Added value of ovarian reserve testing on patient characteristics in the prediction of ovarian response and ongoing pregnancy: an individual patient data approach.

BACKGROUND Although ovarian reserve tests (ORTs) are frequently used prior to IVF treatment for outcome prediction, their added predictive value is unclear. We assessed the added value of ORTs to patient characteristics in the prediction of IVF outcome. METHODS An individual patient data (IPD) meta-analysis from published studies was performed. Studies on FSH, anti-Müllerian hormone (AMH) or antral follicle count (AFC) in women undergoing IVF were identified and authors were contacted. Using random intercept logistic regression models, we estimated the added predictive value of ORTs for poor response and ongoing pregnancy after IVF, relative to patient characteristics. RESULTS We were able to collect 28 study databases, comprising 5705 women undergoing IVF. The area under the receiver-operating characteristic curve (AUC) for female age in predicting poor response was 0.61. AFC and AMH each significantly improved the model fit (P-value <0.001). Moreover, almost a similar accuracy was reached using AMH or AFC alone (AUC 0.78 and 0.76, respectively). Combining the two tests, however, did not improve prediction (AUC 0.80, P = 0.19) of poor response. In predicting ongoing pregnancy after IVF, age was the best single predictor (AUC 0.57), and none of the ORTs added any value. CONCLUSIONS This IPD meta-analysis demonstrates that AFC and AMH clearly add to age in predicting poor response. As single tests, AFC and AMH both fully cover the prediction of poor ovarian response. In contrast, none of the ORTs add any information to the limited capacity of female age to predict ongoing pregnancy after IVF. The clinical usefulness of ORTs prior to IVF will be limited to the prediction of ovarian response.

[1]  M. Eijkemans,et al.  Anti-mullerian hormone predicts menopause: a long-term follow-up study in normoovulatory women. , 2011, The Journal of clinical endocrinology and metabolism.

[2]  S. Nelson,et al.  Anti-Müllerian hormone-based prediction model for a live birth in assisted reproduction. , 2011, Reproductive biomedicine online.

[3]  M. Eijkemans,et al.  Clinical outcomes in relation to the daily dose of recombinant follicle-stimulating hormone for ovarian stimulation in in vitro fertilization in presumed normal responders younger than 39 years: a meta-analysis. , 2011, Human reproduction update.

[4]  D. Lawlor,et al.  Predicting Live Birth, Preterm Delivery, and Low Birth Weight in Infants Born from In Vitro Fertilisation: A Prospective Study of 144,018 Treatment Cycles , 2011, PLoS medicine.

[5]  P. Bossuyt,et al.  Individual patient data meta-analysis: a promising approach for evidence synthesis in reproductive medicine. , 2010, Human reproduction update.

[6]  W. Wong,et al.  Deep phenotyping to predict live birth outcomes in in vitro fertilization , 2010, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[7]  L. Aucott,et al.  Interventions for 'poor responders' to controlled ovarian hyper stimulation (COH) in in-vitro fertilisation (IVF). , 2010, The Cochrane database of systematic reviews.

[8]  C. Olivius Cumulative Live Birth Rates after In Vitro Fertilization , 2009 .

[9]  Lucas M Bachmann,et al.  Individual patient data meta-analysis of diagnostic and prognostic studies in obstetrics, gynaecology and reproductive medicine , 2009, BMC medical research methodology.

[10]  Gary Longton,et al.  Accommodating Covariates in Receiver Operating Characteristic Analysis , 2009 .

[11]  B. Mol,et al.  The role of antimullerian hormone in prediction of outcome after IVF: comparison with the antral follicle count. , 2009, Fertility and sterility.

[12]  Gary Longton,et al.  Estimation and Comparison of Receiver Operating Characteristic Curves , 2009, The Stata journal.

[13]  M. Wikland,et al.  Individualizing FSH dose for assisted reproduction using a novel algorithm: the CONSORT study. , 2009, Reproductive biomedicine online.

[14]  Patrick Bossuyt,et al.  Systematic Reviews of Diagnostic Test Accuracy , 2008, Annals of Internal Medicine.

[15]  R. Gilchrist,et al.  Increased gonadotrophin stimulation does not improve IVF outcomes in patients with predicted poor ovarian reserve , 2008, Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics.

[16]  M. Faddy,et al.  Relationship of Serum Antimüllerian Hormone Concentration to Age at Menopause , 2008 .

[17]  M. Yosef,et al.  Anti-mullerian hormone and inhibin B in the definition of ovarian aging and the menopause transition. , 2008, The Journal of clinical endocrinology and metabolism.

