Journal of Reproduction & Infertility

Journal of Reproduction & Infertility

Occult Form of Premature Ovarian Insufficiency in Women with Infertility and Oligomenorrhea as Assessed by Poor Ovarian Response Criteria

Authors
1 Department of Gynaecology and Obstetrics, Abbasi Shaheed Hospital and Karachi Medical and Dental College, Karachi, Pakistan; Aziz Medical Center, Karachi, Pakistan
2 Department of Gynaecology and Obstetrics, Abbasi Shaheed Hospital and Karachi Medical and Dental College, Karachi, Pakistan
3 Aziz Medical Center, Karachi, Pakistan
Abstract
Background: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the ability of poor ovarian response criteria to classify women presenting with infertility and oligomenorrhea as having "occult" premature ovarian insufficiency. Methods: This was a cross sectional study conducted at Aziz Medical Center, Karachi, Pakistan from 1st August 2015 to 31st July 2016. Women with infertility and oligomenorrhea were included. All eligible women underwent day 2 FSH level and an early follicular phase transvaginal ultrasound to assess the antral follicular count (AFC). All women then underwent the confirmatory test, of Anti- Mullerian Hormone (AMH) level. The main outcome measure was assignment to occult premature ovarian insufficiency (POI) after screening that used the criteria set out in fertility guideline for predicting the likely ovarian response to gonadotrophin stimulation. Another measure was to compare the sensitivity and specificity of the two index criteria, of FSH and AFC, relative to the emerging reference standard, of the AMH criterion. Results: The three criteria together classified 59 (34.91%) women as occult POI in those with oligomenorrhea. The sensitivity, specificity, negative predictive value and positive predictive value of FSH relative to AMH for these women were 77.8%, 95.7%, 90.2% and 89.4%, respectively whereas the same values of AFC relative to AMH were 92.6%, 99.1 %, 96.6% and 98%, respectively. Conclusion: Women with menstrual irregularity and infertility are at a higher risk for satisfying criteria of poor ovarian response irrespective of age. A policy incorporating these surrogate markers can be used to screen these women for occult premature ovarian insufficiency.
Keywords

