4.7 Article

The phenotype of polycystic ovary syndrome ameliorates with aging

Journal

FERTILITY AND STERILITY
Volume 96, Issue 5, Pages 1259-1265

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2011.09.002

Keywords

Polycystic ovary syndrome; aging; hyperandrogenism; insulin resistance; ovarian dysfunction

Funding

  1. Ferring
  2. Genovum
  3. Merck-Serono
  4. Organon
  5. Schering Plough
  6. Serono

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objective: To assess the effects of aging on the features of polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS). Design: Retrospective longitudinal follow-up study. Setting: Tertiary care center. Patient(s): Patients with PCOS, diagnosed according to the 2003 Rotterdam criteria, who visited the outpatient clinic on consecutive occasions with a minimum interval of 6 months. Intervention(s): Comparisons were made between the first visit and the consecutive visit grouped by intervals. Main Outcome Measure(s): Changes in clinical and endocrine characteristics. Result(s): A total of 254 women visited the outpatient clinic on 2 occasions each. Consecutive visits were grouped into 0.5 to 3.9 years (n = 172; mean follow-up, 2.6 years) and 4.0 to 7.0 years (n = 82; mean follow-up, 5.5 years). At their second visit, significantly more women had regained a regular cycle. The total antral follicle count was similar. Serum levels of testosterone, androstenedione, and dehydroepiandrosterone sulfate had decreased significantly. Plasma glucose levels had increased, whereas serum insulin levels and homeostasis model assessment score had significantly decreased. Conclusion(s): The PCOS phenotype changed with aging, suggesting an amelioration of the phenotype and ovarian dysfunction as indicated by the increase in number of regular menstrual cycles, decrease in serum androgen levels, and decrease in insulin resistance. (Fertil Steril (R) 2011; 96: 1259-65. (C) 2011 by American Society for Reproductive Medicine.)

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available