Understanding Follicular Output Rate (FORT) and its Implications for POSEIDON Criteria

Michael Grynberg, Julie Labrosse, Michael Grynberg, Julie Labrosse

Abstract

The management of low prognosis patients in ART represents a challenge for reproductive specialists. Different profiles and biologic characteristics have been identified among these patients. Indeed, while poor ovarian response can be seen in patients with impaired ovarian reserve, others, identified as hypo-responders, show unexpected poor or suboptimal response to controlled ovarian stimulation despite satisfying ovarian parameters. These hypo-responders are associated during FSH stimulation to slow initial responses in terms of estradiol levels and follicle growth, longer stimulations, and/or greater cumulative FSH doses. Hence, it appears that ovarian sensitivity to gonadotropins differs from a patient to another, and plays a determinant role on ovarian response to stimulation. Although precise mechanisms remain to be elucidated, increasing evidence suggests that ovarian sensitivity to FSH could be influenced by the presence of genetic mutations or single nucleotide polymorphisms of gonadotropins and their receptors. Evaluating ovarian sensitivity to FSH therefore appears as a key element to improve IVF success rates in these low prognosis patients and open new treatment perspectives. Since the traditional ovarian markers currently used are not sufficient to accurately reflect ovarian response to FSH, a tool to assess ovarian sensitivity to gonadotropin stimulation was required. The present review aims to present Follicular Output Rate (FORT) as an efficient quantitative and qualitative marker of ovarian responsiveness to gonadotropins, discuss the underlying mechanisms of impaired sensitivity to FSH and the possible FORT implications for Poseidon criteria.

Keywords: FORT; FSH receptor polymorphism; POSEIDON criteria; controlled ovarian stimulation; follicular output rate; hypo-response.

