A new ovarian response prediction index (ORPI): implications for individualised controlled ovarian stimulation

Reproductive Biology and Endocrinology

Jose G Franco⁴  Mario Cavagna²  Juliana Ricci¹  Laura Vagnini³  Adriana M Nascimento³  Ana L Mauri³  Claudia G Petersen⁴  Ricardo LR Baruffi³  Joao Batista A Oliveira⁴ 

[1] Centre for Human Reproduction Prof. Franco Junior, Preto, Ribeirao, Brazil;Women’s Health Reference Centre, Perola Byington Hospital, Paulo, Sao, Brazil;Paulista Centre for Diagnosis, Research and Training, Preto, Ribeirao, Brazil;Department of Gynaecology and Obstetrics, Botucatu Medical School, São Paulo State University, Botucatu, UNESP, Brazil

关键词: Age;    Antral follicles;    Anti-Müllerian hormone;    Individualised controlled ovarian stimulation;    Ovarian response prediction index;   

Others  :  1149869
DOI  :  10.1186/1477-7827-10-94

 received in 2012-08-28, accepted in 2012-11-14,  发布年份 2012

【 摘 要 】

Background

The objective was to present a new ovarian response prediction index (ORPI), which was based on anti-Müllerian hormone (AMH) levels, antral follicle count (AFC) and age, and to verify whether it could be a reliable predictor of the ovarian stimulation response.

Methods

A total of 101 patients enrolled in the ICSI programme were included. The ORPI values were calculated by multiplying the AMH level (ng/ml) by the number of antral follicles (2–9 mm), and the result was divided by the age (years) of the patient (ORPI=(AMH x AFC)/Patient age).

Results

The regression analysis demonstrated significant (P<0.0001) positive correlations between the ORPI and the total number of oocytes and of MII oocytes collected. The logistic regression revealed that the ORPI values were significantly associated with the likelihood of pregnancy (odds ratio (OR): 1.86; P=0.006) and collecting greater than or equal to 4 oocytes (OR: 49.25; P<0.0001), greater than or equal to 4 MII oocytes (OR: 6.26; P<0.0001) and greater than or equal to 15 oocytes (OR: 6.10; P<0.0001). Regarding the probability of collecting greater than or equal to 4 oocytes according to the ORPI value, the ROC curve showed an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.91 and an efficacy of 88% at a cut-off of 0.2. In relation to the probability of collecting greater than or equal to 4 MII oocytes according to the ORPI value, the ROC curve had an AUC of 0.84 and an efficacy of 81% at a cut-off of 0.3. The ROC curve for the probability of collecting greater than or equal to 15 oocytes resulted in an AUC of 0.89 and an efficacy of 82% at a cut-off of 0.9. Finally, regarding the probability of pregnancy occurrence according to the ORPI value, the ROC curve showed an AUC of 0.74 and an efficacy of 62% at a cut-off of 0.3.

Conclusions

The ORPI exhibited an excellent ability to predict a low ovarian response and a good ability to predict a collection of greater than or equal to 4 MII oocytes, an excessive ovarian response and the occurrence of pregnancy in infertile women. The ORPI might be used to improve the cost-benefit ratio of ovarian stimulation regimens by guiding the selection of medications and by modulating the doses and regimens according to the actual needs of the patients.

【 授权许可】

   
2012 Oliveira et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

【 图 表 】

Figure 1.

Figure 2.

