The rate of high ovarian response in women identified at risk by a high serum AMH level is influenced by the type of gonadotropin

References

• La Marca A, Sunkara SK. Individualization of controlled ovarian stimulation in IVF using ovarian reserve markers: from theory to practice. Hum Reprod Update 2014;20:124–40
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Devroey P, Polyzos NP, Blockeel C. An OHSS-free clinic by segmentation of IVF treatment. Hum Reprod 2011;26:2593–7
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pu D, Wu J, Liu J. Comparisons of GnRH antagonist versus GnRH agonist protocol in poor ovarian responders undergoing IVF. Hum Reprod 2011;26:2742–9
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pundir J, Sunkara SK, El-Toukhy T, Khalaf Y. Meta-analysis of GnRH antagonist protocols: do they reduce the risk of OHSS in PCOS? Reprod Biomed Online 2012;24:6–22
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kol S, Homburg R, Alsbjerg B, Humaidan P. The gonadotropin-releasing hormone antagonist protocol - the protocol of choice for the polycystic ovary syndrome patient undergoing controlled ovarian stimulation. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 2012;91:643–7
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• van der Gaast MH, Eijkemans MJ, van der Net JB, et al. Optimum number of oocytes for a successful first IVF treatment cycle. Reprod Biomed Online 2006;13:476–80
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sunkara SK, Rittenberg V, Raine-Fenning N, et al. Association between the number of eggs and live birth in IVF treatment: an analysis of 400 135 treatment cycles. Hum Reprod 2011;26:1768–74
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kok JD, Looman CW, Weima SM, Te Velde ER. A high number of oocytes obtained after ovarian hyperstimulation for in vitro fertilization or intracytoplasmic sperm injection is not associated with decreased pregnancy outcome. Fertil Steril 2006;85:918–24
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fatemi HM, Doody K, Griesinger G, et al. High ovarian response does not jeopardize ongoing pregnancy rates and increases cumulative pregnancy rates in a GnRH-antagonist protocol. Hum Reprod 2013;28:442–52
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nelson SM, Yates RW, Lyall H, et al. Anti-Müllerian hormone-based approach to controlled ovarian stimulation for assisted conception. Hum Reprod 2009;24:867–75
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yates AP, Rustamov O, Roberts SA, et al. Anti-Mullerian hormone-tailored stimulation protocols improve outcomes whilst reducing adverse effects and costs of IVF. Hum Reprod 2011;26:2353–62
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nyboe Andersen A, Devroey P, Arce J-C; for the MERIT Group. Clinical outcome following stimulation with highly purified hMG or recombinant FSH in patients undergoing IVF: a randomized assessor-blind controlled trial. Hum Reprod 2006;21:3217–27
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Devroey P, Pellicer A, Nyboe Andersen A, Arce J-C; on behalf of the Menopur in GnRH Antagonist Cycles with Single Embryo Transfer (MEGASET) Trial Group. A randomized assessor-blind trial comparing highly purified hMG and recombinant FSH in a GnRH antagonist cycle with compulsory single-blastocyst transfer. Fertil Steril 2012;97:561–71
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wolfenson C, Groisman J, Couto AS, et al. Batch-to-batch consistency of human-derived gonadotrophin preparations compared with recombinant preparations. Reprod Biomed Online 2005;10:442–54
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• 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
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• La Marca A, Giulini S, Tirelli A, 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
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nelson SM, Yates RW, Fleming R. Serum anti-Müllerian hormone and FSH: prediction of live birth and extremes of response in stimulated cycles - implications for individualization of therapy. Hum Reprod 2007;22:2414–21
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lee TH, Liu CH, Huang CC, et al. Serum anti-Müllerian hormone and estradiol levels as predictors of ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome in assisted reproduction technology cycles. Hum Reprod 2008;23:160–7
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nardo LG, Gelbaya TA, Wilkinson H, et al. Circulating basal anti-Müllerian hormone levels as predictor of ovarian response in women undergoing ovarian stimulation for in vitro fertilization. Fertil Steril 2009;92:1586–93
