Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
This study aims to evaluate the certainty of anti-Müllerian hormone (AMH) levels in dried blood spots (DBS) compared to serum AMH. A total of 109 infertile women who planned to undergo their controlled ovarian stimulation cycle were recruited. Serum and DBS samples were collected from each patient for the quantification of AMH levels. Serum AMH was measured with an automated clinical chemistry assay (Roche) while DBS AMH was measured using the Ansh Labs DBS AMH ELISA reagent kit. Mean AMH level in DBS was Formula: see textFormula: see textng/mL, which ranged from 0.01 to 17.3Formula: see textng/mL, while the mean AMH in serum samples was Formula: see textFormula: see textng/mL (0.01–10.8Formula: see textng/mL). Comparable accuracy for low AMH quantification was observed between the two methods over basal antral follicle counts (AFC) as a clinical comparator (AUC 86%, cutoff Formula: see textFormula: see textng/mL, Formula: see text, Formula: see text vs. 85%, cutoff Formula: see textFormula: see textng/mL, Formula: see text, Formula: see text, respectively for DBS and serum sample). Likewise, DBS AMH achieved high concordance for low AMH discrimination in comparison to serum AMH method (AUC 99% vs. 93%, respectively). A strong linear Spearman regression (Formula: see text, Formula: see text) and sufficient agreement (94.5%, mean difference of −1.6, 2.7 to −5.9) was demonstrated among studied groups with mathematical Passing and Bablok regression equation of Formula: see text. The confidence interval of intercept (−0.12, 95% CI −0.29 to −0.01) and slope (1.80, 95% CI 1.66–1.94) indicated a constant and proportional difference between the two methods but it was not significant (Formula: see text). AMH measurement in DBS could be useful as an alternative approach to screening ovarian reserve through a more convenient remote sample collection.
Sini et al. (Fri,) studied this question.