【 参考文献 】

• [1]Queenan JT Jr, Whiman-Elia G: An appreciation of modern ART. Clin Obstet Gynecol 2000, 43:942-957.
• [2]Martinez-Conejero JA, Simon C, Pellicer A, Horcajadas JA: Is ovarian stimulation detrimental to the endometrium? Reprod Biomed Online 2007, 15:45-50.
• [3]Liu Y, Lee KF, Ng EH, Yeung WS, Ho PC: Gene expression profiling of human peri-implantation endometria between natural and stimulated cycles. Fertil Steril 2008, 90:2152-2164.
• [4]Rubio C, Mercader A, Alama P, Lizan C, Rodrigo L, Labarta E, Melo M, Pellicer A, Remohi J: Prospective cohort study in high responder oocyte donors using two hormonal stimulation protocols: impact on embryo aneuploidy and development. Hum Reprod 2010, 25:2290-2297.
• [5]Fauser BC, Diedrich K, Devroey P: Predictors of ovarian response: progress towards individualized treatment in ovulation induction and ovarian stimulation. Hum Reprod Update 2008, 14:1-14.
• [6]Alviggi C, Humaidan P, Ezcurra D: Hormonal, functional and genetic biomarkers in controlled ovarian stimulation: tools for matching patients and protocols. Reprod Biol Endocrinol 2012, 10:9. BioMed Central Full Text
• [7]Broekmans FJ, Kwee J, Hendriks DJ, Mol BW, Lambalk CB: A systematic review of tests predicting ovarian reserve and IVF outcome. Hum Reprod Update 2006, 12:685-718.
• [8]La Marca A, Papaleo E, Grisendi V, Argento C, Giulini S, Volpe A: Development of a nomogram based on markers of ovarian reserve for the individualisation of the follicle-stimulating hormone starting dose in in vitro fertilisation cycles. BJOG 2012, 119:1171-1179.
• [9]Lekamge DN, Barry M, Kolo M, Lane M, Gilchrist RB, Tremellen KP: Anti-Mullerian hormone as a predictor of IVF outcome. Reprod Biomed Online 2007, 14:602-610.
• [10]Jayaprakasan K, Campbell B, Hopkisson J, Johnson I, Raine-Fenning N: A prospective, comparative analysis of anti-Mullerian hormone, inhibin-B, and three-dimensional ultrasound determinants of ovarian reserve in the prediction of poor response to controlled ovarian stimulation. Fertil Steril 2010, 93:855-864.
• [11]Yovich J, Stanger J, Hinchliffe P: Targeted gonadotrophin stimulation using the PIVET algorithm markedly reduces the risk of OHSS. Reprod Biomed Online 2012, 24:281-292.
• [12]Chang MY, Chiang CH, Chiu TH, Hsieh TT, Soong YK: The antral follicle count predicts the outcome of pregnancy in a controlled ovarian hyperstimulation/intrauterine insemination program. J Assist Reprod Genet 1998, 15:12-17.
• [13]Hendriks DJ, Mol BW, Bancsi LF, Te Velde ER, Broekmans FJ: Antral follicle count in the prediction of poor ovarian response and pregnancy after in vitro fertilization: a meta-analysis and comparison with basal follicle-stimulating hormone level. Fertil Steril 2005, 83:291-301.
• [14]La Marca A, Broekmans FJ, Volpe A, Fauser BC, Macklon NS: Anti-Mullerian hormone (AMH): what do we still need to know? Hum Reprod 2009, 24:2264-2275.
• [15]Nelson SM, La Marca A: The journey from the old to the new AMH assay: how to avoid getting lost in the values. Reprod Biomed Online 2011, 23:411-420.
• [16]Nelson SM, Anderson RA, Broekmans FJ, Raine-Fenning N, Fleming R, La Marca A: Anti-Mullerian hormone: clairvoyance or crystal clear? Hum Reprod 2012, 27:631-636.
• [17]ASRM: Diagnostic evaluation of the infertile female: a committee opinion. Fertil Steril 2012, 98:302-307.
• [18]Broer SL, Mol BW, Hendriks D, Broekmans FJ: The role of antimullerian hormone in prediction of outcome after IVF: comparison with the antral follicle count. Fertil Steril 2009, 91:705-714.
• [19]Broer SL, Dolleman M, Opmeer BC, Fauser BC, Mol BW, Broekmans FJ: AMH and AFC as predictors of excessive response in controlled ovarian hyperstimulation: a meta-analysis. Hum Reprod Update 2011, 17:46-54.
