
Can Blocking AMH Reverse PCOS? New Study Says Yes
Reduced Quality of Life
PCOS is one of the most common causes of infertility among women of reproductive age, affecting approximately 1 in 10 women — or more than two million individuals in France alone. Currently, treatment options are limited to symptom management.
'This condition has a significant impact on women's quality of life,' said Giacobini. 'It presents with a broad spectrum of symptoms that vary between patients, including polycystic ovaries, elevated androgen levels leading to menstrual irregularities, acne, hair loss, excessive body hair, high levels of AMH, and, in some cases, metabolic syndrome. At least half of women with PCOS have associated comorbidities such as overweight or obesity, elevated insulin levels that increase the risk of developing type 2 diabetes, or cardiovascular disease.'
A Multifactorial Condition
Diagnosis of PCOS is typically based on the presence of at least two of the following three criteria: irregular menstrual cycles, clinical or biochemical signs of hyperandrogenism, and polycystic ovarian morphology as observed via ultrasound.
The exact cause of PCOS remains unclear. 'We've done extensive laboratory research using preclinical models to better understand the heritability of the syndrome,' Giacobini said. 'Genetics are a factor, but they do not fully explain the high prevalence. We've also identified epigenetic changes and environmental influences, such as hormonal exposures during fetal development or after birth. It is highly likely that PCOS has a multifactorial origin.'
In a recent study, Giacobini's team focused on the role of AMH. In PCOS, the ovaries produce excess AMH, which impairs the maturation of follicles and contributes to androgen overproduction. 'In previous preclinical studies, we found that prenatal exposure to AMH could induce PCOS-like symptoms in offspring, and these symptoms were transmitted across generations,' Giacobini explained. 'We then examined critical periods of vulnerability in humans and observed that children of women with PCOS — both daughters and sons — had elevated AMH levels, even before puberty. We also found that mice exhibited high AMH levels during 'mini-puberty,' a transient hormonal phase in early infancy.'
Blocking AMH Receptors
The research team next investigated whether blocking AMH could help prevent PCOS. To do this, they developed a novel antibody, Ha13, designed to block AMH receptors located both in the ovaries and on gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH)-producing neurons, which regulate reproductive function.
'By administering this antibody to young mice during the mini-puberty phase, we were able to prevent the development of PCOS in adulthood,' said Giacobini. 'And when we treated adult mice already exhibiting PCOS symptoms, we reversed all reproductive abnormalities — normalizing menstrual cycles, ovulation, and androgen levels.'
Giacobini views this study as 'a gateway to further research on the pharmacokinetics of this antibody, which could eventually pave the way for human trials.' Although the molecule has been patented, several steps remain before it can be considered for clinical use. 'The effects in animals are very promising, but we still need to evaluate long-term outcomes and establish optimal dosing,' he emphasized.
An Advanced Alternative
Another therapeutic avenue targeting the GnRH receptor is already further along in development. 'We published our preclinical research on GnRH antagonists in 2018, and, thanks to European funding, we were able to initiate clinical trials. The pilot-phase results have been encouraging,' Giacobini said.
'One advantage is that this molecule is already approved by the US Food and Drug Administration and the European Medicines Agency for other indications. We're already familiar with its pharmacological profile and side effects, which significantly accelerates development,' he concluded.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
That distinctive springtime smell: Asparagus pee
Along with many other delights, springtime brings the beginning of the asparagus growing season. Regardless of whether you prefer the green, purple or white variety, asparagus provides a rich source of vitamins and minerals, and its consumption as part of a healthy diet may reduce risk of cancer and cardiovascular-related diseases. Despite the nutritional benefits of asparagus, many are opposed to eating the vegetable due to its pungent aftereffects. As Benjamin Franklin wrote in 1781, 'A few stems of asparagus eaten, shall give our urine a disagreable odour.' This odor has become so well known that post-consumption urine is now often referred to as 'asparagus pee.' Scientists believe the odor in question is due to two chemicals: methanethiol and S-methyl thioester. When enzymes in the human digestive tract break down the asparagusic acid that's naturally present in the vegetable, these volatile compounds are created. When voided from the body, they become foul-smelling gas, wafting up from your asparagus pee. And just because you don't smell it doesn't mean you're not making it. Two studies have shown that people who are unable to smell the odor in their own urine also don't detect it in the urine of known producers. Yes, volunteers sniffed samples of other people's asparagus pee. Though most everyone probably produces the scent to some degree, it seems not everyone's noses pick up on it. In fact, a study my colleagues and I conducted in 2017 found that only 40 percent of those surveyed reported detecting the odor in their urine. A lower proportion of women were able to detect the odor, compared to men, despite women being thought to have a more keen sense of smell. We asked almost 7,000 participants from two large cohort studies to respond to the prompt 'After eating asparagus, you notice a strong characteristic odor in your urine.' By linking the questionnaire data with genetic data, we were able to show that the ability to smell or not to smell depends on a person's genetic makeup. Hundreds of variants in the DNA sequence across multiple genes involved in sense of smell are strongly associated with the ability to detect asparagus metabolites in urine. Asparagus isn't the only food that has genetically linked controversial smell or taste effects. Some people avoid eating cilantro because they claim it has a 'soapy' aftertaste. A study using data from almost 30,000 users of 23andMe found genetic variants in olfactory receptors linked to people's perception of this adverse taste. Maybe you can conduct your own survey at the next family meal that includes a platter of asparagus – or soon after. This article is republished from The Conversation, a nonprofit, independent news organization bringing you facts and trustworthy analysis to help you make sense of our complex world. It was written by: Sarah Coseo Markt, Harvard University Read more: Can you pass this smell test? Oral nicotine pouches deliver lower levels of toxic substances than smoking – but that doesn't mean they're safe Don't believe everything you hear about pesticides on fruits and vegetables Sarah Coseo Markt receives funding from the National Institutes of Health.