References

    1. Esteves SC, Roque M, Bedoschi GM, Conforti A, Humaidan P, Alviggi C. Defining low prognosis patients undergoing assisted reproductive technology: POSEIDON criteria—the why. Front Endocrinol. (2018) 9:461. 10.3389/fendo.2018.00461
    1. Ferraretti AP, La Marca A, Fauser BC, Tarlatzis B, Nargund G, Gianaroli L, 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. 10.1093/humrep/der092
    1. Polyzos NP. Devroey PA systematic review of randomized trials for the treatment of poor ovarian responders: is there any light at the end of the tunnel? Fertil Steril. (2011) 96:1058–61.e7. 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2011.09.048
    1. Papathanasiou A. Implementing the ESHRE 'poor responder' criteria in research studies: methodological implications. Hum Reprod. (2014) 29:1835–8. 10.1093/humrep/deu135
    1. Alviggi C, Andersen CY, Buehler K, Conforti A, De Placido G, Esteves SC, et al. . A new more detailed stratification of low responders to ovarian stimulation: from a poor ovarian response to a low prognosis concept. Fertil Steril. (2016) 105:1452–3. 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2016.02.005
    1. Humaidan P, Alviggi C, Fischer R, Esteves SC. The novel POSEIDON stratification of 'Low prognosis patients in Assisted Reproductive Technology' and its proposed marker of successful outcome. F1000Research. (2016) 5:2911. 10.12688/f1000research.10382.1
    1. Drakopoulos P, Blockeel C, Stoop D, Camus M, de Vos M, Tournaye H, et al. . Conventional ovarian stimulation and single embryo transfer for IVF/ICSI. How many oocytes do we need to maximize cumulative live birth rates after utilization of all fresh and frozen embryos? Hum Reprod. (2016) 31:370–6. 10.1093/humrep/dev316
    1. Alviggi C, Conforti A, Caprio F, Gizzo S, Noventa M, Strina I, et al. . In estimated good prognosis patients could unexpected 'hyporesponse' to controlled ovarian stimulation be related to genetic polymorphisms of FSH receptor? Reprod Sci. (2016) 23:1103–8. 10.1177/1933719116630419
    1. Alviggi C, Conforti A, Esteves SC, Vallone R, Venturella R, Staiano S, et al. . Understanding ovarian hypo-response to exogenous gonadotropin in ovarian stimulation and its new proposed marker-the follicle-to-oocyte (FOI) index. Front Endocrinol. (2018) 9:589. 10.3389/fendo.2018.00589
    1. Broer SL, van Disseldorp J, Broeze KA, Dolleman M, Opmeer BC, Bossuyt P, et al. . 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. (2013) 19:26–36. 10.1093/humupd/dms041
    1. How to Define Diagnose and Treat Poor Responders? Responses From a Worldwide Survey of IVF clinics. Available online at: (accessed October 5, 2018).
    1. Papathanasiou A, Searle BJ, King NM, Bhattacharya S. Trends in 'poor responder' research: lessons learned from RCTs in assisted conception. Hum Reprod. (2016) 22:306–19. 10.1093/humupd/dmw001
    1. Sharma V, Allgar V, Rajkhowa M. Factors influencing the cumulative conception rate and discontinuation of in vitro fertilization treatment for infertility. Fertil Steril. (2002) 78:40–6. 10.1016/S0015-0282(02)03160-6
    1. Carrera-Rotllan J, Estrada-García L, Sarquella-Ventura J. Prediction of pregnancy in IVF cycles on the fourth day of ovarian stimulation. J Assist Reprod Genet. (2007) 24:387–94. 10.1007/s10815-007-9144-7
    1. Ottosen LDM, Kesmodel U, Hindkjaer J, Ingerslev HJ. Pregnancy prediction models and eSET criteria for IVF patients–do we need more information? J Assist Reprod Genet. (2007) 24:29–36. 10.1007/s10815-006-9082-9
    1. Melo MA, Garrido N, Alvarez C, Bellver J, Meseguer M, Pellicer A, et al. . Antral follicle count (AFC) can be used in the prediction of ovarian response but cannot predict the oocyte/embryo quality or the in vitro fertilization outcome in an egg donation program. Fertil Steril. (2009) 91:148–56. 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2007.11.042
    1. Gallot V, Berwanger da Silva AL, Genro V, Grynberg M, Frydman N, Fanchin R. Antral follicle responsiveness to follicle-stimulating hormone administration assessed by the Follicular Output RaTe (FORT) may predict in vitro fertilization-embryo transfer outcome. Hum Reprod. (2012) 27:1066–72. 10.1093/humrep/der479
    1. Seifer DB, MacLaughlin DT, Christian BP, Feng B, Shelden RM. Early follicular serum müllerian-inhibiting substance levels are associated with ovarian response during assisted reproductive technology cycles. Fertil Steril. (2002) 77:468–71. 10.1016/S0015-0282(01)03201-0