• [20]Muttukrishna S, McGarrigle H, Wakim R, Khadum I, Ranieri DM, Serhal P: Antral follicle count, anti-mullerian hormone and inhibin B: predictors of ovarian response in assisted reproductive technology? BJOG 2005, 112:1384-1390.
• [21]Maheshwari A, Fowler P, Bhattacharya S: Assessment of ovarian reserve–should we perform tests of ovarian reserve routinely? Hum Reprod 2006, 21:2729-2735.
• [22]Younis JS, Jadaon J, Izhaki I, Haddad S, Radin O, Bar-Ami S, Ben-Ami M: A simple multivariate score could predict ovarian reserve, as well as pregnancy rate, in infertile women. Fertil Steril 2010, 94:655-661.
• [23]Franco JG Jr, Baruffi RL, Oliveira JB, Mauri AL, Petersen CG, Contart P, Felipe V: Effects of recombinant LH supplementation to recombinant FSH during induced ovarian stimulation in the GnRH-agonist protocol: a matched case–control study. Reprod Biol Endocrinol 2009, 7:58. BioMed Central Full Text
• [24]Spencer JB, Browne AS, Copland SD, Session DR: Discontinuation of rLH two days before hCG may increase the number of oocytes retrieved in IVF. Reprod Biol Endocrinol 2010, 8:29. BioMed Central Full Text
• [25]Buhler KF, Fischer R: Recombinant human LH supplementation versus supplementation with urinary hCG-based LH activity during controlled ovarian stimulation in the long GnRH-agonist protocol: a matched case–control study. Gynecol Endocrinol 2012, 28:345-350.
• [26]Cota AM, Oliveira JB, Petersen CG, Mauri AL, Massaro FC, Silva LF, Nicoletti A, Cavagna M, Baruffi RL, Franco JG Jr: GnRH agonist versus GnRH antagonist in assisted reproduction cycles: oocyte morphology. Reprod Biol Endocrinol 2012, 10:33. BioMed Central Full Text
• [27]Lavorato HL, Oliveira JB, Petersen CG, Vagnini L, Mauri AL, Cavagna M, Baruffi RL, Franco JG Jr: GnRH agonist versus GnRH antagonist in IVF/ICSI cycles with recombinant LH supplementation DNA fragmentation and apoptosis in granulosa cells. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 2012, 165:61-65.
• [28]Ferraretti AP, La Marca A, Fauser BC, Tarlatzis B, Nargund G, Gianaroli L: ESHRE consensus on the definition of ‘poor response’ to ovarian stimulation for in vitro fertilization: the Bologna criteria. Hum Reprod 2011, 26:1616-1624.
• [29]Surrey ES, Schoolcraft WB: Evaluating strategies for improving ovarian response of the poor responder undergoing assisted reproductive techniques. Fertil Steril 2000, 73:667-676.
• [30]Rombauts L, Onwude JL, Chew HW, Vollenhoven BJ: The predictive value of antral follicle count remains unchanged across the menstrual cycle. Fertil Steril 2011, 96:1514-1518.
• [31]Ng EH, Tang OS, Ho PC: The significance of the number of antral follicles prior to stimulation in predicting ovarian responses in an IVF programme. Hum Reprod 2000, 15:1937-1942.
• [32]Ebner T, Sommergruber M, Moser M, Shebl O, Schreier-Lechner E, Tews G: Basal level of anti-Mullerian hormone is associated with oocyte quality in stimulated cycles. Hum Reprod 2006, 21:2022-2026.
• [33]Riggs RM, Duran EH, Baker MW, Kimble TD, Hobeika E, Yin L, Matos-Bodden L, Leader B, Stadtmauer L: Assessment of ovarian reserve with anti-Mullerian hormone: a comparison of the predictive value of anti-Mullerian hormone, follicle-stimulating hormone, inhibin B, and age. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2008, 199:202 e201-208.
• [34]Aflatoonian A, Oskouian H, Ahmadi S, Oskouian L: Prediction of high ovarian response to controlled ovarian hyperstimulation: anti-Mullerian hormone versus small antral follicle count (2–6 mm). J Assist Reprod Genet 2009, 26:319-325.
• [35]Eldar-Geva T, Ben-Chetrit A, Spitz IM, Rabinowitz R, Markowitz E, Mimoni T, Gal M, Zylber-Haran E, Margalioth EJ: Dynamic assays of inhibin B, anti-Mullerian hormone and estradiol following FSH stimulation and ovarian ultrasonography as predictors of IVF outcome. Hum Reprod 2005, 20:3178-3183.
