Association between GnRH Receptor Polymorphisms and Luteinizing Hormone Levels for Low Ovarian Reserve Infertile Women
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Study Design and Patient Selection
2.2. ART Treatment Protocol and Hormone Analysis
2.3. DNA Extraction and Determination of Genotypes
2.4. Statistical Analysis
3. Results
3.1. The Distribution of AMH, FSHR, GnRH, and GnRHR
3.2. The Clinical Characteristics of Patients with Varied Genotypes of GnRHR SNP (rs3756159)
4. Discussion
5. Conclusions
Supplementary Materials
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Acknowledgments
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Oudendijk, J.; Yarde, F.; Eijkemans, M.; Broekmans, F.; Broer, S. The poor responder in IVF: Is the prognosis always poor? A systematic review. Hum. Reprod. Update 2011, 18, 1–11. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Drakopoulos, P.; Bardhi, E.; Boudry, L.; Vaiarelli, A.; Makrigiannakis, A.; Esteves, S.C.; Tournaye, H.; Blockeel, C. Update on the management of poor ovarian response in IVF: The shift from Bologna criteria to the Poseidon concept. Ther. Adv. Reprod. Heal. 2020, 14, 2633494120941480. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhang, Y.; Zhang, C.; Shu, J.; Guo, J.; Chang, H.-M.; Leung, P.C.K.; Sheng, J.-Z.; Huang, H. Adjuvant treatment strategies in ovarian stimulation for poor responders undergoing IVF: A systematic review and network meta-analysis. Hum. Reprod. Updat. 2020, 26, 247–263. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Haahr, T.; Dosouto, C.; Alviggi, C.; Esteves, S.C.; Humaidan, P. Management Strategies for POSEIDON Groups 3 and 4. Front. Endocrinol. 2019, 10, 614. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Ferraretti, A.P.; La Marca, A.; Fauser, B.C.J.M.; Tarlatzis, B.; Nargund, G.; Gianaroli, L.; on behalf of the ESHRE working group on Poor Ovarian Response Definition. ESHRE consensus on the definition of ’poor response’ to ovarian stimulation for in vitro fertilization: The Bologna criteria. Hum. Reprod. 2011, 26, 1616–1624. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Alviggi, C.; Andersen, C.Y.; Buehler, K.; Conforti, A.; De Placido, G.; Esteves, S.C.; Fischer, R.; Galliano, D.; Polyzos, N.P.; Sunkara, S.K.; 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, 1452–1453. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Pandian, Z.; McTavish, A.R.; Aucott, L.; Hamilton, M.P.; Bhattacharya, S. Interventions for ’poor responders’ to controlled ovarian hyper stimulation (COH) in in-vitro fertilisation (IVF). Cochrane Database Syst. Rev. 2010, CD004379. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sunkara, S.K.; Coomarasamy, A.; Faris, R.; Braude, P.; Khalaf, Y. Long gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonist versus short agonist versus antagonist regimens in poor responders undergoing in vitro fertilization: A randomized controlled trial. Fertil. Steril. 2014, 101, 147–153. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Revelli, A.; Chiadò, A.; Dalmasso, P.; Stabile, V.; Evangelista, F.; Basso, G.; Benedetto, C. “Mild” vs. “long” protocol for controlled ovarian hyperstimulation in patients with expected poor ovarian responsiveness undergoing in vitro fertilization (IVF): A large prospective randomized trial. J. Assist. Reprod. Genet. 2014, 31, 809–815. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Huang, M.-C.; Tzeng, S.-L.; Lee, C.-I.; Chen, H.-H.; Huang, C.-C.; Lee, T.-H.; Lee, M.-S. GnRH agonist long protocol versus GnRH antagonist protocol for various aged patients with diminished ovarian reserve: A retrospective study. PLoS ONE 2018, 13, e0207081. