Both researches said menstrual disorder or disturbance, not aging faster, and most important of all is it’s reversible after stop using sirolimus.
Just stop using sirolimus and see if the AMH value bounce back.
2 Likes
Thanks for sharing your story. I think the AMH change may or may not be related, and there’s obviously no way to know for sure, but it’s certainly possible IMO. The paper you shared is interesting, but obviously many limitation to the interpretation - tiny sample size and a massive range of confidence limits. I can say anecdotally that when my wife started Rapamycin, she also had some bleeding, though not really an early cycle.
Presumably you will stop taking Rapa, and you’ll take another AMH test a few months down the line? If you could share your updated experience and result, that would be really useful for others.
I honestly wouldn’t put such huge faith in a single marker, and I definitely wouldn’t be convinced by epigenetic clocks. But IMO, I would categorise taking Rapamycin when you’re a young woman hoping to have a baby as far beyond my own risk tolerance. There’s a huge amount to lose, Rapamycin during a pregnancy itself would be a terrible idea, and the potential benefits for ovarian aging are not well established at all. I hope everything works out for you.
2 Likes
@Forever29 , its been a while since I have done a deep dive into the fertility-improvement results of rapamycin done by the many labs studying this issue. I know that the Dr. Aimee, who is prescribing rapamycin for fertility improvement is having good results, and she’s a Harvard, and UCLA-trained doctor who is in communication with the Columbia University group that is also doing studies on this.
Do you know I they have been using AMH as the primary way to measure the improvements in fertility that they have seen? Rapamycin for Fertility and Menopause; Clinical Results
Obviously, while the researchers and the clinicians seem to be having generally very good results with rapamycin it doesn’t mean that everyone is having great results; perhaps a small percent have less success, but I’d be very cautious about interpreting any results until you know for certain if:
- AMH is the measure that the researchers are using to estimate the 20% fertility improvement they are seeing with rapamycin. And how/when they measure (i.e. after pausing treatment for a while, or during treatment)
- Are there other measures that are relevant, that these researchers are measuring? Exactly when and how do they measure their variables? And how do your measures compare to those other measures, if there are other measures?
Given all the positive research around rapamycin for slowing aging, and improving fertility in mammals, (dozens and dozens of studies), I would be careful about jumping to negative conclusions without a full understanding of all the relevant measures and testing protocols.
We have people here in our forums who have participated in the Columbia University Medical School fertility research; perhaps they have some insights that they can share on the measurement protocols.
6 Likes
Well I’d like you to comment my results which are extremely bad, and also, the studies I have attached saying that the number of primordial follicles dropped drastically from rapamycin in young rats etc. and even AMH immunohistocological staining was lowered.
I’m not taking rapamycin for those who said it’s reversible, I stopped in January when it triggered this faster aging
You have not read the studies it seems. It clearly says the Number Of primordial follicles (eggs!) dropped drastically in young mice.
@LilyD was in the Columbia University study on this topic (the VIBRANT study), and perhaps she can comment on the measures, etc. that they did and her results over the period of the study (if she knows them).
See her statements here: Women Taking Rapamycin for Enhanced Fertility / Menopause Prevention? - #218 by LilyD
and its important to note this:
I notice in the writeup on the VIBRANT study they mention:
Early results from the VIBRANT study suggest that it is possible for rapamycin to decrease ovarian aging by 20%. While a woman typically loses around 50 eggs each month, weekly doses of rapamycin can slow this rate, leading the ovaries to release only 15 eggs a month. Furthermore, study participants have reported improvements in their overall health, memory, hair and nails, findings which are consistent with other studies on rapamycin. By decreasing the number of mature eggs, scientists at Columbia Fertility hope that rapamycin can be utilized to delay menopause.
and I’m wondering how exactly they measure the rate of loss of eggs. Does anyone know?
3 Likes
Hi, yes, so for the Columbia study. I had to go in for testing between the 2nd and 5th day of my cycle. They took blood and measured estradiol, progesterone, AMH, FSH, and LH, and did an ultrasound of both ovaries to count follicles.
7 Likes
I have all my data, but I still don’t know whether I had placebo, and also I’m a little unsure whether at least some of the changes were due to my coming off hormonal birth control, which can depress some of these measures.
My numbers went up during the period where I was taking whatever it was - then I had a 3-week cycle for some reason, and the numbers were down at that appointment. Again, that was probably 4-6 weeks AFTER my last dose of either placebo/rapa. So while I was taking whatever pill it was, the numbers were all up. But again, lots of confounding variables, so hard to draw any conclusions.
