Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39185250›Full record

ArticleHuman reproduction open2024

Aging promotes accumulation of senescent and multiciliated cells in human endometrial epithelium.

Marina Loid, Darina Obukhova, Keiu Kask, Apostol Apostolov, Alvin Meltsov, Demis Tserpelis, Arthur van den Wijngaard, Signe Altmäe, Galina Yahubyan, Vesselin Baev and 11 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Human reproduction open, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Observational
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

21 authors.

Marina LoidDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Institute of Clinical Medicine, University of Tartu, Tartu, Estonia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2235-8535
Darina ObukhovaDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Institute of Clinical Medicine, University of Tartu, Tartu, Estonia.
Keiu KaskDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Institute of Clinical Medicine, University of Tartu, Tartu, Estonia.
Apostol ApostolovDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Institute of Clinical Medicine, University of Tartu, Tartu, Estonia.
Alvin MeltsovCompetence Centre on Health Technologies, Tartu, Estonia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9058-0779
Demis TserpelisDepartment of Clinical Genetics, Maastricht University Medical Centre+, Maastricht, The Netherlands.
Arthur van den WijngaardDepartment of Clinical Genetics, Maastricht University Medical Centre+, Maastricht, The Netherlands.
Signe AltmäeDepartment of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, Faculty of Sciences, University of Granada, Granada, Spain.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0708-1865
Galina YahubyanDepartment of Molecular Biology, Faculty of Biology, University of Plovdiv, Plovdiv, Bulgaria.
Vesselin BaevDepartment of Molecular Biology, Faculty of Biology, University of Plovdiv, Plovdiv, Bulgaria.
Merli SaareDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Institute of Clinical Medicine, University of Tartu, Tartu, Estonia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0221-2093
Maire PetersDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Institute of Clinical Medicine, University of Tartu, Tartu, Estonia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2063-242X
Ave MinajevaInstitute of Biomedicine and Translational Medicine, University of Tartu, Tartu, Estonia.
Priit AdlerFaculty of Science and Technology, Institute of Computer Science, University of Tartu, Tartu, Estonia.
Ganesh AcharyaDivision of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Department of Clinical Science, Intervention and Technology, Karolinska Institutet and Karolinska University Hospital, Stockholm, Sweden.
Kaarel KrjutškovDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Institute of Clinical Medicine, University of Tartu, Tartu, Estonia.
Maria NikolovaDepartment of Molecular Biology, Faculty of Biology, University of Plovdiv, Plovdiv, Bulgaria.
Felipe VilellaResearch & Medical Department, Carlos Simon Foundation, INCLIVA Health Research Institute, Valencia, Spain.
Carlos SimonResearch & Medical Department, Carlos Simon Foundation, INCLIVA Health Research Institute, Valencia, Spain.
Masoud Zamani EstekiDepartment of Clinical Genetics, Maastricht University Medical Centre+, Maastricht, The Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3909-0050
Andres SalumetsDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Institute of Clinical Medicine, University of Tartu, Tartu, Estonia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1251-8160

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

study questionWhat changes occur in the endometrium during aging, and do they impact fertility? SUMMARY ANSWER: Both the transcriptome and cellular composition of endometrial samples from women of advanced maternal age (AMA) are significantly different from that of samples from young women, suggesting specific changes in epithelial cells that may affect endometrial receptivity. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: Aging is associated with the accumulation of senescent cells in aging tissues. Reproductive aging is mostly attributed to the decline in ovarian reserve and oocyte quality, whereas the endometrium is a unique complex tissue that is monthly renewed under hormonal regulation. Several clinical studies have reported lower implantation and pregnancy rates in oocyte recipients of AMA during IVF. Molecular studies have indicated the presence of specific mutations within the epithelial cells of AMA endometrium, along with altered gene expression of bulk endometrial tissue. STUDY DESIGN SIZE DURATION: Endometrial transcriptome profiling was performed for 44 women undergoing HRT during the assessment of endometrial receptivity before IVF. Patients younger than 28 years were considered as the young maternal age (YMA) group (age 23-27 years) and women older than 45 years were considered as the AMA group (age 47-50 years). Endometrial biopsies were obtained on Day 5 of progesterone treatment and RNA was extracted. All endometrial samples were evaluated as being receptive based on the expression of 68 common endometrial receptivity markers. Endometrial samples from another 24 women classified into four age groups (YMA, intermediate age group 1 (IMA1, age 29-35), intermediate age group 2 (IMA2, age 36-44), and AMA) were obtained in the mid-secretory stage of a natural cycle (NC) and used for validation studies across the reproductive lifespan. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS SETTING

methodsA total of 24 HRT samples (12 YMA and 12 AMA) were subject to RNA sequencing (RNA-seq) and differential gene expression analysis, 20 samples (10 YMA and 10 AMA) were used for qPCR validation, and 24 NC samples (6 YMA, 6 IMA1, 6 IMA2 and 6AMA) were used for RNA-seq validation of AMA genes across the woman's reproductive lifespan. Immunohistochemistry (IHC) was used to confirm some expression changes at the protein level. Computational deconvolution using six endometrial cell type-specific transcriptomic profiles was conducted to compare the cellular composition between the groups. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: Comparisons between YMA and AMA samples identified a lower proportion of receptive endometria in the AMA group ( LARGE SCALE DATA: The raw sequencing data reported in this article are deposited at the Gene Expression Omnibus under accession code GSE236128. LIMITATIONS REASONS FOR CAUTION: This retrospective study identified changes in the endometrium of patients undergoing hormonal replacement and validated these changes using samples obtained during a NC. However, future studies must clarify the importance of these findings on the clinical outcomes of assisted reproduction. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE

findingsThe findings reported in this study have important implications for devising future strategies aimed at improving fertility management in women of advanced reproductive age. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTERESTS: This research was funded by the Estonian Research Council (grant no. PRG1076), Horizon 2020 innovation grant (ERIN, grant no. EU952516), Enterprise Estonia (grant no. EU48695), MSCA-RISE-2020 project TRENDO (grant no. 101008193), EU 874867 project HUTER, the Horizon Europe NESTOR grant (grant no. 101120075) of the European Commission, the EVA specialty program (grant no. KP111513) of the Maastricht University Medical Center (MUMC+), MICIU/AEI/10.13039/501100011033 and FEDER, EU projects Endo-Map (grant no. PID2021-12728OB-100), ROSY (grant no. CNS2022-135999), and the National Science Fund of Bulgaria (grant no. KII-06 H31/2). The authors declare no competing interests.

Indexed as

agingassisted reproductionendometrial receptivityendometriumgene expressionimmunohistochemistry

Identifiers

PMID39185250
PMCPMC11344589

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.