References
- te Velde ER, Pearson PL. The variability of female reproductive aging. Hum Reprod Update 2002;8:141–54
- Chuang CC, Chen CD, Chao KH, et al. Age is a better predictor of pregnancy potential than basal FSH levels in women undergoing IVF. Fertil Steril 2003;79:63–8
- Broekmans FJ, Kwee J, Hendriks DJ, et al. A systematic review of tests predicting ovarian reserve and IVF outcome. Hum Reprod Update 2006;12:685–718
- Broer SL, Mol BWJ, Hendriks D, Broekmans FJM. The role of antimullerian hormone in prediction of outcome after IVF: comparison with the antral follicle count. Fertil Steril 2009;91:705–14
- Nardo LG, Gelbaya T, Wilkinson H, et al. Circulating basal anti-mullerian hormone levels as predictor of ovarian response in women undergoing ovarian stimulation for in vitro fertilization. Fertil Steril 2009;92:1586–93
- Weenen C, Laven JS, Von Bergh AR, et al. Anti-mullerian hormone expression pattern in the human ovary: potential implications for initial and cyclic follicle recruitment. Mol Hum Reprod 2004;10:77–83
- Ebner T, Sommergruber M, Moser M, et al. Basal level of anti-mullerian hormone is associated with oocyte quality in stimulated cycles. Hum Reprod 2006;21:2022–6
- Majumder K, Gelbaya TA, Laing I, Nardo LG. The use of anti-Mullerian hormone and antral follicle count to predict the potential of oocytes and embryos. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 2010;150:166–70
- Nelson SM, Yates RW, Lyall H, et al. Anti-Mullerian hormone-based approach to controlled ovarian stimulation for assisted conception. Hum Reprod 2009;24:867–75
- Andersona RA, Nelson SM, Wallacec WHB. Measuring anti-Müllerian hormone for the assessment of ovarian reserve: when and for whom is it indicated? Maturitas 2012;71:28–33
- Majumder K, Gelbaya TA, Laing I, et al. 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;150:166–70
- Rustamov O, Smith A, Roberts SA, et al. Anti-Mullerian hormone: poor assay reproducibility in a large cohort of subjects suggests sample instability. Hum Reprod 2012;27:3085–91
- Long WQ, Ranchin V, Pautier P, et al. Detection of minimal levels of serum anti-Mullerian hormone during follow-up of patients with ovarian granulosa cell tumor by means of a highly sensitive enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 2000;85:540–4
- La Marca A, Sighinolfi G, Radi D, et al. Anti-Mullerian hormone (AMH) as a predictive marker in assisted reproductive technology (ART). Hum Reprod Update 2010;16:113–30
- La Marca A, Nelson SM, Sighinolfi G, et al. Anti-Mullerian Hormone (AMH) based prediction model for the live birth in assisted reproduction. Reprod Biomed Online 2011;22:341–9
- Nelson SM. Biomarkers of ovarian response: current and future applications. Fertil Steril 2013;99:963–9
- Fiçicioglu C, Kutlu T, Baglam E, Bakacak Z. Early follicular antimüllerian hormone as an indicator of ovarian reserve. Fertil Steril 2006;85:592–6
- 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;91:705–14
- Broer SL, Dolleman M, Opmeer BC, et al. AMH and AFC as predictors of excessive response in controlled ovarian hyperstimulation: a meta-analysis. Hum Reprod Update 2011;17:46–54
- Ferraretti AP, La Marca A, Fauser BCJM, et al. ESHRE consensus on the definition of ‘poor response’ to ovarian stimulation for in vitro fertilization: the Bologna criteria. Hum Reprod 2011;26:1616–24