I do know the researchers were feeling positive, i.e., that the rapa was seeming to do what they hoped it would, but again, it’s a double-blind study that hasn’t been unblinded yet, so grain of salt with everything.
6 Likes
How did your AMH change over the period of tracking / testing? Did you see any changes?
2 Likes
Yes so AMH bounced around a little but overall went up, even at the last appointment where it was lower (and I was back on my hormonal bc). I’ll just tell you all the numbers:
Initial (1 month off BC, pre-treatment): 0.24
Month 1 of treatment: 0.98
Month 2 of treatment: 0.31
Month 3 of treatment: 1.36
Month 4 (post-treatment): 0.99
Final assessment (6 months after last treatment, 2-3 months back on hormonal bc): 0.33
Unfortunately I missed some planned assessments in between, when I was still off bc, because there is only a narrow window for assessment (certain days of your period), and a couple of times that happened while the research facility was closed for a holiday. So this is what I have. I will be sure to update when I know what experimental condition I was in.
5 Likes
Thanks for the detailed information. I’m just trying to understand @Forever29 's test results. So it sounds like the exact timing of the measurement (i.e. day of the cycle) matters a lot in terms of the results you get. So I’m wondering if we don’t know the exact timing of Forever29’s testing then I’m wonder how we need to (or can) interpret her results. Do you have any insights on this, given your conversations with the researchers, etc.?
2 Likes
So yes, my understanding is that the day of the cycle matters a lot because those numbers move around quite a bit but are pretty stable in cycle day 2 or 3 especially.
5 Likes
@Forever29 I don’t know if this matters, but the measure I see on my chart is different from what you’re quoting. My AMH was measured as ng/mL, and the numbers you’re saying, 28-29, are double the top of the range for 18-25 y/o (median 3.6, range 1.02-14.63), so I’m wondering if it’s possible you could be comparing different measuring methods? I’m sorry you’re having this worry! It would freak me out too. But I hope there’s a reassuring explanation to be found.
7 Likes
@Forever29 Just want to point out that in the top study you linked, the participants were taking low-dose Sirolimus daily, not intermittently. I believe it’s known that daily dosing has very different effects from intermittent (e.g., once a week) doses, in case that gives you any comfort.
Update: I also looked up the dosing abbreviations used in this study you linked (https://www.fertstert.org/article/S0015-0282(24)01694-7/fulltext), and I believe the macaques were receiving rapa twice a day and intramuscularly, which is not how it’s typically used for anti-aging purposes. So I don’t think that these studies are necessarily relevant to what you’re experiencing, just so you don’t use them against yourself as evidence you’ve done something harmful to your fertility!
8 Likes
These studies are relevant in the lack of better ones. In fact, every single argument FOR rapamycin used in these circles is based on studies where the dose is never the one that we wanna use intermittently…but they’re still making claims based on those arguments.
And now you pick the only difference in these studies and dismissing it instead of explaining why daily low dose could cause so severe ovarian aging observed in th se studies.
Why it does it? If it’s “different” effects, how different?
Its all too blant to me
I clearly did harm myself, actually i dont blame myself I blame health influencers who make rash claims without any backup arguments.
1 Like
It might be possible if I was 6 year old child,… But it’s also evident you haven’t read my post at all where i speak that 28-29 is 4 ng/mL approx.
Sorry but you’re questioning if I’m a complete retard to compare values with different measures. LOL.
so th answer is: who would have guessed but I’m not a retard
AMH doesn’t move much.
Why are you in this forum, You don’t sound like you read studies?
AMH is not variable. Especially not 40%. Can be measured at any day. plus, keep in mind thay my cycle shortened suddenly after taking first 6 mg rapa (there is my post about it from January) , so after 15 yrs if 33 days like a clock it became 28-30. I knew from years of reading on fertility that shortening cycle is a sign of reproductive aging. My long cycle and high AMH were as i said as 25-28 year old and they dropped very drastically right after rapa.
My AMH never bounced it was always at 4.
And then dropped
Together with my circle shortening.
Your variations are small. What is your age?
It seems it went back down. Its not improvement from rapa.
I’ve seen such changes in people who don’t take it too.
But consistently 3 or 4 times over 1,5 yr having 28-29 and then 10 months later 16 is very rapid.
Your first AMH is 0.98 and your last is 0.33 and you’re saying it went up overall?
Should I scream or laugh