  1. Nelson LM. Primary ovarian insufficiency. N Engl J Med. 2009;360:606-14.doi: 10.1056/nejmcp0808697
  2. Tucker EJ, Grover SR, Bachelot A, Touraine P, Sinclair AH. Premature ovarian insufficiency: new perspectives on ge-netic cause and phenotypic spectrum. Endocr Rev. 2016;37(6):609-35.
  3. European Society for Human Reproduction and Em-bryology (ESHRE) Guideline Group on POI, Webber L, Davies M, Anderson R, Bartlett J, Braat D, et al. ESHRE Guideline: management of women with premature ovarian insufficiency. Hum Reprod. 2016;31(5):926-37.
  4. Gleicher N, Weghofer A, Barad DH. Defining ovarian reserve to better understand ovarian aging. Reprod Biol Endocrinol. 2011;9:23.
  5. Gleicher N, Kushnir VA, Barad DH. Prospectively assessing risk for premature ovarian senescence in young females: a new paradigm. Reprod Biol Endo-crinol. 2015;13:34.
  6. Cameron IT, O'Shea FC, Rolland JM, Hughes EG, de Kretser DM, Healy DL. Occult ovarian failure: a syndrome of infertility, regular menses, and elevated follicle-stimulating hormone concentrations. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 1988;67(6):1190-4.
  7. Bedoschi G, Turan V, Oktay K. Fertility preservation options in women with endometriosis. Minerva Ginecol. 2013;65(2):99-103.
  8. Cohen J, Chabbert-Buffet N, Darai E. Diminished ovarian reserve, premature ovarian failure, poor ovarian responder--a plea for universal definitions. J Assist Reprod Genet. 2015;32(12):1709-12.
  9. Ferraretti AP, La Marca A, Fauser BC, Tarlatzis B, Nargund G, Gianaroli L; ESHRE working group on poor ovarian response definition. ESHRE consensus on the definition of 'poor response' to ovarian stimulation for in vitro fertiliza-tion: the Bologna criteria. Hum Reprod. 2011;26(7):1616-24.
  10. National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. Fertility problems: assessment and treatment. London: NICE; 2013 p.
  11. The Rotterdam ESHRE/ASRM-sponsored PCOS Consensus Workshop Group. Revised 2003 consensus on diagnostic criteria and long-term health risks related to polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS). Hum Reprod. 2004;19:41-7.
  12. Iliodromiti S, Kelsey TW, Wu O, Anderson RA, Nelson SM. The predictive accuracy of anti-Mül-lerian hormone for live birth after assisted conception: a systematic review and meta-analysis of the literature. Hum Reprod Update. 2014;20(4):560-70.
  13. Laven JS. Primary Ovarian Insufficiency. Semin Reprod Med. 2016;34(4):230-4.
  14. Baker VL. Primary ovarian insufficiency in the adolescent. Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol. 2013;25(5):375-81.
  15. Gleicher N, Kushnir VA, Barad DH. Prospectively assessing risk for premature ovarian senescence in young females: a new paradigm. Reprod Biol Endocrinol. 2015;13:34.
  16. Shestakova IG, Radzinsky VE, Khamoshina MB. Occult form of premature ovarian insufficiency. Gynecol Endocrinol. 2016;32(sup2):30-2.
  17. Gizzo S, Andrisani A, Noventa M, Quaranta M, Esposito F, Armanini D, et al. Menstrual cycle length: a surrogate measure of reproductive health capable of improving the accuracy of biochemical/sonographical ovarian reserve test in estimating the reproductive chances of women referred to ART. Reprod Biol Endocrinol. 2015;13:28.
  18. Devine K, Mumford SL, Wu M, DeCherney AH, Hill MJ, Propst A. Diminished ovarian reserve in the United States assisted reproductive technology population: diagnostic trends among 181,536 cycles from the Society for Assisted Reproductive Technology Clinic Outcomes Reporting System. Fertil Steril. 2015;104(3):612-19.e3.
  19. Toner JP, Seifer DB. Why we may abandon basal follicle-stimulating hormone testing: a sea change in determining ovarian reserve using antimüllerian hormone. Fertil Steril. 2013;99(7):1825-30.
  20. Jamil Z, Fatima SS, Ahmed K, Malik R. Anti-Mul-lerian Hormone: Above and Beyond Conventional Ovarian Reserve Markers. Dis Markers. 2016;2016:5246217.
  21. Fleming R, Seifer DB, Frattarelli JL, Ruman J. As-sessing ovarian response: antral follicle count versus anti-Müllerian hormone. Reprod Biomed Online. 2015;31(4):486-96.
  22. Pearson K, Long M, Prasad J, Wu YY, Bonifacio M. Assessment of the Access AMH assay as an automated, high-performance replacement for the AMH Generation II manual ELISA. Reprod Biol Endocrinol. 2016;14:8.
  23. van Helden J, Weiskirchen R. Performance of the two new fully automated anti-Müllerian hormone immunoassays compared with the clinical standard assay. Hum Reprod. 2015;30(8):1918-26.
  24. Majumder K, Gelbaya TA, Laing I, Nardo LG. The use of anti-Müllerian hormone and antral follicle count to predict the potential of oocytes and embryos. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2010;150(2):166-70.
  25. Iliodromiti S, Anderson RA, Nelson SM. Technical and performance characteristics of anti-Müllerian hormone and antral follicle count as biomarkers of ovarian response. Hum Reprod Update. 2015;21(6):698-710.
  26. Mutlu MF, Erdem M, Erdem A, Yildiz S, Mutlu I, Arisoy O, et al. Antral follicle count determines poor ovarian response better than anti-Müllerian hormone but age is the only predictor for live birth in in vitro fertilization cycles. J Assist Reprod Genet. 2013;30(5):657-65.
  27. Oner G, Ulug P, Elmali F. Ovarian reserve markers in unexplained infertility patients treated with clo-miphene citrate during intrauterine insemination. Arch Med Sci. 2015;11(6):1250-4.
  28. Nelson SM, Fleming R, Gaudoin M, Choi B, Santo-Domingo K, Yao M. Antimüllerian hormone levels and antral follicle count as prognostic indicators in a personalized prediction model of live birth. Fertil Steril. 2015;104(2):325-32.
  29. Park HJ, Lee GH, Gong du S, Yoon TK, Lee WS. The meaning of anti-Müllerian hormone levels in patients at a high risk of poor ovarian response. Clin Exp Reprod Med. 2016;43(3):139-45.