level of agreement or disagreement with each statement. Consensus was reached if the proportion of participants agreeing or disagreeing with a statement was >66%. Results Eleven statements were developed, of which two statements were merged. Overall, eight statements achieved consensus and two statements did not achieve consensus. The statements reaching consensus are summarized here. (1) SNP in the follicle stimulating hormone receptor (FSHR), rs6166 (c.2039A>G, p.Asn680Ser) (N=5 statements): Ser/Ser carriers have higher basal FSH levels than Asn/Asn carriers. Ser/Ser carriers require higher amounts of gonadotropin during ovarian stimulation than Asn/Asn carriers. Ser/Ser carriers produce fewer oocytes during ovarian stimulation than Asn/Asn or Asn/Ser carriers. There is mixed evidence supporting an association between this variant and ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome. (2) SNP of FSHR, rs6165 (c.919G>A, p.Thr307Ala) (N=1 statement): Few studies suggest Thr/Thr carriers require a shorter duration of gonadotropin stimulation than Thr/Ala or Ala/Ala carriers. (3) SNP of FSHR, rs1394205 (-29G>A) (N=1 statement): Limited data in specific ethnic groups suggest that A/A allele carriers may require higher amounts of gonadotropin during ovarian stimulation and produce fewer oocytes than G/G carriers. (4) SNP of FSH β-chain (FSHB), rs10835638 (-211G>T) (N=1 statement): There is contradictory evidence supporting an association between this variant and basal FSH levels or oocyte number. (5) SNPs of luteinizing hormone β-chain (LHB) and LH/choriogonadotropin receptor (LHCGR) genes (N=1 statement): these may influence ovarian stimulation outcomes and could represent potential future targets for pharmacogenomic research in ART, although data are still very limited. Conclusions This Delphi consensus provides clinical perspectives from a diverse international group of experts. The consensus supports a link between some variants in gonadotropin/gonadotropin receptor genes and ovarian stimulation outcomes; however, further research is needed to clarify these findings.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Alessandro Conforti
- Department of Neuroscience, Reproductive Science and Odontostomatology, University Federico II, Naples, Italy
| | - Frank Tüttelmann
- Institute of Reproductive Genetics, University of Münster, Münster, Germany
| | - Carlo Alviggi
- Department of Neuroscience, Reproductive Science and Odontostomatology, University Federico II, Naples, Italy
| | - Hermann M. Behre
- Center for Reproductive Medicine and Andrology, University Hospital Halle, Martin Luther University Halle-Wittenberg, Halle, Germany
| | - Robert Fischer
- Department of Gynecological Endocrinology and Reproductive Medicine, Fertility Center Hamburg, Hamburg, Germany
| | - Liang Hu
- Clinical Research Center for Reproduction and Genetics in Hunan Province, Reproductive and Genetic Hospital of CITIC-XIANGYA, Changsha, China
- Institute of Reproductive and Stem Cell Engineering, School of Basic Medical Science, Central South University, Changsha, China
| | - Nikolaos P. Polyzos
- Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology and Reproductive Medicine, Dexeus University Hospital, Barcelona, Spain
| | - Dana Chuderland
- Global Medical Affairs Fertility, Merck Healthcare KGaA, Darmstadt, Germany
| | | | - Thomas D’Hooghe
- Global Medical Affairs Fertility, Merck Healthcare KGaA, Darmstadt, Germany
- Research Group Reproductive Medicine, Department of Development and Regeneration, Organ Systems, Group Biomedical Sciences, KU Leuven (University of Leuven), Leuven, Belgium
- Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology, and Reproductive Sciences, Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, CT, United States
| | - Manuela Simoni
- Unit of Endocrinology, Department of Biomedical, Metabolic and Neural Sciences, University of Modena and Reggio Emilia, Modena, Italy
| | - Sesh K. Sunkara
- Faculty of Life Sciences and Medicine, King’s College London, London, United Kingdom
| | - Salvatore Longobardi
- Global Clinical Development, Research and Development, Merck KGaA, Darmstadt, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Goetz LH, Schork NJ. Personalized medicine: motivation, challenges, and progress. Fertil Steril 2019; 109:952-963. [PMID: 29935653 DOI: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2018.05.006] [Citation(s) in RCA: 251] [Impact Index Per Article: 50.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/26/2018] [Revised: 05/04/2018] [Accepted: 05/04/2018] [Indexed: 01/07/2023]
Abstract
There is a great deal of hype surrounding the concept of personalized medicine. Personalized medicine is rooted in the belief that since individuals possess nuanced and unique characteristics at the molecular, physiological, environmental exposure, and behavioral levels, they may need to have interventions provided to them for diseases they possess that are tailored to these nuanced and unique characteristics. This belief has been verified to some degree through the application of emerging technologies such as DNA sequencing, proteomics, imaging protocols, and wireless health monitoring devices, which have revealed great inter-individual variation in disease processes. In this review, we consider the motivation for personalized medicine, its historical precedents, the emerging technologies that are enabling it, some recent experiences including successes and setbacks, ways of vetting and deploying personalized medicines, and future directions, including potential ways of treating individuals with fertility and sterility issues. We also consider current limitations of personalized medicine. We ultimately argue that since aspects of personalized medicine are rooted in biological realities, personalized medicine practices in certain contexts are likely to be inevitable, especially as relevant assays and deployment strategies become more efficient and cost-effective.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Nicholas J Schork
- The Translational Genomics Research Institute, Phoenix, Arizona; The City of Hope/TGen IMPACT Center, Duarte, California; J. Craig Venter Institute, La Jolla, California; The University of California, San Diego, La Jolla, California.
| |
Collapse
|