Investigating genetic predisposition to premature decline in ovarian reserve

Introduction. Normal ovarian reserve (OR) determining the ovarian response to follicle development containing fully-featured oocytes is an important factor in pregnancy, including assisted reproductive technology (ART) programs. The causes of premature OR decrease are multifactorial. The study of gene polymorphism as a cause of the premature OR decrease deserves attention.

Aim: to determine genetic predisposition to premature OR decrease and create a prognostic model based on study results.

Materials and Methods. A retrospective comparative cohort study was conducted. A total of 200 reproductively active patients with infertility underwent ART were examined. The patients were divided into 2 groups: Group 1 included 100 patients with a premature OR decrease; Group 2 consisted of 100 patients with a normal OR. All patients underwent molecular genetic study. Genetic polymorphisms of the genes ESR1, ESR2, FSHR, CYP19A were studied.

Results. The final clinical phenotype is shaped by multiple factors – genetic and environmental. Several genetic variants contribute to the formation of premature decrease in ovarian reserve. Gene combination of CYP19A1 and FSHR displayed the greatest synergistic effect, potentiating each other and predisposing to a poor ovarian response as part of stimulated superovulation.

Conclusion. Identifying genetic markers is a promising method for individual OR evaluation, including its premature decline. Multilocus analysis and a prognostic model based on combining several polymorphic gene variants will allow to assess risks of premature OR decrease and individualize ART programs.

1. Radzinskii V.E. Portrait of a modern patient: signs of modernity. [Portret sovremennoj pacientki. Orientiry sovremennosti]. Rossijskij vestnik akushera-ginekologa. 2020;20(6):7–11. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.17116/rosakush2020200617.

2. Budanova M.A. Assessment of the reasons of decreasing ovarial reserve in reproductive age women. [Ocenka prichin snizheniya ovarial'nogo rezerva u zhenshchin reproduktivnogo vozrasta]. Sovremennaya nauka: aktual'nye problemy teorii i praktiki. Seriya: estestvennye i tekhnicheskie nauki. 2021;(9):94–102. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.37882/2223-2966.2021.09.05.

3. Gasymova D.M., Rukhliada N.N. Mediated and unmediated influence of pathological factors on ovarian reserve (a review). [Ovarial'nyj rezerv, oposredovannoe i neposredstvennoe vliyanie patologicheskih faktorov na nego (obzor literatury)]. Problemy reprodukcii. 2017;23(6):7–11. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.17116/repro20172367-11.

4. Jirge P.R. Poor ovarian reserve. J Hum Reprod Sci. 2016;9(2):63–9. https://doi.org/10.4103/0974-1208.183514.

5. Steiner A.Z. Biomarkers of ovarian reserve as predictors of reproductive potential. Semin Reprod Med. 2013;31(6):437–42. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0033-1356479.

6. Gasparov A.S., Dubinskaya E.D., Titov D.S., Lapteva N.V. Clinical value of the ovarian reserve in reproductive function. [Klinicheskoe znachenie ovarial'nogo rezerva v realizacii reproduktivnoj funkcii]. Akusherstvo i ginekologiya. 2014;(4):11–6. (In Russ.).

7. Chernukha G.E., Tabeeva G.I., Rshtuni S.D. et al. Genes involved in premature ovarian failure. [Geny, vovlechennye v razvitie prezhdevremennogo nedostatosnochti yaichnikov]. Akusherstvo i ginekologiya. 2021;(11):71–80. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.18565/aig.2021.11.71-80.

8. Zenkina V.G., Solodkova O.A., Bozhko G.G. et al. Molecular mechanisms of oogenesis. [Molekulyarnye mekhanizmy oogeneza]. Byulleten' sibirskoj mediciny. 2021;20(2):139–47. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.20538/1682-0363-2021-2-139-147.

9. Kovalev V.V., Kudryavtseva E.V. Molecular genetic deviations and obstetric pathology. [Molekulyarno-geneticheskie deviacii i akusherskaya patologiya]. Akusherstvo i ginekologiya. 2020;(1):26–32. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.18565/aig.2020.1.26-32.

10. Altmäe S., Haller K., Peters M. et al. Allelic estrogen receptor 1 (ESR1) gene variants predict the outcome of ovarian stimulation in in vitro fertilization. Mol Hum Reprod. 2007;13(8):521–6. https://doi.org/10.1093/molehr/gam035.

11. Loutradis D., Theofanakis C., Anagnostou E. et al. Genetic profile of SNP(s) and ovulation induction. Curr Pharm Biotechnol. 2012;13(3):417– 25. https://doi.org/10.2174/138920112799361954.

12. Ayvaz O.U., Ekmekci A., Baltaci V. et al. Evaluation of in vitro fertilization parameters and estrogen receptor alpha gene polymorphisms for women with unexplained infertility. J Assist Reprod Genet. 2009;26(9–10)503–10. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10815-009-9354-2.

