과배란유도 시 혈중 AMH와 난소 반응성과의 상관관계; 예측 인자로서의 효용성

Correlation of Basal AMH & Ovarian Response in IVF Cycles; Predictive Value of AMH

  • 안영선 (관동대학교 의과대학 제일병원 산부인과) ;
  • 김진영 (관동대학교 의과대학 제일병원 산부인과) ;
  • 조연진 (관동대학교 의과대학 제일병원 산부인과) ;
  • 김민지 (관동대학교 의과대학 제일병원 산부인과) ;
  • 김혜옥 (관동대학교 의과대학 제일병원 산부인과) ;
  • 박찬우 (관동대학교 의과대학 제일병원 산부인과) ;
  • 송인옥 (관동대학교 의과대학 제일병원 산부인과) ;
  • 궁미경 (관동대학교 의과대학 제일병원 산부인과) ;
  • 강인수 (관동대학교 의과대학 제일병원 산부인과)
  • Ahn, Young-Sun (Department of Obstetrics & Gynecology, Cheil General Hospital, Kwandong University, College of Medicine) ;
  • Kim, Jin-Yeong (Department of Obstetrics & Gynecology, Cheil General Hospital, Kwandong University, College of Medicine) ;
  • Cho, Yun-Jin (Department of Obstetrics & Gynecology, Cheil General Hospital, Kwandong University, College of Medicine) ;
  • Kim, Min-Ji (Department of Obstetrics & Gynecology, Cheil General Hospital, Kwandong University, College of Medicine) ;
  • Kim, Hye-Ok (Department of Obstetrics & Gynecology, Cheil General Hospital, Kwandong University, College of Medicine) ;
  • Park, Chan-Woo (Department of Obstetrics & Gynecology, Cheil General Hospital, Kwandong University, College of Medicine) ;
  • Song, In-Ok (Department of Obstetrics & Gynecology, Cheil General Hospital, Kwandong University, College of Medicine) ;
  • Koong, Mi-Kyoung (Department of Obstetrics & Gynecology, Cheil General Hospital, Kwandong University, College of Medicine) ;
  • Kang, Inn-Soo (Department of Obstetrics & Gynecology, Cheil General Hospital, Kwandong University, College of Medicine)
  • 발행 : 2008.12.30

초록

목 적: 체외수정을 위한 과배란유도 시 난소 반응성의 예측 인자로서 항뮬러리안 호르몬 (AMH)의 효용성을 FSH와 비교하여 알아보고, 체외수정 결과와의 관계도 알아보고자 하였다. 연구방법: 2007년 1월부터 2007년 8월까지 단기 요법이나 GnRH antagonist 요법을 이용하여 체외수정을 시행하는 111명을 대상으로, 생리주기 3일째 혈중 AMH 및 FSH를 전향적으로 측정하였다. 과배란유도 후 채취된 난자 개수와 AMH 또는 FSH의 상관관계를 분석하였고, 채취된 난자 수 및 AMH 수치에 따라 과배란유도 결과와 체외수정 결과를 비교하였다. 저반응군 및 과반응군의 예측을 위한 AMH의 임계치를 알아보기 위해 ROC curve 분석을 시행하였다. 결 과: AMH는 채취된 성숙 난자 수와 밀접한 양의 상관관계를 나타냈으며 (r=0.792, p<0.001), FSH (r=-0.477, p<0.001) 보다 더 높은 상관관계를 보였다. 난소 반응성에 따라 저반응군 (성숙난자수 ${\leq}2$), 정상반응군 ($3{\sim}16$), 과반응군 (${\geq}17$)으로 나누어 AMH와 FSH 수치는 유의한 차이를 보였으며, 저반응군 (채취된 성숙 난자 수${\leq}2$) 및 과반응군 (채취된 성숙 난자 수${\geq}17$)을 예측하는데 ROC curve 상 AMH의 임계치는 각각 <0.50 ng/ml (sensitivity 88.9%, specificity 89.5%), 및 ${\geq}2.60\;ng/ml$ ((sensitivity 85.7%, specificity 87.0%)였다. AMH level에 따라 low AMH group (${\leq}0.60\;ng/ml$), normal AMH group ($0.60{\sim}2.60\;ng/ml$), high AMH group으로 구분하여, 각 군간 채취된 성숙 난자 수와 ($2.7{\pm}2.2$, $8.1{\pm}4.8$, $16.5{\pm}5.7$, p<0.001), 투여된 성선자극호르몬제의 용량에 ($3530.5{\pm}1251.0$, $2957.1{\pm}1057.6$, $2219.2{\pm}751.9\;IU$, p<0.001) 유의한 차이를 보였다. 성숙 난자의 비율과 수정율에 유의한 차이는 없었으며 임신율도 23.8%, 34.0%, 37.5%로 각 군간 유의한 차이는 없었다. 결 론: 혈중 기저 AMH는 과배란유도 시 채취되는 성숙 난자 수와 높은 상관관계가 있어 난소 반응성의 예측 인자로서 유용할 것으로 생각된다. AMH 수치에 따라 체외수정 결과에는 차이가 없었으나, 저반응군 및 과반응군의 예측에 유용하여 체외수정 시 주기의 취소나, 환자별 적정 용량의 결정 및 난소과자극 증후군의 위험을 감소시키는데 도움이 될 것으로 사료된다.

