Predictive value of age-specific FSH levels for IVF-ET outcome in women with normal ovarian function

Reproductive Biology and Endocrinology

Wenjun Wang¹  Lingyan Zheng¹  Nengyong Ouyang¹  Ruiqi Li¹  Ping Yuan¹  Liangan Wang¹  Zheng Su²  Tingfeng Fang¹ 

[1] Department of Obstetrics & Gynecology, Sun Yat-Sen Memorial Hospital, Sun Yat-Sen University, No.107 Yanjiang Xi Road, Guangzhou 510120, P. R. China;Comprehensive Department, SunYat-Sen Memorial Hospital, Sun Yat-Sen University, No.107 Yanjiang Xi Road, Guangzhou 510120, P. R. China

关键词: IVF-ET;    Premature ovarian aging (POA);    FSH;    Age;   

Others  :  1216373
DOI  :  10.1186/s12958-015-0056-6

 received in 2015-02-15, accepted in 2015-05-30,  发布年份 2015

【 摘 要 】

Background

Most of infertile women with normal follicle stimulating hormone (FSH) levels and antral follicle count (AFC) at day 2–3 of the period, but poor IVF outcomes may occur when use of routine controlled ovarian stimulation. This paper is to evaluate the predictive value of age-specific FSH levels for IVF-ET outcomes in women with normal ovarian function.

Methods

A total of 1287 women undergoing their first IVF cycles were enrolled in this retrospective study. The FSH levels and AFC of all of the women were within normal ranges (FSH ≤ 12 IU/L;AFC ≥ 5). The patients were grouped by age (younger: < 33 years, medium-aged:33–37years and older:38–41years), and within each age group, the patients were subdivided by the upper limit of the 95 % confidence interval (CI) for mean FSH levels. Patients with FSH levels equal to or greater than the upper 95 % CI of FSH in each age group were included into a premature ovarian aging (POA) subgroup (younger:FSH ≥ 7.84, medium-aged: ≥8.12 and older: FSH ≥ 8.47),the remaining patients in each age group were included into a control subgroup. The outcomes of IVF-ET were compared between the POA subgroup and the control subgroup in each age group.

Results

In each age group, the total dose of gonadotropin(Gn) in the POA subgroups were significantly higher than those of the corresponding control subgroups. In the younger and medium-aged groups, women in the POA subgroups had significantly lower oocyte yields, frozen embryos, and higher rates of poor ovarian response(POR) than those in the corresponding control subgroups. When controlling for age, BMI and AFC, the multiple logistic regression analysis indicated the following: In each age group, the total dose of Gn was significantly correlated with POA; the oocyte yield was significantly related to POA only in the younger group; and in the whole age groups, the incidence of POR in the POA group was 2.719 times greater than in the control group (OR = 2.719, 95 % CI [1.598–4.625], P < 0.001).

Conclusion

Basal FSH levels combined with age (age-specific FSH levels) can be used as a more accurate marker for the ovarian response in women with normal ovarian reserves undergoing IVF-ET, particularly in women ≤37 years old.