13. Altmäe S., Hovatta O., Stavreus-Evers A., et al. Genetic predictors of controlled ovarian hyperstimulation: Where do we stand today? Hum Reprod Update. 2011;17(6):813–28. https://doi.org/10.1093/humupd/dmr034.

14. De Santo I., McCartney A., Midliaccio I. et al. The emerging role of ESR1 mutations in luminal breast cancer as a prognostic and predictive biomarker of response to endocrine therapy. Cancers (Basel). 2019;11(12):1894. https://doi.org/10.3390/cancers11121894.

15. Boudjenah R., Molina-Gomes D., Torre A. et al. Genetic polymorphisms influence the ovarian response to rFSH stimulation in patients undergoing in vitro fertilization programs with ICSI. PLoS One. 2012;7(6):e38700. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0038700.

16. Allegra A., Marino A., Raimondo S. et al. The carriers of the A/G–G/G allelic combination of the c.2039 A>G and c.-29 G>A FSH receptor polymorphisms retrieve the highest number of oocytes in IVF/ICSI cycles. J Assist Reprod Genet. 2017;34(2):263–73. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10815-016-0835-9.

17. Lyangasova O.V., Savikina K.G., Lomteva S.V., Shkurat T.P. Polymorphic variants of the FSHR gene and the hormonal profile of assisted reproductive technology programs. [Polimorfnye varianty gena FSHR i gormonal'nyj profil' programm vspomogatel'nyh reproduktivnyh tekhnologij]. Zhivye i biokosnye sistemy. 2017;(19):6. (In Russ.).

18. Praveen V.P., Ladjouze A., Sauter K.-S. et al. Novel CYP19A1 mutations extend the genotype-phenotype correlation and reveal the impact on ovarian function. J Endocr Soc. 2020;4(4):bvaa030. https://doi.org/10.1210/jendso/bvaa030.

19. Kudryavtseva E.V. The role of detoxification genes in the formation of the pathology of the reproductive system. [Rol' genov detoksikacii v formirovanii patologii reproduktivnoj sistemy]. Vestnik ural'skoj medicinskoj akademicheskoj nauki. 2013;(2):106–9. (In Russ.).

20. Song D., Huang X.-L., Hong L. et al. Sequence variants in FSHR and CYP19A1 genes and the ovarian response to controlled ovarian stimulation. Fertil Steril. 2019;112(4):749–757.e2. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2019.05.017.

21. Abu-Musa A., Haahr T., Humaidan P. Novel physiology and definition of poor ovarian response; clinical recommendations. Int J Mol Sci. 2020;21(6):2110. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms21062110.

22. Alviggi C., Andersen C.Y., Buehler 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(6):1452–3. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2016.02.005.

23. Ponomarenko I.V. Using the method of Multifactor Dimensionality Reduction (MDR) and its modifications for analysis of gene-gene and gene-environment interactions in genetic-epidemiological studies (review). [Ispol'zovanie metoda Multifactor Dimensionality Reduction (MDR) i ego modifikacij dlya analiza gen-gennyh i genno-sredovyh vzaimodejstvij pri genetiko-epidemiologicheskih issledovaniyah (obzor)]. Nauchnye rezul'taty biomedicinskih issledovanij. 2019;5(1):4–21. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.18413/2313-8955-2019-5-1-0-1.

24. Chakova N.N., Niyazova S.S., Komissarova S.M. Intergenic interaction of sympathoadrenal and renin-angiotensin-aldosterone systems genes polymorphism in hypertrophic cardiomyopathy. [Vzaimodejstvie allel'nyh variantov genov simpatoadrenalovoj i renin-angiotenzin-al'dosteronovoj sistem pri gipertroficheskoj kardiomiopatii]. Molekulyarnaya i prikladnaya genetika. 2016;20:61–9. (In Russ.).

25. Epistasis: methods and protocols (Methods in Molecular Biology, 1253). Eds. J.H. Moore, S.M. Williams. Humana New York, 2015. 360 p. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4939-2155-3.

26. Kim S., Pyun J.-A., Kang H. et al. Epistasis between CYP19A1 and ESR1 polymorphisms is associated with premature ovarian failure. Fertil Steril. 2011;95(1):353–6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2010.07.1067.

27. Anagnostou E., Mavrogianni D., Theofanakis C. et al. ESR1, ESR2 and FSH receptor gene polymorphisms in combination: A useful genetic tool for the prediction of poor responders. Curr Pharm Biotechnol. 2012;13(3):426– 34. https://doi.org/10.2174/138920112799361891.

28. Kudryavtseva E.V. Philosophical, medical and legal aspects of reproductive genetics. [Filosofskie, medicinskie i yuridicheskie aspekty reproduktivnoj genetiki]. Ural'skij medicinskij zhurnal. 2018;(13):54–7. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.25694/URMJ.2018.13.46.

29. Sindiani A.M., Batiha O., Al-Zoubi E. et al. 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(1):69–79. https://doi.org/10.5653/cerm.2020.03706.