Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32143439›Full record

ReviewInternational journal of molecular sciences2020

Biomarkers for the Noninvasive Diagnosis of Endometriosis: State of the Art and Future Perspectives.

Costin Vlad Anastasiu, Marius Alexandru Moga, Andrea Elena Neculau, Andreea Bălan, Ioan Scârneciu, Roxana Maria Dragomir, Ana-Maria Dull, Liana-Maria Chicea

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in International journal of molecular sciences, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 104 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
104citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
17.5field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
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

104 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 196 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Experiences of pain communication in endometriosis: A meta-synthesis.Acta obstetricia et gynecologica Scandinavica · 2025
    Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Expression ofInternational journal of molecular sciences · 2023
    Pooled it
  5. Trial
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Evaluating Subtypes of Endometriosis in Rhesus Macaques (Macaca mulatta) Using Clinical Findings and Immunohistochemistry.Journal of the American Association for Laboratory Animal Science : JAALAS · 2026
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Review

44 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Costin Vlad AnastasiuDepartment of Medical and Surgical Specialties, Faculty of Medicine, Transilvania University of Brasov, 500019 Brasov, Romania.ORCID 0000-0002-3786-1061
Marius Alexandru MogaDepartment of Medical and Surgical Specialties, Faculty of Medicine, Transilvania University of Brasov, 500019 Brasov, Romania.
Andrea Elena NeculauDepartment of Fundamental, Prophylactic and Clinical Sciences, Faculty of Medicine, University Transilvania Brasov, 500019 Brasov, Romania.
Andreea BălanDepartment of Medical and Surgical Specialties, Faculty of Medicine, Transilvania University of Brasov, 500019 Brasov, Romania.
Ioan ScârneciuDepartment of Medical and Surgical Specialties, Faculty of Medicine, Transilvania University of Brasov, 500019 Brasov, Romania.
Roxana Maria DragomirDepartment of Medical and Surgical Specialties, Faculty of Medicine, Transilvania University of Brasov, 500019 Brasov, Romania.
Ana-Maria DullRegina Maria Hospital, 500091 Brasov, Romania.
Liana-Maria Chicea"Victor Papilian" Medical School, University "Lucian Blaga" of Sibiu, 550024 Sibiu, Romania.
Transylvania University of Brașov · ROLucian Blaga University of Sibiu · RO

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundEarly and accurate diagnosis of endometriosis is crucial for the management of this benign, yet debilitating pathology. Despite the advances of modern medicine, there is no common ground regarding the pathophysiology of this disease as it continues to affect the quality of life of millions of women of reproductive age. The lack of specific symptoms often determines a belated diagnosis. The gold standard remains invasive, surgery followed by a histopathological exam. A biomarker or a panel of biomarkers is easy to measure, usually noninvasive, and could benefit the clinician in both diagnosing and monitoring the treatment response. Several studies have advanced the idea of biomarkers for endometriosis, thereby circumventing unnecessary invasive techniques. Our paper aims at harmonizing the results of these studies in the search of promising perspectives on early diagnosis.

methodsWe selected the papers from Google Academic, PubMed, and CrossRef and reviewed recent articles from the literature, aiming to evaluate the effectiveness of various putative serum and urinary biomarkers for endometriosis.

resultsThe majority of studies focused on a panel of biomarkers, rather than a single biomarker and were unable to identify a single biomolecule or a panel of biomarkers with sufficient specificity and sensitivity in endometriosis.

conclusionNoninvasive biomarkers, proteomics, genomics, and miRNA microarray may aid the diagnosis, but further research on larger datasets along with a better understanding of the pathophysiologic mechanisms are needed.

Indexed as

AutoantibodiesBiomarkersCytokinesEndometriosisEndometriumFemaleGenomicsHumansInflammationMetabolomicsMicroRNAsNeovascularization, PathologicOligonucleotide Array Sequence AnalysisOxidative StressPeptidesProteomicsAutoantibodiesBiomarkersCytokinesMicroRNAsPeptidesangiogenesisbiomarkercytokinesendometriosisurinary biomarkers

Identifiers

PMID32143439
PMCPMC7084761
OpenAlexW3010047044

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.