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Prapas, Y.; Petousis, S.; Dagklis, T.; Panagiotidis, Y.; Papatheodorou, A.; Assunta, I.; Prapas, N. GnRH antagonist versus long GnRH agonist protocol in poor IVF responders: A randomized clinical trial. Eur. J. Obstet. Gynecol. Reprod. Biol. 2013, 166, 43–46. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Nelson, S.M. Biomarkers of ovarian response: Current and future applications. Fertil. Steril. 2013, 99, 963–969. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- La Marca, A.; Sunkara, S.K. Individualization of controlled ovarian stimulation in IVF using ovarian reserve markers: From theory to practice. Hum. Reprod. Update 2014, 20, 124–140. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Čuš, M.; Vlaisavljević, V.; Repnik, K.; Potočnik, U.; Kovačič, B. Could polymorphisms of some hormonal receptor genes, involved in folliculogenesis help in predicting patient response to controlled ovarian stimulation? J. Assist. Reprod. Genet. 2019, 36, 47–55. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Chen, D.; Zhu, X.; Wu, J. Can polymorphisms of AMH/AMHR2 affect ovarian stimulation outcomes? A systematic review and meta-analysis. J. Ovarian Res. 2020, 13, 103. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Alviggi, C.; Conforti, A.; Santi, D.; Esteves, S.C.; Andersen, C.Y.; Humaidan, P.; Chiodini, P.; De Placido, G.; Simoni, M. Clinical relevance of genetic variants of gonadotrophins and their receptors in controlled ovarian stimulation: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Hum. Reprod. Update 2018, 24, 599–614. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Conforti, A.; Vaiarelli, A.; Cimadomo, D.; Bagnulo, F.; Peluso, S.; Carbone, L.; Di Rella, F.; De Placido, G.; Ubaldi, F.M.; Huhtaniemi, I.; et al. Pharmacogenetics of FSH Action in the Female. Front. Endocrinol. 2019, 10, 398. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Sindiani, A.M.; Batiha, O.; Al-Zoubi, E.; Khadrawi, S.; Alsoukhni, G.; Alkofahi, A.; Alahmad, N.A.; Shaaban, S.; Alshdaifat, E.; Abu-Halima, M. Association of single-nucleotide polymorphisms in the ESR2 and FSHR genes with poor ovarian response in infertile Jordanian women. Clin. Exp. Reprod. Med. 2021, 48, 69–79. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Song, D.; Huang, X.-L.; Hong, L.; Yu, J.-M.; Zhang, Z.-F.; Zhang, H.-Q.; Sun, Z.-G.; Du, J. Sequence variants in FSHR and CYP19A1 genes and the ovarian response to controlled ovarian stimulation. Fertil. Steril. 2019, 112, 749–757.e2. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Huang, W.; Cao, Y.; Shi, L. Effects of FSHR polymorphisms on premature ovarian insufficiency in human beings: A meta-analysis. Reprod. Biol. Endocrinol. 2019, 17, 80. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Van der Gaast, M.H.; Beckers, N.G.; Beier-Hellwig, K.; Beier, H.M.; Macklon, N.S.; Fauser, B.C. Ovarian stimulation for IVF and endometrial receptivity—The missing link. Reprod BioMed. Online 2002, 5, 36–43. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Valkenburg, O.; Uitterlinden, A.; Piersma, D.; Hofman, A.; Themmen, A.; De Jong, F.; Fauser, B.; Laven, J. Genetic polymorphisms of GnRH and gonadotrophic hormone receptors affect the phenotype of polycystic ovary syndrome. Hum. Reprod. 2009, 24, 2014–2022. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Chen, W.-Y.; Du, Y.-Q.; Guan, X.; Zhang, H.-Y.; Liu, T. Effect of GnRHR polymorphisms on in vitro fertilization and embryo transfer in patients with polycystic ovary syndrome. J. Hum. Genet. 