Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32106286›Full record

SynthesisHuman reproduction (Oxford, England)2020

Endometriotic cell culture contamination and authenticity: a source of bias in in vitro research?

Andrea Romano, Sofia Xanthoulea, Elisa Giacomini, Bert Delvoux, Eugenia Alleva, Paola Vigano

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Human reproduction (Oxford, England), 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

18 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Modelling Endometriosis Using In Vitro and In Vivo Systems.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025
    Review
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. FDX1 enhances endometriosis cell cuproptosis via G6PD-mediated redox homeostasis.Apoptosis : an international journal on programmed cell death · 2023
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Andrea RomanoObstetrics and Gynaecology Department, GROW - School for Oncology and Developmental Biology, Maastricht University, Maastricht, The Netherlands.
Sofia XanthouleaObstetrics and Gynaecology Department, GROW - School for Oncology and Developmental Biology, Maastricht University, Maastricht, The Netherlands.
Elisa GiacominiReproductive Sciences Laboratory, Division of Genetics and Cell Biology, IRCCS Ospedale San Raffaele, Milan, 20132, Italy.
Bert DelvouxObstetrics and Gynaecology Department, GROW - School for Oncology and Developmental Biology, Maastricht University, Maastricht, The Netherlands.
Eugenia AllevaObstetrics and Gynaecology Department, IRCCS San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Milan, 20132, Italy.
Paola ViganoReproductive Sciences Laboratory, Division of Genetics and Cell Biology, IRCCS Ospedale San Raffaele, Milan, 20132, Italy.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

study questionAre the primary cell cultures and cell lines used in endometriosis research of sufficient quality? SUMMARY ANSWER: Primary cells used in endometriosis research lack purity and phenotypic characterisation, and cell lines are not genotypically authenticated. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: The poor reproducibility of in vitro research and the lack of authenticity of the cell lines used represent reasons of concern in the field of reproductive biology and endometriosis research. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: In the present study, past in vitro research in the field of endometriosis was systematically reviewed to determine whether the appropriate quality controls were considered. In addition, we explored the performance of Paired Box 2 (Pax2) as an endometrium specific marker in endometrial and endometriotic primary cell cultures; we also characterised the most diffused endometriosis cell lines with respect to important markers including the short tandem repeat (STR) profile. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING,

methodsLiterature review part: almost 300 published protocols describing the isolation and creation of primary cell cultures from endometriosis were reviewed. Wet-lab part: primary cells isolated from 13 endometriosis patients were analysed by immunohistochemistry, immunofluorescence and FACS for the expression of Pax2. Cell lines Z11 and Z12, the most diffused endometriosis cell lines, were characterised with respect to the expression of Pax2, steroid hormone receptors and STR profile. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: From the literature review work, we underscored the lack of sufficient cell purity and phenotypic characterisation of primary cell cultures, which present high risk of contaminations from surrounding non-endometriotic tissues. Past work based on the use of cell lines was reviewed as well, and it emerged that cell line authentication was never performed.In an effort to address these weaknesses for future research, we present data on the performance of Pax2, a suitable marker to exclude ovarian (and other non-endometrial) cell contaminations from primary cell cultures; STR profiles of cell lines Z11 and Z12 were analysed and indicated that the cells were authentic. These profiles are now available for authentication purposes to researchers wishing to perform experiments with these cells.A quality control pipeline to assure sufficient quality of in vitro research in the field of reproductive biology and endometriosis is proposed. We encourage scientists, research institutes, journal reviewers, editors and funding bodies to raise awareness of the problem and adopt appropriate policies to solve it in the future. LARGE-SCALE DATA: STR profiles of cell lines Z11 and Z12 are deposited at the Cellosaurus database-web.expasy.org. LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: There may be additional markers suitable to assess cell quality. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE

findingsFuture in vitro research in endometriosis and the reliability of outcomes can be improved by using the recommendations presented in this study. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S): The study was partly financed by the 'Stichting Fertility Foundation' (The Netherlands). The authors declare no existing conflict of interest. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: Non-applicable.

Indexed as

EndometriosisEndometriumFemaleHumansNetherlandsPrimary Cell CultureReproducibility of Resultscell cultureendometriosisendometriumquality controlshort tandem repeat

Identifiers

PMID32106286
PMCPMC7048714

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.