Association Between Biomarkers of Ovarian Reserve and Infertility Among Older Women of Reproductive Age | Geriatrics | JAMA | JAMA Network
[Skip to Navigation]
Access to paid content on this site is currently suspended due to excessive activity being detected from your IP address 34.239.150.57. Please contact the publisher to request reinstatement.
1.
Mathews  TJ, Hamilton  BE.  Mean age of mothers is on the rise: United States, 2000-2014.  NCHS Data Brief. 2016;(232):1-8.PubMedGoogle Scholar
2.
Hansen  KR, Knowlton  NS, Thyer  AC, Charleston  JS, Soules  MR, Klein  NA.  A new model of reproductive aging: the decline in ovarian non-growing follicle number from birth to menopause.  Hum Reprod. 2008;23(3):699-708.PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
3.
Lee  MM, Donahoe  PK.  Müllerian inhibiting substance: a gonadal hormone with multiple functions.  Endocr Rev. 1993;14(2):152-164.PubMedGoogle Scholar
4.
Roberts  VJ, Barth  S, el-Roeiy  A, Yen  SS.  Expression of inhibin/activin subunits and follistatin messenger ribonucleic acids and proteins in ovarian follicles and the corpus luteum during the human menstrual cycle.  J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 1993;77(5):1402-1410.PubMedGoogle Scholar
5.
Santoro  N, Isaac  B, Neal-Perry  G,  et al.  Impaired folliculogenesis and ovulation in older reproductive aged women.  J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2003;88(11):5502-5509.PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
6.
Freeman  EW, Sammel  MD, Lin  H, Boorman  DW, Gracia  CR.  Contribution of the rate of change of antimüllerian hormone in estimating time to menopause for late reproductive-age women.  Fertil Steril. 2012;98(5):1254-1259.PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
7.
Dólleman  M, Faddy  MJ, van Disseldorp  J,  et al.  The relationship between anti-Müllerian hormone in women receiving fertility assessments and age at menopause in subfertile women: evidence from large population studies.  J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2013;98(5):1946-1953.PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
8.
Wu  CH, Chen  YC, Wu  HH, Yang  JG, Chang  YJ, Tsai  HD.  Serum anti-Müllerian hormone predicts ovarian response and cycle outcome in IVF patients.  J Assist Reprod Genet. 2009;26(7):383-389.PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
9.
Broer  SL, van Disseldorp  J, Broeze  KA,  et al; IMPORT Study Group.  Added value of ovarian reserve testing on patient characteristics in the prediction of ovarian response and ongoing pregnancy: an individual patient data approach.  Hum Reprod Update. 2013;19(1):26-36.PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
10.
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(3):705-714.PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
11.
Brodin  T, Hadziosmanovic  N, Berglund  L, Olovsson  M, Holte  J.  Antimüllerian hormone levels are strongly associated with live-birth rates after assisted reproduction.  J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2013;98(3):1107-1114.PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
12.
Steiner  AZ, Long  DL, Herring  AH, Kesner  JS, Meadows  JW, Baird  DD.  Urinary follicle-stimulating hormone as a measure of natural fertility in a community cohort.  Reprod Sci. 2013;20(5):549-556.PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
13.
Steiner  AZ, Herring  AH, Kesner  JS,  et al.  Antimüllerian hormone as a predictor of natural fecundability in women aged 30-42 years.  Obstet Gynecol. 2011;117(4):798-804.PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
14.
Jain  T, Soules  MR, Collins  JA.  Comparison of basal follicle-stimulating hormone versus the clomiphene citrate challenge test for ovarian reserve screening.  Fertil Steril. 2004;82(1):180-185.PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
15.
Weinberg  CR, Wilcox  AJ. Reproductive epidemiology. In: Rothman  KJ, Greenland  S, eds.  Modern Epidemiology. 2nd ed. Philadelphia, PA: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 1998:585-608.
16.
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention; Society for Assisted Reproductive Technology.  2014 Assisted Reproductive Technology National Summary Report. Atlanta, GA: US Dept of Health and Human Services; 2016.
17.
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. About adult BMI. https://www.cdc.gov/healthyweight/assessing/bmi/adult_bmi/index.html. Accessed September 1, 2017.
18.
Li  HW, Wong  BP, Ip  WK, Yeung  WS, Ho  PC, Ng  EH.  Comparative evaluation of three new commercial immunoassays for anti-Müllerian hormone measurement.  Hum Reprod. 2016;31(12):2796-2802.PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
19.
Hagen  CP, Vestergaard  S, Juul  A,  et al.  Low concentration of circulating antimüllerian hormone is not predictive of reduced fecundability in young healthy women: a prospective cohort study.  Fertil Steril. 2012;98(6):1602-1608.PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
20.
Zarek  SM, Mitchell  EM, Sjaarda  LA,  et al.  Is anti-Müllerian hormone associated with fecundability? findings from the EAGER trial.  J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2015;100(11):4215-4221.PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
21.
Depmann  M, Broer  SL, Eijkemans  MJC,  et al.  Anti-Müllerian hormone does not predict time to pregnancy: results of a prospective cohort study [published online April 10, 2017].  Gynecol Endocrinol. doi:10.1080/09513590.2017.1306848PubMedGoogle Scholar
22.
Benirschke  K, Kim  CK.  Multiple pregnancy, 1.  N Engl J Med. 1973;288(24):1276-1284.PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
23.
Pigny  P, Gorisse  E, Ghulam  A,  et al.  Comparative assessment of five serum antimüllerian hormone assays for the diagnosis of polycystic ovary syndrome.  Fertil Steril. 2016;105(4):1063-1069.PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
24.
Pellatt  L, Rice  S, Dilaver  N,  et al.  Anti-Müllerian hormone reduces follicle sensitivity to follicle-stimulating hormone in human granulosa cells.  Fertil Steril. 2011;96(5):1246-1251.PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
25.
Gnoth  C, Godehardt  D, Godehardt  E, Frank-Herrmann  P, Freundl  G.  Time to pregnancy: results of the German prospective study and impact on the management of infertility.  Hum Reprod. 2003;18(9):1959-1966.PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
26.
Grande  M, Borobio  V, Bennasar  M,  et al.  Role of ovarian reserve markers, antimüllerian hormone and antral follicle count, as aneuploidy markers in ongoing pregnancies and miscarriages.  Fertil Steril. 2015;103(5):1221-1227.PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
27.
Zarek  SM, Mitchell  EM, Sjaarda  LA,  et al.  Antimüllerian hormone and pregnancy loss from the Effects of Aspirin in Gestation and Reproduction Trial.  Fertil Steril. 2016;105(4):946-952.PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
Original Investigation
October 10, 2017