2017, 62, 1065–1071. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Wu, C.-H.; Yang, S.-F.; Tsao, H.-M.; Chang, Y.-J.; Lee, T.-H.; Lee, M.-S. Anti-Müllerian Hormone Gene Polymorphism is Associated with Clinical Pregnancy of Fresh IVF Cycles. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2019, 16, 841. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Chung, T.-T.; Pan, M.-S.; Kuo, C.-L.; Wong, R.-H.; Lin, C.-W.; Chen, M.-K.; Yang, S.-F. Impact of RECK gene polymorphisms and environmental factors on oral cancer susceptibility and clinicopathologic characteristics in Taiwan. Carcinogenesis 2011, 32, 1063–1068. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Tsai, H.-T.; Hsin, C.-H.; Hsieh, Y.-H.; Tang, C.-H.; Yang, S.-F.; Lin, C.-W.; Chen, M.-K. Impact of Interleukin-18 Polymorphisms -607A/C and -137G/C on Oral Cancer Occurrence and Clinical Progression. PLoS ONE 2013, 8, e83572. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Berker, B.; Şükür, Y.E.; Özdemir, E.; Özmen, B.; Sönmezer, M.; Atabekoğlu, C.S.; Aytaç, R. Human Menopausal Gonadotropin Commenced on Early Follicular Period Increases Live Birth Rates in POSEIDON Group 3 and 4 Poor Responders. Reprod Sci. 2021, 28, 488–494. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Alviggi, C.; Conforti, A.; Esteves, S.C.; Andersen, C.Y.; Bosch, E.; Bühler, K.; Ferraretti, A.P.; De Placido, G.; Mollo, A.; Fischer, R.; et al. Recombinant luteinizing hormone supplementation in assisted reproductive technology: A systematic review. Fertil. Steril. 2018, 109, 644–664. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Grow, D.; Kawwass, J.F.; Kulkarni, A.D.; Durant, T.; Jamieson, D.J.; Macaluso, M. GnRH agonist and GnRH antagonist protocols: Comparison of outcomes among good-prognosis patients using national surveillance data. Reprod. Biomed. Online 2014, 29, 299–304. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
Variable | Assay ID | Context Sequence |
---|---|---|
AMH 146 T > G (rs10407022) | C__25599842_10 | GAAGACTTGGACTGGCCTCCAGGCA[G/T] CCCACAAGAGCCTCTGTGCCTGGTG |
FSHR A2039G (rs6166) | C___2676874_10 | AGGGACAAGTATGTAAGTGGAACCA[C/T] TGGTGACTCTGGGAGCTGAAGAGCA |
GnRH-1 (rs6185) | C___1529427_1_ | CTGGCTGGAGCAGCCTTCCACGCAC[C/G] AAGTCAGTAGAATAAGGCCAGCTAG |
GnRHR-1 (rs3756159) | C__27477550_10 | AACATGAAAGGTATAAAGCCCTCAA[A/G] TGCAGGGTGTGGCTATGAAAGTCGG |
AMH 146 T > G (rs10407022) | Age < 35 Years (n = 86) | Age ≥ 35 Years (n = 183) | p Value 1 | ||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Genotype | n | % | n | % | |
TT | 37/86 | 43.0 | 62/183 | 33.9 | Reference |
TG | 37/86 | 43.0 | 90/183 | 49.2 | 0.1913 |
GG | 12/86 | 14.0 | 31/183 | 16.9 | 0.2773 |
Recessive | |||||
TT | 37/86 | 43.0 | 62/183 | 33.9 | Reference |
TG/GG | 49/86 | 57.0 | 121/183 | 66.1 | 0.1478 |
Allele | |||||
T | 111/172 | 64.5 | 214/366 | 58.5 | Reference |
G | 61/172 | 35.5 | 152/366 | 41.5 | 0.1802 |
FSHR A2039G (rs6166) | Age < 35 Years (n = 86) | Age ≥ 35 Years (n = 183) | p Value 1 | ||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Genotype | n | % | n | % | |
AA | 30/86 | 34.9 | 73/183 | 39.9 | Reference |
AG | 48/86 | 55.8 | 91/183 | 49.7 | 0.3746 |
GG | 8/86 | 9.3 | 19/183 | 10.4 | 0.9593 |
Recessive | |||||
AA | 30/86 | 34.9 | 73/183 | 39.9 | Reference |
AG/GG | 56/86 | 65.1 | 110/183 | 60.1 | 0.4316 |
Allele | |||||
A | 108/172 | 62.8 | 237/366 | 64.8 | Reference |
G | 64/172 | 37.2 | 129/366 | 35.2 | 0.6582 |
GnRH-1 (rs6185) | Age < 35 Years (n = 86) | Age ≥ 35 Years (n = 183) | p Value 1 | ||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Genotype | n | % | n | % | |