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Broer SL, Dólleman 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
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Anckaert E, Smitz J, Schiettecatte J, et al. The value of anti-Müllerian hormone measurement in the long GnRH agonist protocol: association with ovarian response, dose adjustments, embryo quality and pregnancy. Hum Reprod 2012;27:1829–39
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Arce J-C, La Marca A, Mirner Klein B, et al. Antimüllerian hormone in gonadotropin releasing-hormone antagonist cycles: prediction of ovarian response and cumulative treatment outcome in good-prognosis patients. Fertil Steril 2013;99:1644–53
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gardner DK, Schoolcraft WB. In-vitro culture of human blastocysts. In: Jansen R, Mortimer D, eds. Towards reproductive certainty: fertility and genetics beyond 1999. New York: The Parthenon Publishing Group; 1999:378–88
   Google Scholar
• Kolibianakis EM, Collins J, Tarlatzis BC, et al. Among patients treated for IVF with gonadotrophins and GnRH analogues, is the probability of live birth dependent on the type of analogue used? A systematic review and meta-analysis. Hum Reprod Update 2006;12:651–71
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Al-Inany HG, Youssef MA, Aboulghar M, et al. Gonadotrophin-releasing hormone antagonists for assisted reproductive technology. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2011;5:CD001750
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fleming R, Broekmans F, Calhaz-Jorge C, et al. Can anti-Müllerian hormone concentrations be used to determine gonadotrophin dose and treatment protocol for ovarian stimulation? Reprod Biomed Online 2013;26:431–9
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nelson SM. Biomarkers of ovarian response: current and future applications. Fertil Steril 2013;99:963–9
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Horsman G, Talbot JA, McLoughlin JD, et al. A biological, immunological and physico-chemical comparison of the current clinical batches of the recombinant FSH preparations Gonal-F and Puregon. Hum Reprod 2000;15:1898–902
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Flack MR, Bennet AP, Froehlich J, et al. Increased biological activity due to basic isoforms in recombinant human follicle-stimulating hormone produced in a human cell line. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 1994;79:756–60
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Barrios-de-Tomasi J, Timossi C, Merchant H, et al. Assessment of the in vitro biological activities of the human follicle stimulating hormones. Mol Cell Endocrinol 2002;186:189–98
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ulloa-Aguirre A, Timossi C, Barrios-de-Tomasi J, et al. Impact of carbohydrate heterogeneity in function of follicle-stimulating hormone: studies derived from in vitro and in vivo models. Biol Reprod 2003;69:379–89
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lambert A, Rodgers M, Mitchell R, et al. In-vitro biopotency and glycoform distribution of recombinant human FSH (ORG32489), Metrodin and Metrodin-HP. Hum Reprod 1995;10:1928–35
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• de Leeuw R, Mulders J, Voortman G, et al. Structure-function relationship of recombinant follicle stimulating hormone (Puregon). Mol Hum Reprod 1996;2:361–9
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Steelman SL, Pohley FM. Assay of the follicle stimulating hormone based on the augmentation with human chorionic gonadotropin. Endocrinology 1953;53:604–16
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Smitz J, Andersen AN, Devroey P, Arce J-C; MERIT Group. Endocrine profile in serum and follicular fluid differs after ovarian stimulation with HP-hMG or recombinant FSH in IVF patients. Hum Reprod 2007;22:676–87
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Luo W, Wiltbank MC. Distinct regulation by steroids of messenger RNAs for FSHR and CYP19A1 in bovine granulosa cells. Biol Reprod 2006;75:217–25
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bosch E, Labarta E, Crespo J, et al. Circulating progesterone levels and ongoing pregnancy rates in controlled ovarian stimulation cycles for in vitro fertilization: analysis of over 4000 cycles. Hum Reprod 2010;25:2092–100
