A multi-centre international study of salivary hormone oestradiol and progesterone measurements in ART monitoring. Issue 2 (February 2021)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Sakkas, Denny; Howles, Colin M.; Atkinson, Leslie; Borini, Andrea; Bosch, Ernesto A.; Bryce, Crystal; Cattoli, Monica; Copperman, Alan B.; de Bantel, Astrid Finet; French, Brian; Gerris, Jan; Granger, Steve W.; Grzegorczyk-Martin, Veronika; Lee, Joseph A.; Levy, Michael J.; Matin, Marla J.; Somers, Sara; Widra, Eric A.; Alper, Michael M.
• Is Part Of: Reproductive biomedicine online. Volume 42:Issue 2(2021)
• Page Start: 421
• Page End: 428
• Publication Date: 2021-02
• Subjects: Luteal support -- Ovarian stimulation monitoring -- Saliva estradiol -- Saliva progesterone; Human reproductive technology -- Periodicals; Human embryo -- Periodicals; Reproduction -- Periodicals; 616.692
• DOI: 10.1016/j.rbmo.2020.10.012
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 1472-6483

Abstract

Abstract: Research question: Ovarian stimulation during IVF cycles involves close monitoring of oestradiol, progesterone and ultrasound measurements of follicle growth. In contrast to blood draws, sampling saliva is less invasive. Here, a blind validation is presented of a novel saliva-based oestradiol and progesterone assay carried out in samples collected in independent IVF clinics. Design: Concurrent serum and saliva samples were collected from 324 patients at six large independent IVF laboratories. Saliva samples were frozen and run blinded. A further 18 patients had samples collected more frequently around the time of HCG trigger. Saliva samples were analysed using an immunoassay developed with Salimetrics LLC. Results: In total, 652 pairs of saliva and serum oestradiol were evaluated, with correlation coefficients ranging from 0.68 to 0.91. In the European clinics, a further 237 of saliva and serum progesterone samples were evaluated; however, the correlations were generally poorer, ranging from –0.02 to 0.22. In the patients collected more frequently, five out of 18 patients (27.8%) showed an immediate decrease in oestradiol after trigger. When progesterone samples were assessed after trigger, eight out of 18 (44.4%) showed a continued rise. Conclusions: Salivary oestradiol hormone testing correlates well to serum-based assessment, whereas progesterone values, around the time of trigger, are not consistent from patient to patient.