GG | 25/86 | 29.1 | 54/183 | 29.5 | Reference |
GC | 43/86 | 50.0 | 93/183 | 50.8 | 0.9966 |
CC | 18/86 | 20.9 | 36/183 | 19.7 | 0.8387 |
Recessive | |||||
GG | 25/86 | 29.1 | 54/183 | 29.5 | Reference |
GC/CC | 61/86 | 70.9 | 129/183 | 70.5 | 0.9414 |
Allele | |||||
G | 93/172 | 54.1 | 201/366 | 54.9 | Reference |
C | 79/172 | 45.9 | 165/366 | 45.1 | 0.8539 |
GnRHR-1 (rs3756159) | Age < 35 Years (n = 86) | Age ≥ 35 Years (n = 183) | p Value 1 | ||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Genotype | n | % | n | % | |
CC | 34/86 | 39.5 | 44/183 | 24.0 | Reference |
CT | 32/86 | 37.2 | 94/183 | 51.4 | 0.0071 |
TT | 20/86 | 23.3 | 45/183 | 24.6 | 0.1166 |
Recessive | |||||
CC | 34/86 | 39.5 | 34/183 | 24.0 | Reference |
CT/TT | 52/86 | 60.5 | 139/183 | 76.0 | 0.0091 |
Allele | |||||
C | 100/172 | 58.1 | 182/366 | 49.7 | Reference |
T | 72/172 | 41.9 | 184/366 | 50.3 | 0.0732 |
Characteristics of Patients | GnRHR rs3756159 CC n = 78 | GnRHR rs3756159 CT/TT n = 191 | p Value |
---|---|---|---|
Woman age (years) | 36.0 (34.0 to 41.0) | 38.0 (35.0 to 41.0) | 0.0513 |
Duration of infertility (years) | 3.0 (2.0 to 4.0) | 3.0 (1.5 to 5.0) | 0.5970 |
Baseline AMH (ng/mL) | 0.60 (0.43 to 0.94) | 0.60 (0.28 to 0.90) | 0.2619 |
Baseline FSH (IU/L) | 7.60 (4.76 to 9.50) | 7.40 (5.35 to 10.38) | 0.6122 |
Baseline LH (IU/L) | 3.60 (2.45 to 5.40) | 4.40 (2.91 to 6.48) | 0.0308 |
Baseline E2 (ng/mL) | 37.0 (25.0 to 59.0) | 37.0 (22.0 to 66.5) | 0.8942 |
E2 on Day of trigger (ng/mL) | 775.5 (485.0 to 1267.0) | 823.0 (524.8 to 1208.0) | 0.4533 |
P4 on Day of trigger (pg/mL) | 0.66 (0.37 to 0.90) | 0.66 (0.46 to 1.02) | 0.3235 |
Day of stimulation (days) | 14 (13 to 15) | 14 (13 to 15) | 0.8692 |
Number of retrieved oocytes | 4 (3 to 7) | 4 (3 to 6) | 0.4028 |
Number of mature oocytes | 3 (2 to 6) | 3 (2 to 5) | 0.2512 |
Number of Day3 embryos | 3 (2 to 5) | 3 (2 to 5) | 0.3711 |
Day3 good embryo rate (%) | 70.8 (50.0 to 100.0) | 66.7 (50.0 to 100.0) | 0.4837 |
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. |
© 2021 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Weng, S.-L.; Tzeng, S.-L.; Lee, C.-I.; Liu, C.-H.; Huang, C.-C.; Yang, S.-F.; Lee, M.-S.; Lee, T.-H. Association between GnRH Receptor Polymorphisms and Luteinizing Hormone Levels for Low Ovarian Reserve Infertile Women. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2021, 18, 7006. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph18137006
Weng S-L, Tzeng S-L, Lee C-I, Liu C-H, Huang C-C, Yang S-F, Lee M-S, Lee T-H. Association between GnRH Receptor Polymorphisms and Luteinizing Hormone Levels for Low Ovarian Reserve Infertile Women. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 2021; 18(13):7006. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph18137006
Chicago/Turabian StyleWeng, Shun-Long, Shu-Ling Tzeng, Chun-I Lee, Chung-Hsien Liu, Chun-Chia Huang, Shun-Fa Yang, Maw-Sheng Lee, and Tsung-Hsien Lee. 2021. "Association between GnRH Receptor Polymorphisms and Luteinizing Hormone Levels for Low Ovarian Reserve Infertile Women" International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 18, no. 13: 7006. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph18137006
APA StyleWeng, S. -L., Tzeng, S. -L., Lee, C. -I., Liu, C. -H., Huang, C. -C., Yang, S. -F., Lee, M. -S., & Lee, T. -H. (2021). Association between GnRH Receptor Polymorphisms and Luteinizing Hormone Levels for Low Ovarian Reserve Infertile Women. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 18(13), 7006. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph18137006