[18]  E. Greenblatt,et al.  Elevated day 3 follicle-stimulating hormone/luteinizing hormone ratio >or= 2 is associated with higher rates of cancellation in in vitro fertilization-embryo transfer cycles. , 2008, Fertility and sterility.

[19]  F. Broekmans,et al.  Relationship of serum antimüllerian hormone concentration to age at menopause. , 2008, The Journal of clinical endocrinology and metabolism.

[20]  K. Elkind-Hirsch,et al.  The predictive value for in vitro fertility delivery rates is greatly impacted by the method used to select the threshold between normal and elevated basal follicle-stimulating hormone. , 2008, Fertility and sterility.

[21]  F. Broekmans,et al.  The accuracy of multivariate models predicting ovarian reserve and pregnancy after in vitro fertilization: a meta-analysis. , 2008, Human reproduction update.

[22]  J. Segars,et al.  The combined effect of age and basal follicle-stimulating hormone on the cost of a live birth at assisted reproductive technology. , 2008, Fertility and sterility.

[23]  S. Nelson,et al.  Serum anti-Müllerian hormone and FSH: prediction of live birth and extremes of response in stimulated cycles--implications for individualization of therapy. , 2007, Human reproduction.

[24]  J. Habbema,et al.  Predicting ongoing pregnancy chances after IVF and ICSI: a national prospective study. , 2007, Human reproduction.

[25]  B K Campbell,et al.  Does 3D ultrasound offer any advantage in the pretreatment assessment of ovarian reserve and prediction of outcome after assisted reproduction treatment? , 2007, Human reproduction.

[26]  D. Barad,et al.  Age-Specific Levels for Basal Follicle-Stimulating Hormone Assessment of Ovarian Function , 2007, Obstetrics and gynecology.

[27]  L. Merce,et al.  Prediction of ovarian response and IVF/ICSI outcome by three-dimensional ultrasonography and power Doppler angiography. , 2007, European journal of obstetrics, gynecology, and reproductive biology.

[28]  J. Check,et al.  Effect of embryo quality on pregnancy outcome following single embryo transfer in women with a diminished egg reserve. , 2007, Fertility and sterility.

[29]  T. Mukherjee,et al.  Moderately elevated levels of basal follicle-stimulating hormone in young patients predict low ovarian response, but should not be used to disqualify patients from attempting in vitro fertilization. , 2007, Fertility and sterility.

[30]  A. Volpe,et al.  Anti-Müllerian hormone measurement on any day of the menstrual cycle strongly predicts ovarian response in assisted reproductive technology. , 2007, Human reproduction.

[31]  J. Skull,et al.  Evaluation of the utility of multiple endocrine and ultrasound measures of ovarian reserve in the prediction of cycle cancellation in a high-risk IVF population. , 2007, Human reproduction.

[32]  L. Aucott,et al.  Interventions for 'poor responders' to controlled ovarian hyperstimulation (COH) in in-vitro fertilisation (IVF). , 2007, The Cochrane database of systematic reviews.

[33]  A. Coomarasamy,et al.  Pituitary suppression regimens in poor responders undergoing IVF treatment: a systematic review and meta-analysis. , 2007, Reproductive biomedicine online.

[34]  G. Zielhuis,et al.  Antimüllerian hormone predicts ovarian responsiveness, but not embryo quality or pregnancy, after in vitro fertilization or intracyoplasmic sperm injection. , 2007, Fertility and sterility.

[35]  B. Mol,et al.  A systematic review of tests predicting ovarian reserve and IVF outcome. , 2006, Human reproduction update.

[36]  N. Macklon,et al.  What can the clinician do to improve implantation? , 2006, Reproductive biomedicine online.

[37]  M. Matteo,et al.  Basal FSH concentration as a predictor of IVF outcome in older women undergoing stimulation with GnRH antagonist. , 2006, Reproductive biomedicine online.

[38]  E. Margalioth,et al.  Dynamic assays of inhibin B, anti-Mullerian hormone and estradiol following FSH stimulation and ovarian ultrasonography as predictors of IVF outcome , 2005 .

[39]  P. Serhal,et al.  Antral follicle count, anti‐mullerian hormone and inhibin B: predictors of ovarian response in assisted reproductive technology? , 2005, BJOG : an international journal of obstetrics and gynaecology.

[40]  M. Ashrafi,et al.  Follicle stimulating hormone as a predictor of ovarian response in women undergoing controlled ovarian hyperstimulation for IVF , 2005, International journal of gynaecology and obstetrics: the official organ of the International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics.

[41]  P. Ho,et al.  Antral follicle count and FSH concentration after clomiphene citrate challenge test in the prediction of ovarian response during IVF treatment. , 2005, Human reproduction.