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kolibianakis EM, Venetis CA, Bontis J, Tarlatzis BC. Significantly lower pregnancy rates in the presence of progesterone elevation in patients treated with GnRH antagonists and gonadotrophins: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Curr Pharm Biotechnol 2012;13:464–70
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Huang R, Fang C, Xu S, et al. Premature progesterone rise negatively correlated with live birth rate in IVF cycles with GnRH agonist: an analysis of 2,566 cycles. Fertil Steril 2012;98:664–70
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ochsenkühn R, Arzberger A, von Schönfeldt V, et al. Subtle progesterone rise on the day of human chorionic gonadotropin administration is associated with lower live birth rates in women undergoing assisted reproductive technology: a retrospective study with 2,555 fresh embryo transfers. Fertil Steril 2012;98:347–54
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Labarta E, Martínez-Conejero JA, Alamá P, et al. Endometrial receptivity is affected in women with high circulating progesterone levels at the end of the follicular phase: a functional genomics analysis. Hum Reprod 2011;26:1813–25
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Van Vaerenbergh I, Fatemi HM, Blockeel C, et al. Progesterone rise on HCG day in GnRH antagonist/rFSH stimulated cycles affects endometrial gene expression. Reprod Biomed Online 2011;22:263–71
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Melo MA, Meseguer M, Garrido N, et al. The significance of premature luteinization in an oocyte-donation programme. Hum Reprod 2006;21:1503–07
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lahoud R, Kwik M, Ryan J, et al. Elevated progesterone in GnRH agonist down regulated in vitro fertilisation (IVFICSI) cycles reduces live birth rates but not embryo quality. Arch Gynecol Obstet 2012;285:535–40
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Xu B, Li Z, Zhang H, et al. Serum progesterone level effects on the outcome of in vitro fertilization in patients with different ovarian response: an analysis of more than 10,000 cycles. Fertil Steril 2012;97:1321–7
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Younis JS, Haddad S, Matilsky M, Ben-Ami M. Premature luteinization: could it be an early manifestation of low ovarian reserve? Fertil Steril 1998;69:461–5
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Elgindy EA. Progesterone level and progesterone/estradiol ratio on the day of hCG administration: detrimental cutoff levels and new treatment strategy. Fertil Steril 2011;95:1639–44
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cetinkaya ES, Berker B, Aytac R, et al. The value of the progesterone-to-estradiol ratio on the day of hCG administration in predicting ongoing pregnancy and live birth rates in normoresponders undergoing GnRH antagonist cycles. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 2013;170:452–7
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Munne S, Magli C, Adler A, et al. Treatment-related chromosome abnormalities in human embryos. Hum Reprod 1997;12:780–4
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Munné S, Ary J, Zouves C, et al. Wide range of chromosome abnormalities in the embryos of young egg donors. Reprod Biomed Online 2006;12:340–6
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Haaf T, Hahn A, Lambrecht A, et al. A high oocyte yield for intracytoplasmic sperm injection treatment is associated with an increased chromosome error rate. Fertil Steril 2009;91:733–8
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rubio C, Mercader A, Alamá P, et al. Prospective cohort study in high responder oocyte donors using two hormonal stimulation protocols: impact on embryo aneuploidy and development. Hum Reprod 2010;25:2290–7
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Soares SR, Rubio C, Rodrigo L, et al. High frequency of chromosomal abnormalities in embryos obtained from oocyte donation cycles. Fertil Steril 2003;80:656–7
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ziebe S, Lundin K, Janssens R, Helmgaard L, Arce J-C; MERIT (Menotrophin vs Recombinant FSH in vitro Fertilisation Trial) Group. Influence of ovarian stimulation with HP-hMG or recombinant FSH on embryo quality parameters in patients undergoing IVF. Hum Reprod 2007;22:2404–13
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Weghofer A, Munné S, Brannath W, et al. The impact of LH-containing gonadotropins on diploidy rates in preimplantation embryos: long protocol stimulation. Hum Reprod 2008;23:499–503
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar