Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38341605›Full record

SynthesisReproductive biology and endocrinology : RB&E2024

An integrated multi-tissue approach for endometriosis candidate biomarkers: a systematic review.

Axelle Brulport, Mathilde Bourdon, Daniel Vaiman, Christian Drouet, Khaled Pocate-Cheriet, Kheira Bouzid, Louis Marcellin, Pietro Santulli, Carole Abo, Maxime Jeljeli and 5 more

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Reproductive biology and endocrinology : RB&E, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 26 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
26citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

26 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Kisspeptin and Endometriosis-Is There a Link?Journal of clinical medicine · 2024
    Review
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

15 authors.

Axelle BrulportInstitut Pasteur, Université Paris Cité, CNRS UMR 3525, INSERM UA12, Comparative Functional Genomics Group, Paris, 75015, France. axelle.brulport@inserm.fr.
Mathilde BourdonUniversité Paris Cité, Institut Cochin, INSERM, CNRS, F-75014, Paris, France.
Daniel VaimanUniversité Paris Cité, Institut Cochin, INSERM, CNRS, F-75014, Paris, France.
Christian DrouetUniversité Paris Cité, Institut Cochin, INSERM, CNRS, F-75014, Paris, France.
Khaled Pocate-CherietUniversité Paris Cité, Institut Cochin, INSERM, CNRS, F-75014, Paris, France.
Kheira BouzidUniversité Paris Cité, Institut Cochin, INSERM, CNRS, F-75014, Paris, France.
Louis MarcellinUniversité Paris Cité, Institut Cochin, INSERM, CNRS, F-75014, Paris, France.
Pietro SantulliUniversité Paris Cité, Institut Cochin, INSERM, CNRS, F-75014, Paris, France.
Carole AboUniversité Paris Cité, Institut Cochin, INSERM, CNRS, F-75014, Paris, France.
Maxime JeljeliUniversité Paris Cité, Institut Cochin, INSERM, CNRS, F-75014, Paris, France.
Sandrine ChouzenouxUniversité Paris Cité, Institut Cochin, INSERM, CNRS, F-75014, Paris, France.
Charles ChapronUniversité Paris Cité, Institut Cochin, INSERM, CNRS, F-75014, Paris, France.
Frédéric BatteuxUniversité Paris Cité, Institut Cochin, INSERM, CNRS, F-75014, Paris, France.
Camille BerthelotInstitut Pasteur, Université Paris Cité, CNRS UMR 3525, INSERM UA12, Comparative Functional Genomics Group, Paris, 75015, France.
Ludivine DoridotUniversité Paris Cité, Institut Cochin, INSERM, CNRS, F-75014, Paris, France.

Funding

European Research Council (ERC) under the European Union's Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme grant agreement No 851360
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Biomarker identification could help in deciphering endometriosis pathophysiology in addition to their use in the development of non invasive diagnostic and prognostic approaches, that are essential to greatly improve patient care. Despite extensive efforts, no single potential biomarker or combination has been clinically validated for endometriosis.Many studies have investigated endometriosis-associated biological markers in specific tissues, but an integrative approach across tissues is lacking. The aim of this review is to propose a comprehensive overview of identified biomarkers based on tissue or biological compartment, while taking into account endometriosis phenotypes (superficial, ovarian or deep, or rASRM stages), menstrual cycle phases, treatments and symptoms.We searched PubMed and Embase databases for articles matching the following criteria: 'endometriosis' present in the title and the associated term 'biomarkers' found as Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) terms or in all fields. We restricted to publications in English and on human populations. Relevant articles published between 01 January 2005 (when endometriosis phenotypes start to be described in papers) and 01 September 2022 were critically analysed and discussed.Four hundred forty seven articles on endometriosis biomarkers that included a control group without endometriosis and provided specific information on endometriosis phenotypes are included in this review. Presence of information or adjustment controlling for menstrual cycle phase, symptoms and treatments is highlighted, and the results are further summarized by biological compartment. The 9 biological compartments studied for endometriosis biomarker research are in order of frequency: peripheral blood, eutopic endometrium, peritoneal fluid, ovaries, urine, menstrual blood, saliva, feces and cervical mucus. Adjustments of results on disease phenotypes, cycle phases, treatments and symptoms are present in 70%, 29%, 3% and 6% of selected articles, respectively. A total of 1107 biomarkers were identified in these biological compartments. Of these, 74 were found in several biological compartments by at least two independent research teams and only 4 (TNF-a, MMP-9, TIMP-1 and miR-451) are detected in at least 3 tissues with cohorts of 30 women or more.Integrative analysis is a crucial step to highlight potential pitfalls behind the lack of success in the search for clinically relevant endometriosis biomarkers, and to illuminate the physiopathology of this disease.

Indexed as

EndometriosisBiomarkersEndometriumFemaleHumansPrognosisBiomarkersBiological compartmentsCandidate biomarkersEndometriosisEndometriosis phenotypes

Identifiers

PMID38341605
PMCPMC10858544

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.