4.4 Article

The Relationship of Anti-Mullerian Hormone in Polycystic Ovary Syndrome Patients with Different Subgroups

Journal

Publisher

DOVE MEDICAL PRESS LTD
DOI: 10.2147/DMSO.S299558

Keywords

anti-Mullerian hormone; polycystic ovary syndrome; hyperandrogenism; polycystic ovary morphology

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The study found that AMH levels were higher in PCOS patients compared to controls, with no difference in subgroups of PCOS patients under 30 years old. AMH levels in the PCOM subgroup were significantly higher than those in the HA subgroup, suggesting a strong relationship between AMH and PCOM but not with HA.
Purpose: To explore the value of anti-Mullerian hormone (AMH) in patients with poly-cystic ovary syndrome (PCOS) with different phenotypes and ages, and to identify the relationship between hyperandrogenism (HA) and polycystic ovary morphology (PCOM), in a Chinese cohort. Methods: A total of 2262 women (1631 with PCOS and 631 controls) were enrolled. The serum AMH and total testosterone (TT) were analyzed, the AMH levels of each subgroup were compared, and the value of each phenotype and age group of patients with PCOS was evaluated. Results: The level of AMH in women with PCOS (mean +/- SD, 8.63 +/- 4.73 ng/mL) was higher than that in controls (5.57 +/- 3.31 ng/mL) (P<0.01). The level of AMH in the PCOM subgroup (11.19 +/- 6.4 ng/mL) was significantly higher than that in the HA subgroup (8.58 +/- 4.74 ng/mL) (P<0.01), and both were higher than that in controls (P<0.01). AMH was higher in PCOS patients than in controls, but the same values were found in subgroups of PCOS patients under 30 years old. Conclusion: AMH changed in different subgroups of PCOS, which was the possible reason why AMH was not a diagnostic indicator. However, AMH could help to differentiate between clinical subgroups, as it was strongly related with PCOM but not with HA. AMH changed substantially with age, but was stable in PCOS patients under 30 years old.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available