Objectives: The aim of this study was to evaluate the usefulness of Anti-mullerian hormone (AMH) as a predictive marker for ovarian response and cycle outcome in IVF cycles. Methods: From Jan., to Aug., 2007, 111 patients undergoing IVF/ICSI stimulated by short or antagonist protocol were selected. On cycle day 3, basal serum AMH level and FSH level were measured. The correlation between basal serum AMH or FSH, and COH outcome was analyzed and IVF outcome was compared according to the AMH levels. To determine the threshold value of AMH for poor- and hyper-response, ROC curve was analyzed. Results: Serum AMH showed higher correlation coefficient (r=0.792, p<0.001) with the number of retrieved mature oocyte than serum FSH (r=-0.477, p<0.001). According to ovarian response, FSH and AMH leves showed significant differences among poor, normal, and hyperresponder. For predicting poor (${\leq}2$ oocytes) and hyperresponse (${\geq}17$ oocyets), AMH cut-off values were 0.5 ng/ml (the sensitivity 88.9% and the specificity 89.5%) and 2.5 ng/ml (sensitivity 85.7%, specificity 87.0%), respectively. According to the AMH level, patients were divided into 3 groups: low (${\leq}0.60\;ng/ml$), normal ($0.60{\sim}2.60\;ng/ml$), and high AMH (${\geq}2.60\;ng/ml$). The number of retrieved mature oocytes was significantly higher ($2.7{\pm}2.2$, $8.1{\pm}4.8$, $16.5{\pm}5.7$) and total gonadotropin dose was lower ($3530.5{\pm}1251.0$, $2957.1{\pm}1057.6$, and $2219.2{\pm}751.9\;IU$) in high AMH group (p<0.001). There was no significant difference in fertilization rates and pregnancy rates (23.8%, 34.0%, 37.5%) among the groups. Conclusions: Basal serum AMH level correlated better with the number of retrieved mature oocytes than FSH level, suggesting its usefulness for predicting ovarian response. However, IVF outcome was not significantly different according to the AMH levels. Serum AMH level presented good cut-off value for poor- or hyper-responders, therefore it could be useful in prediction of cycle cancellation, gonadotropin dose, and OHSS risk in IVF cycles.