[42]  E. Badings,et al.  Obesity and Clomiphene Challenge Test as Predictors of Outcome of in vitro Fertilization and Intracytoplasmic Sperm Injection , 2005, Gynecologic and Obstetric Investigation.

[43]  J. Habbema,et al.  Serum antimullerian hormone levels best reflect the reproductive decline with age in normal women with proven fertility: a longitudinal study. , 2005, Fertility and sterility.

[44]  J. Habbema,et al.  The antral follicle count is a better marker than basal follicle-stimulating hormone for the selection of older patients with acceptable pregnancy prospects after in vitro fertilization. , 2005, Fertility and sterility.

[45]  J. Habbema,et al.  Expected poor responders on the basis of an antral follicle count do not benefit from a higher starting dose of gonadotrophins in IVF treatment: a randomized controlled trial. , 2005, Human reproduction.

[46]  A. Ivanova,et al.  Prognostic value of some ovarian reserve tests in poor responders , 2005, Archives of Gynecology and Obstetrics.

[47]  S. Muttukrishna,et al.  Inhibin B and anti‐Mullerian hormone: markers of ovarian response in IVF/ICSI patients? , 2004, BJOG : an international journal of obstetrics and gynaecology.

[48]  F. Broekmans,et al.  Anti-müllerian hormone is a promising predictor for the occurrence of the menopausal transition , 2004, Menopause.

[49]  K. Kalinov,et al.  Mean Ovarian Diameter (MOD) as a Predictor of Poor Ovarian Response , 2004, Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics.

[50]  K. Biberoğlu,et al.  Comparison of Basal and Clomiphene Citrate Induced FSH and Inhibin B, Ovarian Volume and Antral Follicle Counts as Ovarian Reserve Tests and Predictors of Poor Ovarian Response in IVF , 2004, Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics.

[51]  A. Loft,et al.  A prospective randomized clinical trial comparing an individual dose of recombinant FSH based on predictive factors versus a 'standard' dose of 150 IU/day in 'standard' patients undergoing IVF/ICSI treatment. , 2003, Human reproduction.

[52]  P. Bezemer,et al.  Comparison of endocrine tests with respect to their predictive value on the outcome of ovarian hyperstimulation in IVF treatment: results of a prospective randomized study. , 2003, Human reproduction.

[53]  A. Andersson,et al.  A prospective study of predictive factors of ovarian response in 'standard' IVF/ICSI patients treated with recombinant FSH. A suggestion for a recombinant FSH dosage normogram. , 2003, Human reproduction.

[54]  B. Tarlatzis,et al.  Clinical management of low ovarian response to stimulation for IVF: a systematic review. , 2003, Human reproduction update.

[55]  D. Baird,et al.  Prospective analysis of the relationships between the ovarian follicle cohort and basal FSH concentration, the inhibin response to exogenous FSH and ovarian follicle number at different stages of the normal menstrual cycle and after pituitary down-regulation. , 2003, Human reproduction.

[56]  F. Broekmans,et al.  Serum anti-Müllerian hormone levels: a novel measure of ovarian reserve. , 2002, Human reproduction.

[57]  B. Fauser,et al.  Antimüllerian hormone serum levels: a putative marker for ovarian aging. , 2002, Fertility and sterility.

[58]  R. Harrison,et al.  A prospective randomized clinical trial of differing starter doses of recombinant follicle-stimulating hormone (follitropin-beta) for first time in vitro fertilization and intracytoplasmic sperm injection treatment cycles. , 2001, Fertility and sterility.

[59]  P C Ho,et al.  The significance of the number of antral follicles prior to stimulation in predicting ovarian responses in an IVF programme. , 2000, Human reproduction.

[60]  J. Kremer,et al.  External validation of the templeton model for predicting success after IVF. , 2000, Human reproduction.

[61]  M. Blankenstein,et al.  Basal follicle-stimulating hormone levels are of limited value in predicting ongoing pregnancy rates after in vitro fertilization. , 2000, Fertility and sterility.

[62]  H. Martikainen,et al.  Pretreatment transvaginal ultrasound examination predicts ovarian responsiveness to gonadotrophins in in-vitro fertilization. , 1997, Human reproduction.

[63]  Z. Rosenwaks,et al.  Follicle-stimulating hormone levels on cycle day 3 are predictive of in vitro fertilization outcome. , 1989, Fertility and sterility.

[64]  Z. Rosenwaks,et al.  The value of basal and/or stimulated serum gonadotropin levels in prediction of stimulation response and in vitro fertilization outcome. , 1988, Fertility and sterility.