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Jim Cramer Says 'Danaher Can Make a Comeback'
Danaher Corporation (NYSE:DHR) is one of the 22 stocks Jim Cramer recently talked about. A caller inquired if Cramer thinks it is time to get back into the stock, and here's what Mad Money's host had to say in response: 'Okay, well, let me tell you, we never left it for the Charitable Trust because I have faith, ultimately, that this company will come through. Why? I've known it for 30 years. I have felt that it always does things right in the end. I am sticking by that, and I truly believe that Danaher can make a comeback. This is healthcare, a lot of IPOs are coming. They have China business. The China business isn't that bad. I am not abandoning Danaher right here.' A healthcare professional in a lab coat holding a microscope and looking at a slide under the lens. Danaher (NYSE:DHR) develops and markets products and services for medical, scientific, and industrial use. The company's technologies support bioprocessing, diagnostics, laboratory automation, genomic research, and clinical testing. While we acknowledge the potential of DHR as an investment, we believe certain AI stocks offer greater upside potential and carry less downside risk. If you're looking for an extremely undervalued AI stock that also stands to benefit significantly from Trump-era tariffs and the onshoring trend, see our free report on the best short-term AI stock. READ NEXT: The Best and Worst Dow Stocks for the Next 12 Months and 10 Unstoppable Stocks That Could Double Your Money. Disclosure: None. Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data


Fox News
2 hours ago
- Fox News
How sensationalized headlines about 'brain plastic' are undermining trust in safe, sustainable materials
Earlier this year, a terrifying claim swept headlines and social media: "You have a spoon's worth of plastic in your brain." The warning, based on a study published in Nature Medicine, set off a cultural firestorm, dominating news cycles, TikToks and dinner table conversations. It was the kind of phrase designed to go viral, and it did. But here's what didn't go viral: the follow-up. Experts later flagged the study for a critical flaw: To quantify microplastics in samples, the study relied on equipment with limitations in distinguishing plastics from other materials, leading to potential false positives. An independent expert noted: "The method is lauded for its ability to detect smaller micro- and nanoplastics than other methods can, but it will give you a lot of false positives if you do not adequately remove biological material from the sample. Most of the presumed plastic they found is polyethylene, which to me really indicates that they didn't really clean up their samples properly." The nuance, though important, didn't make the headlines. This highlights a broader issue: there's no globally standardized methods for the collection, detection and quantification of microplastics. Some microplastics studies may fail to identify whether the particle is a mineral, an organic material or something else, yet still misidentify them and claim they are microplastics. And without standardized methodologies for identifying and quantifying the different types of particles, it is difficult to generate reliable data and assess their true impact. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) states, "While there are many studies on microplastics in food, the current state of science is limited in its ability to inform regulatory risk assessment… due to several factors, including a continued lack of standardized definitions, reference materials, sample collection and preparation procedures, and appropriate quality controls, to name a few." Yet recent coverage has prioritized drama over scientific nuance, creating confusion rather than clarity. Let's be clear: microplastics are real. Everyday life, from tire dust to synthetic fibers, produces these particles. They're in the environment and potentially our bodies. But presence alone doesn't constitute a crisis. The real question is what this means for human health and how to respond responsibly. The FDA has made clear that "current scientific evidence does not demonstrate that levels of microplastics or nanoplastics detected in foods pose a risk to human health." When we treat preliminary research as settled science – or worse, viral clickbait – we lose the ability to make smart decisions. This is particularly true in the case of materials like PET, the plastic used in food packaging, water bottles and medical supplies. PET is among the safest, most rigorously tested plastics, approved globally by regulators including the FDA and EFSA. Why is this misinformation dangerous? Because it undermines trust in safe and sustainable materials like PET, which is both lightweight and recyclable. According to life cycle assessments (LCA), a PET bottle produces significantly lower greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions than alternative containers like glass bottles or aluminum cans, and requires less energy to produce. It enables safe hydration, reduces food waste and makes modern healthcare possible. Yet consumers increasingly question PET, not because science changed, but because headlines did. That disconnect carries real-world consequences. This is exactly why it is so important for our regulatory agencies to step up and address the lack of standardization in microplastics research and to develop methods and standards that allow for consistent and comparable results in research. Only then will we be able to have a more disciplined public conversation around microplastics that we can be confident is based on dependable evidence, and which stops the confusion of comparing apples to oranges. None of this is to dismiss the broader challenge of plastic pollution. Our industry – and society – must invest in better systems: smarter product design, stronger recycling infrastructure and more rigorous scientific research. But meaningful progress starts with clarity, not confusion. The public deserves facts. Not just headlines.