ArticleBMC biology2026
Uterine microbiome signatures associated with endometriosis.
Article in BMC biology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundEndometriosis is a chronic inflammatory disorder affecting ~ 10% of reproductive-age women, often causing pelvic pain and infertility. Despite its prevalence, diagnosis remains delayed due to non-specific symptoms and lack of reliable non-invasive biomarkers. Emerging evidence implicates the microbiome in disease pathogenesis.
resultsWe analyzed uterine microbiomes from 266 tissue samples collected during either the proliferative or secretory phase, using 16S rRNA gene sequencing. Genus-level analysis revealed variable Lactobacillus abundance among all individuals. Prevotella showed borderline enrichment in proliferative-phase patients. Sub-genus analyses identified a small number of differentially abundant taxa, though none remained significant after FDR correction. To capture subtle microbial shifts, we developed a feature set combining weakly differential taxa, algorithmically selected taxa via machine learning, and a functional dysbiosis score. A supervised classifier trained on proliferative-phase data achieved moderate predictive performance (AUC = 0.70), while secretory-phase models performed more poorly (AUC = 0.58).
conclusionsThe uterine microbiome shows phase-dependent differences in its potential to inform endometriosis status. Although no robust individual microbial biomarkers were identified, machine learning models incorporating subtle community features from the proliferative phase yielded modest diagnostic potential. These results highlight the importance of menstrual cycle-aware sampling and support further development of microbiome-informed diagnostic tools for endometriosis.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.