Association Between Biomarkers of Ovarian Reserve and Infertility Among Older Women of Reproductive Age

Author Affiliations
  • 1Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill
  • 2Department of Biostatistics, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill
  • 3Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology and Preventive Medicine, University of Southern California, Los Angeles
  • 4National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, Cincinnati, Ohio
  • 5Department of Statistical Science, Duke University, Durham, North Carolina
  • 6Epidemiology Branch, National Institute of Environmental Health Science/National Institutes of Health, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina
JAMA. 2017;318(14):1367-1376. doi:10.1001/jama.2017.14588
Key Points

Question  Is diminished ovarian reserve, as measured by low antimüllerian hormone (AMH), associated with infertility among women of late reproductive age?

Findings  In this time-to-pregnancy cohort study of women aged 30 to 44 years without a history of infertility, women with a low AMH value had an 84% predicted cumulative probability of conception by 12 cycles of pregnancy attempt compared with 75% in women with a normal AMH value, a nonsignificant difference.

Meaning  Among women attempting to conceive naturally, diminished ovarian reserve was not associated with infertility; women should be cautioned against using AMH levels to assess their current fertility.

Abstract

Importance  Despite lack of evidence of their utility, biomarkers of ovarian reserve are being promoted as potential markers of reproductive potential.

Objective  To determine the associations between biomarkers of ovarian reserve and reproductive potential among women of late reproductive age.

Design, Setting, and Participants  Prospective time-to-pregnancy cohort study (2008 to date of last follow-up in March 2016) of women (N = 981) aged 30 to 44 years without a history of infertility who had been trying to conceive for 3 months or less, recruited from the community in the Raleigh-Durham, North Carolina, area.

Exposures  Early-follicular-phase serum level of antimüllerian hormone (AMH), follicle-stimulating hormone (FSH), and inhibin B and urinary level of FSH.

Main Outcomes and Measures  The primary outcomes were the cumulative probability of conception by 6 and 12 cycles of attempt and relative fecundability (probability of conception in a given menstrual cycle). Conception was defined as a positive pregnancy test result.

Results  A total of 750 women (mean age, 33.3 [SD, 3.2] years; 77% white; 36% overweight or obese) provided a blood and urine sample and were included in the analysis. After adjusting for age, body mass index, race, current smoking status, and recent hormonal contraceptive use, women with low AMH values (<0.7 ng/mL [n = 84]) did not have a significantly different predicted probability of conceiving by 6 cycles of attempt (65%; 95% CI, 50%-75%) compared with women (n = 579) with normal values (62%; 95% CI, 57%-66%) or by 12 cycles of attempt (84% [95% CI, 70%-91%] vs 75% [95% CI, 70%-79%], respectively). Women with high serum FSH values (>10 mIU/mL [n = 83]) did not have a significantly different predicted probability of conceiving after 6 cycles of attempt (63%; 95% CI, 50%-73%) compared with women (n = 654) with normal values (62%; 95% CI, 57%-66%) or after 12 cycles of attempt (82% [95% CI, 70%-89%] vs 75% [95% CI, 70%-78%], respectively). Women with high urinary FSH values (>11.5 mIU/mg creatinine [n = 69]) did not have a significantly different predicted probability of conceiving after 6 cycles of attempt (61%; 95% CI, 46%-74%) compared with women (n = 660) with normal values (62%; 95% CI, 58%-66%) or after 12 cycles of attempt (70% [95% CI, 54%-80%] vs 76% [95% CI, 72%-80%], respectively). Inhibin B levels (n = 737) were not associated with the probability of conceiving in a given cycle (hazard ratio per 1-pg/mL increase, 0.999; 95% CI, 0.997-1.001).

Conclusions and Relevance  Among women aged 30 to 44 years without a history of infertility who had been trying to conceive for 3 months or less, biomarkers indicating diminished ovarian reserve compared with normal ovarian reserve were not associated with reduced fertility. These findings do not support the use of urinary or blood follicle-stimulating hormone tests or antimüllerian hormone levels to assess natural fertility for women with these characteristics.

×