    1. Hazout A, Bouchard P, Seifer DB, Aussage P, Junca AM, Cohen-Bacrie P, et al. Serum antimüllerian hormone/müllerian-inhibiting substance appears to be a more discriminatory marker of assisted reproductive technology outcome than follicle-stimulating hormone, inhibin B, or estradiol. Fertil Steril. (2004) 82:1323–9. 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2004.03.061
    1. La Marca A, Giulini S, Tirelli A, Bertucci E, Marsella T, Xella S, et al. Anti-Müllerian hormone measurement on any day of the menstrual cycle strongly predicts ovarian response in assisted reproductive technology. Hum Reprod. (2007) 22:766–71. 10.1093/humrep/del421
    1. 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. 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2007.12.013
    1. Fanchin R, Louafi N, Méndez Lozano DH, Frydman N, Frydman R, Taieb J. Per-follicle measurements indicate that anti-müllerian hormone secretion is modulated by the extent of follicular development and luteinization and may reflect qualitatively the ovarian follicular status. Fertil Steril. (2005) 84:167–73. 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2005.01.115
    1. van Rooij IA, Broekmans FJ, te Velde ER, Fauser BC, Bancsi LF, de Jong FH, et al. Serum anti-Müllerian hormone levels: a novel measure of ovarian reserve. Hum Reprod. (2002) 17:3065–71. 10.1093/humrep/17.12.3065
    1. de Vet A, Laven JS, de Jong FH, Themmen AP, Fauser BC. Antimüllerian hormone serum levels: a putative marker for ovarian aging. Fertil Steril. (2002) 77:357–62. 10.1016/S0015-0282(01)02993-4
    1. Pigny P, Merlen E, Robert Y, Cortet-Rudelli C, Decanter C, Jonard S, et al. . Elevated serum level of anti-mullerian hormone in patients with polycystic ovary syndrome: relationship to the ovarian follicle excess and to the follicular arrest. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. (2003) 88:5957–62. 10.1210/jc.2003-030727
    1. Fanchin R, Taieb J, Lozano DH, Ducot B, Frydman R, Bouyer J. High reproducibility of serum anti-Mullerian hormone measurements suggests a multi-staged follicular secretion and strengthens its role in the assessment of ovarian follicular status. Hum Reprod. (2005) 20:923–7. 10.1093/humrep/deh688
    1. Fanchin R, Schonäuer 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. 10.1093/humrep/deg042
    1. Genro VK, Grynberg M, Scheffer JB, Roux I, Frydman R, Fanchin R. Serum anti-Müllerian hormone levels are negatively related to Follicular Output RaTe (FORT) in normo-cycling women undergoing controlled ovarian hyperstimulation. Hum Reprod. (2011) 26:671–7. 10.1093/humrep/deq361
    1. Zhang N, Hao CF, Zhuang LL, Liu XY, Gu HF, Liu S, et al. . Prediction of IVF/ICSI outcome based on the follicular output rate. Reprod Biomed Online. (2013) 27:147–53. 10.1016/j.rbmo.2013.04.012
    1. Hassan A, Kotb M, AwadAllah A, Wahba A, Shehata N. Follicular output rate can predict clinical pregnancy in women with unexplained infertility undergoing IVF/ICSI: a prospective cohort study. Reprod Biomed Online. (2017) 34:598–604. 10.1016/j.rbmo.2017.03.004
    1. Shima K, Kitayama S, Nakano R. Gonadotropin binding sites in human ovarian follicles and corpora lutea during the menstrual cycle. Obstet Gynecol. (1987) 69:800–6.
    1. Gougeon A. Regulation of ovarian follicular development in primates: facts and hypotheses. Endocr Rev. (1996) 17:121–55. 10.1210/edrv-17-2-121
    1. Rehman R, Mustafa R, Baig M, Arif S, Hashmi MF. Use of follicular output rate to predict intracytoplasmic sperm injection outcome. Int J Fertil Steril. (2016) 10:169–74. 10.22074/ijfs.2016.4906
    1. Alviggi C, Pettersson K, Longobardi S, Andersen CY, Conforti A, De Rosa P, et al. . A common polymorphic allele of the LH beta-subunit gene is associated with higher exogenous FSH consumption during controlled ovarian stimulation for assisted reproductive technology. Reprod Biol Endocrinol. (2013) 11:51. 10.1186/1477-7827-11-51
    1. Alviggi C, Conforti A, Esteves SC. Impact of mutations and polymorphisms of gonadotrophins and their receptors on the outcome of controlled ovarian stimulation. In: Ghumman S, editor. Principles and Practice of Controlled Ovarian Stimulation in ART. New Delhi: Springer; (2015). p. 147–56.
    1. Perez Mayorga M, Gromoll J, Behre HM, Gassner C, Nieschlag E, Simoni M. Ovarian response to follicle-stimulating hormone (FSH) stimulation depends on the FSH receptor genotype. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. (2000) 85:3365–9. 10.1210/jc.85.9.3365
