Published: 2019-06-29

Modified ovarian response prediction index: a novel index for ovarian response prediction in GnRH agonist cycles

B. Kalpana, Soumya Ranjan Panda


Background: Evaluation of the ovarian reserve is necessary to achieve an appropriate controlled ovarian stimulation (COS). This can be done by correctly predicting the ovarian response. The objective of this study was to derive a simple index by combining the above parameters which will be helpful determining ovarian response.

Methods: This retrospective analysis was performed at Guru hospital, Madurai, involving 162 patients between July 2016 and July 2018. Inclusion criteria was all patients attending for their first ICSI (intracytoplasmic sperm injection) cycle between the above period, GnRH agonist protocol as the method of ovarian stimulation, no history of any previous ovarian surgery, presence of both ovaries and no evidence of any obvious endocrine disorders. We calculated MORPI values by multiplying the AMH (ng/ml) level by the number of antral follicles (2-9 mm), and the result was divided by the age (years) of the patient and the day- 3 serum FSH level.

Results: At a cut-off value of 35 (AUC-0.952) for collection of ≥ 4 oocytes and 140 (AUC-0.952) for collection of ≥ 15 oocytes, MORPI was found to have optimum sensitivity and specificity under ROC curve analysis.

Conclusions: MORPI is a simple, precise and cost effective index to predict a low ovarian response, the collection of >4 MII oocytes and an excessive ovarian response in infertile women. This index also has a good ability to predict the clinical pregnancy rate. This might be used to improve the cost-benefit ratio of ovarian stimulation regimens.


Antral follicle count, Anti-Müllerianhormone, Controlled ovarian stimulation, Follicle-stimulating hormone, Modified ovarian response prediction index

Full Text:



Coccia ME, Rizzello F. Ovarian reserve. Ann N Y AcadSci. 2008;1127:27-30.

Sills ES, Alper MM, Walsh AP. Ovarian reserve screening in infertility: practical applications and theoretical directions for research. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2009;146:30-6.

Oliveira JBA, Baruffi RL, Petersen CG. A new ovarian response prediction index (ORPI): implications for individualized controlled ovarian stimulation. Reproduct Bio Endocrinol. 2012;10:94.

Ferraretti AP, La Marca A, Fauser BC. ESHRE consensus on the definition of ’poor response’ to ovarian stimulation for in vitro fertilization: the Bologna criteria. Hum Reprod. 2011;26:1616-24.

La Marca A, Sighinolfi G, Radi D. Anti-Mullerian hormone (AMH)as a predictive marker in assisted reproductive technology (ART). Hum Reprod Update. 2010;16:113-30.

Broer SL, Dolleman M, Opmeer BC. AMH and AFC as predictors of excessive response in controlled ovarian hyper stimulation: a meta analysis. Hum Reprod Update. 2011;17:46-54.

Karimzadeh M, Ghandi S. Age and basal FSH as a predictor of ART outcome. Iranian J Reproduct Med. 2009;7(1):19-22.

Cui Y, Shi Y, Cui L, Han T, Gao X, Chen ZJ. Age-specific serum antimullerian hormone levels in women with and without polycystic ovary syndrome. Fertil Steril. 2014;102(1):230-236.e2.

Oehninger S, Nelson SM, Verweij P, Stegmann BJ. Predictive factors for ovarian response in a corifollitropinalfa/GnRH antagonist protocol for controlled ovarian stimulation in IVF/ICSI cycles. Reprod Biol Endocrinol. 2015;13:117.

Desai SS, Achrekar SK, Paranjape SR, Desai SK, Mangoli VS, Mahale SD. Association of allelic combinations of FSHR genepolymorphisms with ovarian response. Reprod Biomed. 2013;27(4):400-6.

Lazaros L, Hatzi E, Xita N. Influence of FSHR diplotypes on ovarian response to standard gonadotropin stimulation for IVF/ICSI. J Reprod Med. 2013;58:395-401.

Burks HR, Ross L, Opper N, Paulson E, Stanczyk FZ, Chung K. Can highly sensitive anti müllerian hormone testing predict failed response to ovarian stimulation? Fertil Steril. 2015;104(3):643-8.

Nelson S, Klein B, Arce J. Comparison of antimüllerian hormone levels and antral follicle count as predictor of ovarian response to controlled ovarian stimulation in good-prognosis patients at individual fertility clinics in two multicenter trials. Fertil Steril. 2015;103(4):923-930.e1.

Iliodromiti S, Kelsey TW, Wu O, Anderson RA, Nelson S. The predictive accuracy of anti-Müllerian hormone for live birth after assisted conception: a systematic review and meta-analysis of the literature. Hum Reprod Update. 2014;20(4):560-70.

La Marca A, Papaleo E, Grisendi V, Argento C, Giulini S, Volpe A. Development of a nomogram based on markers of ovarian reserve for the individualization of the follicle-stimulating hormone starting dose in in vitro fertilization cycles. BJOG. 2012;119(10):1171-9.

Allegra A, Marino A, Volpes A, Coffaro F, Scaglione P, Gullo S, et al. A randomized controlled trial investigating the use of a predictive nomogram for the selection of the FSH starting dose in IVF/ICSI cycles. Reprod Biomed. 2017;34(4):429-38.