• [36]te Velde ER, Pearson PL: The variability of female reproductive ageing. Hum Reprod Update 2002, 8:141-154.
• [37]Nikolaou D, Templeton A: Early ovarian ageing: a hypothesis. Detection and clinical relevance. Hum Reprod 2003, 18:1137-1139.
• [38]Broekmans FJ, de Ziegler D, Howles CM, Gougeon A, Trew G, Olivennes F: The antral follicle count: practical recommendations for better standardization. Fertil Steril 2010, 94:1044-1051.
• [39]La Cour Freiesleben N, Gerds TA, Forman JL, Silver JD, Nyboe Andersen A, Popovic-Todorovic B: Risk charts to identify low and excessive responders among first-cycle IVF/ICSI standard patients. Reprod Biomed Online 2011, 22:50-58.
• [40]La Marca A, Sighinolfi G, Radi D, Argento C, Baraldi E, Artenisio AC, Stabile G, Volpe A: Anti-Mullerian hormone (AMH) as a predictive marker in assisted reproductive technology (ART). Hum Reprod Update 2010, 16:113-130.
• [41]van Disseldorp J, Lambalk CB, Kwee J, Looman CW, Eijkemans MJ, Fauser BC, Broekmans FJ: Comparison of inter- and intra-cycle variability of anti-Mullerian hormone and antral follicle counts. Hum Reprod 2010, 25:221-227.
• [42]Fanchin R, Schonauer LM, Righini C, Guibourdenche J, Frydman R, Taieb J: Serum anti-Mullerian hormone is more strongly related to ovarian follicular status than serum inhibin B, estradiol, FSH and LH on day 3. Hum Reprod 2003, 18:323-327.
• [43]La Marca A, Stabile G, Artenisio AC, Volpe A: Serum anti-Mullerian hormone throughout the human menstrual cycle. Hum Reprod 2006, 21:3103-3107.
• [44]Tsepelidis S, Devreker F, Demeestere I, Flahaut A, Gervy C, Englert Y: Stable serum levels of anti-Mullerian hormone during the menstrual cycle: a prospective study in normo-ovulatory women. Hum Reprod 2007, 22:1837-1840.
• [45]Wunder DM, Bersinger NA, Yared M, Kretschmer R, Birkhauser MH: Statistically significant changes of antimullerian hormone and inhibin levels during the physiologic menstrual cycle in reproductive age women. Fertil Steril 2008, 89:927-933.
• [46]Nelson SM, Yates RW, Lyall H, Jamieson M, Traynor I, Gaudoin M, Mitchell P, Ambrose P, Fleming R: Anti-Mullerian hormone-based approach to controlled ovarian stimulation for assisted conception. Hum Reprod 2009, 24:867-875.
• [47]Nelson SM, Yates RW, Fleming R: Serum anti-Mullerian hormone and FSH: prediction of live birth and extremes of response in stimulated cycles–implications for individualization of therapy. Hum Reprod 2007, 22:2414-2421.
• [48]Yates AP, Rustamov O, Roberts SA, Lim HY, Pemberton PW, Smith A, Nardo LG: Anti-Mullerian hormone-tailored stimulation protocols improve outcomes whilst reducing adverse effects and costs of IVF. Hum Reprod 2011, 26:2353-2362.
• [49]Wang JG, Douglas NC, Nakhuda GS, Choi JM, Park SJ, Thornton MH, Guarnaccia MM, Sauer MV: The association between anti-Mullerian hormone and IVF pregnancy outcomes is influenced by age. Reprod Biomed Online 2010, 21:757-761.
• [50]Nakhuda GS, Douglas NC, Thornton MH, Guarnaccia MM, Lobo R, Sauer MV: Anti-Mullerian hormone testing is useful for individualization of stimulation protocols in oocyte donors. Reprod Biomed Online 2010, 20:42-47.
• [51]Gallot V, Berwanger Da Silva AL, Genro V, Grynberg M, Frydman N, Fanchin R: Antral follicle responsiveness to follicle-stimulating hormone administration assessed by the Follicular Output RaTe (FORT) may predict in vitro fertilization-embryo transfer outcome. Hum Reprod 2012, 27:1066-1072.
• [52]Biasoni V, Patriarca A, Dalmasso P, Bertagna A, Manieri C, Benedetto C, Revelli A: Ovarian sensitivity index is strongly related to circulating AMH and may be used to predict ovarian response to exogenous gonadotropins in IVF. Reprod Biol Endocrinol 2011, 9:112. BioMed Central Full Text
• [53]Aboulghar M: Symposium: Update on prediction and management of OHSS. Prevention of OHSS. Reprod Biomed Online 2009, 19:33-42.