    1. Yao Y, Ma CH, Tang HL, Hu YF. Influence of follicle-stimulating hormone receptor (FSHR) Ser680Asn polymorphism on ovarian function and in-vitro fertilization outcome: a meta-analysis. Mol Genet Metab. (2011) 103:388–93. 10.1016/j.ymgme.2011.04.005
    1. Alviggi C, Conforti A, Santi D, Esteves SC, Andersen CY, Humaidan P, et al. . Clinical relevance of genetic variants of gonadotrophins and their receptors in controlled ovarian stimulation: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Hum Reprod. (2018) 24:599–614. 10.1093/humupd/dmy019
    1. Achrekar SK, Modi DN, Desai SK, Mangoli VS, Mangoli RV, Mahale SD. Poor ovarian response to gonadotrophin stimulation is associated with FSH receptor polymorphism. Reprod Biomed Online. (2009) 18:509–15. 10.1016/S1472-6483(10)60127-7
    1. Desai SS, Achrekar SK, Pathak BR, Desai SK, Mangoli VS, Mangoli RV, et al. . Follicle-stimulating hormone receptor polymorphism (G−29A) is associated with altered level of receptor expression in granulosa cells. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. (2011) 96:2805–12. 10.1210/jc.2011-1064
    1. Genro VK, Matte U, De Conto E, Cunha-Filho JS, Fanchin R. Frequent polymorphisms of FSH receptor do not influence antral follicle responsiveness to follicle-stimulating hormone administration as assessed by the Follicular Output RaTe (FORT). J Assist Reprod Genet. (2012) 29:657–63. 10.1007/s10815-012-9761-7
    1. Alviggi C, Clarizia R, Pettersson K, Mollo A, Humaidan P, Strina I, et al. . Suboptimal response to GnRHa long protocol is associated with a common LH polymorphism. Reprod Biomed Online. (2009) 18:9–14. 10.1016/S1472-6483(10)60418-X
    1. Zhao MX, Zhou GY, Zhu JY, Gong B, Hou JX, Zhou T, et al. . Fluoride exposure, follicle stimulating hormone receptor gene polymorphism and hypothalamus-pituitary-ovarian axis hormones in chinese women. Biomed Environ Sci. (2015) 28:696–700. 10.3967/bes2015.099
    1. Biasoni V, Patriarca A, Dalmasso P, Bertagna A, Manieri C, Benedetto C, et al. . Ovarian sensitivity index is strongly related to circulating AMH and may be used to predict ovarian response to exogenous gonadotropins in IVF. Reprod Biol Endocrinol. (2011) 9:112. 10.1186/1477-7827-9-112
    1. Behre HM, Greb RR, Mempel A, Sonntag B, Kiesel L, Kaltwasser P, et al. . Significance of a common single nucleotide polymorphism in exon 10 of the follicle-stimulating hormone (FSH) receptor gene for the ovarian response to FSH: a pharmacogenetic approach to controlled ovarian hyperstimulation. Pharmacogenet Genomics. (2005) 15:451–6. 10.1097/01.fpc.0000167330.92786.5e
    1. Alviggi C, Mollo A, Clarizia R, De Placido G. Exploiting LH in ovarian stimulation. Reprod Biomed Online. (2006) 12:221–33. 10.1016/S1472-6483(10)60865-6
    1. Gizzo S, Andrisani A, Noventa M, Manfè S, Oliva A, Gangemi M, et al. . Recombinant LH supplementation during IVF cycles with a GnRH-antagonist in estimated poor responders: a cross-matched pilot investigation of the optimal daily dose and timing. Mol Med Rep. (2015) 12:4219–29. 10.3892/mmr.2015.3904
    1. Ferraretti AP, Gianaroli L, Magli MC, D'angelo A, Farfalli V, Montanaro N. Exogenous luteinizing hormone in controlled ovarian hyperstimulation for assisted reproduction techniques. Fertil Steril. (2004) 82:1521–6. 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2004.06.041
    1. De Placido G, Alviggi C, Mollo A, Strina I, Ranieri A, Alviggi E, et al. Effects of recombinant LH (rLH) supplementation during controlled ovarian hyperstimulation (COH) in normogonadotrophic women with an initial inadequate response to recombinant FSH (rFSH) after pituitary downregulation. Clin Endocrinol. (2004) 60:637–43. 10.1111/j.1365-2265.2004.02027.x
    1. Bosch E, Labarta E, Crespo J, Simón C, Remohí J, Pellicer A. Impact of luteinizing hormone administration on gonadotropin-releasing hormone antagonist cycles: an age-adjusted analysis. Fertil Steril. (2011) 95:1031–6. 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2010.10.021
    1. Humaidan P, Bungum M, Bungum L, Yding Andersen C. Effects of recombinant LH supplementation in women undergoing assisted reproduction with GnRH agonist down-regulation and stimulation with recombinant FSH: an opening study. Reprod Biomed Online. (2004) 8:635–43. 10.1016/S1472-6483(10)61643-4

Source: PubMed

Sponsors and Collaborators

Medical Conditions

Drug Interventions

3
Subscribe