Oligo/Amenorrhea Is an Independent Risk Factor Associated With Low Ovarian Response

Ovarian response determines the luteinizing hormone suppression threshold for patients following the gonadotrophin releasing hormone antagonist protocol: A retrospective cohort study

Background

Ovarian reactivity to gonadotrophin stimulation varies, and individual adjustments to the timing and dose of gonadotrophin-releasing hormone (GnRH) antagonist administration are necessary to prevent excessive increases and decreases in luteinizing hormone (LH) levels in patients with different ovarian response following the GnRH antagonist (GnRH-A) protocol. The present study aims to investigate optimal LH suppression thresholds for patients with normal ovarian response (NOR), high ovarian response (HOR), and poor ovarian response (POR) following the GnRH-A protocol respectively.

Methods

A total of 865 in vitro fertilization (IVF) cycles using a flexible or fixed GnRH-A protocol were included. Patients were categorized into the HOR, NOR, or POR group according to their anti-Müllerian hormone (AMH) levels. Then, patients in each group were stratified into one of four subgroups according to the quartile (Q1-Q4) of the basal LH level to LH on triggering day ratio (bLH/hLH). The primary outcomes were the clinical pregnancy and live birth rates, and the secondary outcomes were the number of oocytes retrieved, MII oocytes, two pronucleus (2PN) embryos, and good-quality embryos.

Results

There were 526 patients with NOR, 180 with HOR, and 159 with POR. Basal LH level, LH on triggering day and bLH/hLH were identified as independent predictors of clinical pregnancy rate and live birth rate by logistics regression analysis. Compared to those with NOR, patients with POR had the lowest embryo implantation rate (22.6% vs. 32.8%, P < 0.05), clinical pregnancy rate (32.3% vs. 47.3%, P < 0.05) and live birth rate (22.6 vs. 37.8%, P < 0.05) of fresh embryo transfer (ET). The embryo implantation, clinical pregnancy and live birth rates of frozen embryo transfer (FET) were not significantly different among the three groups. In the subgroup analysis, patients with HOR had the highest embryo implantation rate (51.6%, P < 0.05), clinical pregnancy rate (68.4%, P < 0.05) and live birth rate (52.6%, P < 0.05) of ET in Q3, with a bLH/hLH ratio of 2.40-3.69. In the NOR group, the embryo implantation rate (41.9%, P < 0.05), clinical pregnancy rate (61.5%, P < 0.05) and live birth rate (50.8%, P < 0.05) of ET and live birth rate (53.1%, P < 0.05) of FET were highest in Q2, with a bLH/hLH ratio of 1.29-2.05. Patients with POR had the highest clinical pregnancy rate (57.1%, P < 0.05) and live birth rate (42.9%, P < 0.05) of ET in Q2, with a bLH/hLH ratio of 0.86-1.35.

Conclusions

In the present study, the bLH/hLH ratio represented the LH suppression threshold. The subgroup analysis of HOR, NOR and POR showed that, the LH suppression threshold varies according to ovarian response. We recommend LH suppression thresholds of 2.40-3.69 for HOR, 1.29-2.05 for NOR, and 0.86-1.35 for POR to obtain the highest clinical pregnancy rate and live birth rate. This study provides comprehensive and precise references for clinicians to monitor LH levels individually during controlled ovarian stimulation (COS) according to the patient's ovarian response following the GnRH-A protocol.

Current understanding of the genomic abnormities in premature ovarian failure: chance for early diagnosis and management

Premature ovarian failure (POF) is an insidious cause of female infertility and a devastating condition for women. POF also has a strong familial and heterogeneous genetic background. Management of POF is complicated by the variable etiology and presentation, which are generally characterized by abnormal hormone levels, gene instability and ovarian dysgenesis. To date, abnormal regulation associated with POF has been found in a small number of genes, including autosomal and sex chromosomal genes in folliculogenesis, granulosa cells, and oocytes. Due to the complex genomic contributions, ascertaining the exact causative mechanisms has been challenging in POF, and many pathogenic genomic characteristics have yet to be elucidated. However, emerging research has provided new insights into genomic variation in POF as well as novel etiological factors, pathogenic mechanisms and therapeutic intervention approaches. Meanwhile, scattered studies of transcriptional regulation revealed that ovarian cell function also depends on specific biomarker gene expression, which can influence protein activities, thus causing POF. In this review, we summarized the latest research and issues related to the genomic basis for POF and focused on insights gained from their biological effects and pathogenic mechanisms in POF. The present integrated studies of genomic variants, gene expression and related protein abnormalities were structured to establish the role of etiological genes associated with POF. In addition, we describe the design of some ongoing clinical trials that may suggest safe, feasible and effective approaches to improve the diagnosis and therapy of POF, such as Filgrastim, goserelin, resveratrol, natural plant antitoxin, Kuntai capsule et al. Understanding the candidate genomic characteristics in POF is beneficial for the early diagnosis of POF and provides appropriate methods for prevention and drug treatment. Additional efforts to clarify the POF genetic background are necessary and are beneficial for researchers and clinicians regarding genetic counseling and clinical practice. Taken together, recent genomic explorations have shown great potential to elucidate POF management in women and are stepping from the bench to the bedside.

Effect of reproductive and lifestyle factors on anti-mullerian hormone levels in women of Indian origin

Background:

Infertility is a world-wide problem and one third females. Over the years, anti-mullerian hormone (AMH) has emerged as a major marker of ovarian reserve. There is also increasing interest in determining the factors which can impact AMH levels.

Aims:

To correlate the association of reproductive and lifestyle factors on AMH levels in women of Indian origin.

Settings and Design:

Multicentric cross sectional study.

Materials and Methods:

The study was conducted using data extracted from the patient records of seven private fertility practices located in North India. Women who were attending these clinics for fertility treatment were requested to fill the questionnaire related to reproductive and lifestyle factors.

Statistical Analysis used:

Our outcome variable was level of AMH measured in the past 3 months, and was assessed as normal or low. All analyses were conducted using STATA 17.

Results:

We found a direct association of low AMH with increasing age, short cycles, amenorrhea and women with family history of premature menopause. We found a direct correlation of high AMH and women with polycystic ovary syndrome and those whose partners had Oligoasthenoteratozoospermia (OATS) or azoospermia. There was no correlation with smoking, sleep, diet, body mass index, cell phone or laptop use in our study.

Conclusion:

Reproductive and lifestyle factors may affect ovarian reserve and but there was a dearth of human studies in this area. To the best of our knowledge this is the first human study on the effect of AMH on Laptop and Cell phone use. We urgently need more studies to confirm or refute our findings so that we can counsel our patients well.