【 授权许可】

   
2015 Fang et al.

【 参考文献 】

• [1]Lu Q, Shen H, Li Y, Zhang C, Wang C, Chen X, Liang R, Wei L. Low testosterone levels in women with diminished ovarian reserve impair embryo implantation rate: a retrospective case–control study. J Assist Reprod Genet. 2014; 31:485-491.
• [2]Kara M, Aydin T, Aran T, Turktekin N, Ozdemir B. Does dehydroepiandrosterone supplementation really affect IVF-ICSI outcome in women with poor ovarian reserve? Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2014; 173:63-65.
• [3]Merhi Z, Zapantis A, Berger DS, Jindal SK. Determining an anti-Mullerian hormone cutoff level to predict clinical pregnancy following in vitro fertilization in women with severely diminished ovarian reserve. J Assist Reprod Genet. 2013; 30:1361-1365.
• [4]Toner JP, Philput CB, Jones GS, Muasher SJ. Basal follicle-stimulating hormone level is a better predictor of in vitro fertilization performance than age. Fertil Steril. 1991; 55:784-791.
• [5]Kligman I, Rosenwaks Z. Differentiating clinical profiles: Predicting good responders, poor responders, and hyperresponders. Fertil Steril. 2001; 76:1185-1190.
• [6]Fasouliotis SJ, Simon A, Laufer N. Evaluation and treatment of low responders in assisted reproductive technology: a challenge to meet. J Assist Reprod Genet. 2000; 17:357-373.
• [7]Nikolaou D, Templeton A. Early ovarian ageing: a hypothesis. Detection and clinical relevance. Hum Reprod. 2003; 18:1137-1139.
• [8]Nikolaou D, Templeton A. Early ovarian ageing. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2004; 113:126-133.
• [9]Gleicher N, Weghofer A, Oktay K, Barad D. Do etiologies of premature ovarian aging (POA) mimic those of premature ovarian failure (POF)? Hum Reprod. 2009; 24:2395-2400.
• [10]Weghofer A, Margreiter M, Fauster Y, Schaetz T, Brandstetter A, Boehm D, Feichtinger W. Age-specific FSH levels as a tool for appropriate patient counselling in assisted reproduction. Hum Reprod. 2005; 20:2448-2452.
• [11]Barad DH, Weghofer A, Gleicher N. Age-specific levels for basal follicle-stimulating hormone assessment of ovarian function. Obstet Gynecol. 2007; 109:1404-1410.
• [12]El-Shawarby SA, Khalaf Y. Age-specific serum FSH concentrations and their correlation with the outcome of ovarian stimulation for IVF. Reprod Biomed Online. 2009; 18:750-755.
• [13]Mutlu MF, Erdem M, Erdem A, Yildiz S, Mutlu I, Arisoy O, Oktem M. Antral follicle count determines poor ovarian response better than anti-Mullerian hormone but age is the only predictor for live birth in in vitro fertilization cycles. J Assist Reprod Genet. 2013; 30:657-665.
• [14]Vural B, Cakiroglu Y, Vural F, Filiz S. Hormonal and functional biomarkers in ovarian response. Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2014; 289:1355-1361.
• [15]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.
• [16]Hongmei YU. A discussion about the estimation of sample size and power of test of experimental design. Chinese Journal of Health Statistics. 2005(01).
• [17]Creus M, Penarrubia J, Fabregues F, Vidal E, Carmona F, Casamitjana R, Vanrell JA, Balasch J. Day 3 serum inhibin B and FSH and age as predictors of assisted reproduction treatment outcome. Hum Reprod. 2000; 15:2341-2346.
• [18]Chuang CC, Chen CD, Chao KH, Chen SU, Ho HN, Yang YS. Age is a better predictor of pregnancy potential than basal follicle-stimulating hormone levels in women undergoing in vitro fertilization. Fertil Steril. 2003; 79:63-68.
• [19]van Loendersloot LL, van Wely M, Limpens J, Bossuyt PM, Repping S, van der Veen F. Predictive factors in in vitro fertilization (IVF): a systematic review and meta-analysis. Hum Reprod Update. 2010; 16:577-589.
• [20]Singh N, Bahadur A, Malhotra N, Kalaivani M, Mittal S. Prospective analysis of ovarian reserve markers as determinant in response to controlled ovarian stimulation in women undergoing IVF cycles in low resource setting in India. Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2013; 288:697-703.
• [21]Souter I, Dimitriadis I, Baltagi LM, Meeker JD, Petrozza JC. Elevated day 3 follicle-stimulating hormone in younger women: is gonadotropin stimulation/intrauterine insemination a good option? Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2014; 211:62.
• [22]Abdalla H, Thum MY. An elevated basal FSH reflects a quantitative rather than qualitative decline of the ovarian reserve. Hum Reprod. 2004; 19:893-898.
• [23]Sharif K, Elgendy M, Lashen H, Afnan M. Age and basal follicle stimulating hormone as predictors of in vitro fertilisation outcome. J Obstet Gynaecol. 1998; 105:107-112.
• [24]Esposito MA, Coutifaris C, Barnhart KT. A moderately elevated day 3 FSH concentration has limited predictive value, especially in younger women. Hum Reprod. 2002; 17:118-123.
• [25]Bancsi LF, Broekmans FJ, Mol BW, Habbema JD, Te VE. Performance of basal follicle-stimulating hormone in the prediction of poor ovarian response and failure to become pregnant after in vitro fertilization: a meta-analysis. Fertil Steril. 2003; 79:1091-1100.
• [26]Ficicioglu C, Cenksoy PO, Yildirim G, Kaspar C. Which cut-off value of serum anti-Mullerian hormone level can predict poor ovarian reserve, poor ovarian response to stimulation and in vitro fertilization success? A prospective data analysis. Gynecol Endocrinol. 2014; 30:372-376.
• [27]Tal R, Tal O, Seifer BJ, Seifer DB. Antimullerian hormone as predictor of implantation and clinical pregnancy after assisted conception: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Fertil Steril. 2015; 103:119-130.
• [28]Li Y, Nie M, Liu Y, Zhang W, Yang X. The dynamic changes of anti-Mullerian hormone and inhibin B during controlled ovarian hyperstimulation in decreased ovarian reserve women and the effect on clinical outcome. Gynecol Endocrinol. 2015; 14:1-4.