키워드

참고문헌

  1. Kwee J, Elting MW, Schats R, Bezemer PD, Lambalk CB, Schoemaker J. 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. Hum Reprod 2003; 18: 1422-7 https://doi.org/10.1093/humrep/deg205
  2. Bukulmez O, Arici A. Assessment of ovarian reserve. Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol 2004; 16: 231-7 https://doi.org/10.1097/00001703-200406000-00005
  3. 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 metaanalysis and comparison with basal follicle-stimulating hormone level. Fertil Steril 2005; 83: 291-301 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2004.10.011
  4. Wallace WH, Kelsey TW. Ovarian reserve and reproductive age may be determined from measurement of ovarian volume by transvaginal sonography. Hum Reprod 2004; 19: 1612-7 https://doi.org/10.1093/humrep/deh285
  5. Jarvela IY, Sladkevicius P, Kelly S, Ojha K, Campbell S, Nargund G. Quantification of ovarian power Doppler signal with three-dimensional ultrasonography to predict response during in vitro fertilization. Obstet Gynecol 2003; 102: 816-22 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0029-7844(03)00693-8
  6. Behringer RR, Finegold MJ, Cate RL. Mullerian inhibiting substance function during mammalian sexual development. Cell 1994; 79: 415-25 https://doi.org/10.1016/0092-8674(94)90251-8
  7. Lee MM, Donahoe PK, Hasegawa T, Silverman B, Crist GB, Best S, et al. Müllerian inhibiting substance in humans normal levels from infancy to adulthood. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 1996; 81: 571-6 https://doi.org/10.1210/jc.81.2.571
  8. Laven JS, Mulders AG, Visser JA, Themmen AP, De Jong FH, Fauser BC. Antimüllerian hormone serum concentrations in normoovulatory and anovulatory women of reproductive age, J Clin Endocrinol Metab 2004; 89: 318-23 https://doi.org/10.1210/jc.2003-030932
  9. van Rooij IA, Broekmans FJ, te Velde ER, Bancsi LF, de Jong FH, Themmen AP. Serum antimüllerian hormone levels: a novel measure of ovarian reserve. Hum Reprod 2002; 17: 3065-71 https://doi.org/10.1093/humrep/17.12.3065
  10. Durlinger AL, Kramer P, Karels B, de Jong FH, Uilenbroek JT, Grootegoed JA, et al. Control of primordial follicle recruitment by anti-Mullerian hormone in the mouse ovary. Endocrinology 1999; 140: 5789-96 https://doi.org/10.1210/en.140.12.5789
  11. Gruijters MJ, Visser JA, Durlinger AT, Themmen AF. Antimüllerian hormone and its role in ovarian function. Mol Cell Endocrinol 2003; 15: 85-90
  12. Fanchin R, Schonauer LM, Righini C, Guibourdenche J, Frydman R, Taieb J. Serum anti-Müllerian hormone is more strongly related to ovarian follicular status than serum inhibin B, estradiol, FSH and LH on day 3. Hum Reprod 2003; 18: 323-7 https://doi.org/10.1093/humrep/deg042
  13. Silberstein T, MacLaughlin DT, Shai I, Trimarch JR, Lambert- Messerlian G, Seifer DB, et al. Mullerian inhibiting substance levels at the time of HCG administrarion in IVF cycles predict both ovarian reserve and embryo morphology. Hum Reprod 2006; 21: 159-63 https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordjournals.humrep.a002489
  14. Durlinger AL, Visser JA, Themmen AP. Regulation of ovarian function: The role of anti-Mullerian hormone. Reproduction 2003; 124: 601-9 https://doi.org/10.1530/rep.0.1240601
  15. Visser JA, deJong FH, Laven JSE, Themmen APN. Anti-Mullerian hormone: a new marker for ovarian function. Reproduction 2006; 1: 1-9
  16. Van Rooij IA, Broekmans FJ, teVelde ER, Fauser BC, Bansci LF, de Jong FH, et al. Serum anti-Mullerian hormone levels: a novel measure of ovarian reserve. Hum Reprod 2002; 17: 3065-71 https://doi.org/10.1093/humrep/17.12.3065
  17. Cook CL, Siow Y, Taylor S, Fallat ME. Serum mullerianinhibiting substance levels during normal menstrual cycles. Fertil Steril 2000; 73: 859-61 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0015-0282(99)00639-1
  18. La Marca A, Stabile G, Carducci Artenisio A, Volpe A. Serum anti-Mullerain hormone throughout the human menstrual cycle. Hum Reprod 2006; 21: 3103-7 https://doi.org/10.1093/humrep/del291
  19. Nelson SM, Yates RW, Fleming R. Serum anti-Mullerian hormone and FSH: predictioin of live birth and extremes of response in stimulated cycles-implications for individualization of therapy. Hum Reprod 2007; 22: 2414-21 https://doi.org/10.1093/humrep/dem204
  20. Jurema MW, Bracero NJ, Garcia JE. Fine tuning cycle day 3 hormonal assessment of ovarian reserve improves in vitro fertilization outcome in gonadotropin-releasing hormone antagonist cycles. Fertil Steril 2003; 80: 1156-61 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0015-0282(03)02159-9
  21. Bancsi LF, Broekmans FJ, Eijkemans MJ, de Jong FH, Habbema JD, te Velde ER. Predictors of poor ovarian response in in vitro fertilization a prospective study comparing basal markers of ovarian reserve. Fertil Steril 2002; 77: 328-36 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0015-0282(01)02983-1
  22. Kwee J, Schats R, McDonnell J, Themmen A, de Jong F, Lambalk C. Evaluation of anti-Mullerian hormone as a test for the prediction of ovarian reserve. Fertil Steril 2008; 90: 737-43 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2007.07.1293
  23. La Marca A, Giulini S, Tirelli A, Bertucci E, Marsella T, Xella S, et al. Anti-mullerian hormone measurement on any day of the menstrual cycle strongly predicts ovarian response in assisted reproductive technology. Hum Reprod 2007; 22: 766-71 https://doi.org/10.1093/humrep/del421
  24. Seifer DB, MacLaughlin DT, Christian BP, Feng B, Shelden RM. Early follicular serum mullerian-inhibiting substance levels are associated with ovarian response during assisted reproductive technology cycles. Fertil Steril 2002; 77: 468-71 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0015-0282(01)03201-0
  25. Eldar-Geva T, Ben Chetrit A, Spitz IM, Rabinowitz R, Markowitz E, Mimoni T, et al. 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: 3178-83 https://doi.org/10.1093/humrep/dei203
  26. Ebner T, Sommergruber M, Shebl O, Schreier-Lechner E, Tews G. Basal level of anti-Mullerian hormone is associated with oocyte quality in stimulate cycles. Hum Reprod 2006; 21: 2022-6 https://doi.org/10.1093/humrep/del127
  27. Smeenk JM, Sweep FC, Zielhuis GA, Kremer JA, Thomas CM, Braat DD. Antimullerian hormone predicts ovarian responsiveness, but not embryo quality or pregnancy, after in vitro fertilization or intracyoplasmic sperm injection. Fertil Steril 2007; 87: 223-618 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2006.06.019