Some aspects of interactivity between endocrine and immune systems required for successful reproduction
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: In successful reproduction, endocrine and immune systems closely interact. We here attempt to further elucidate the relationship between androgen levels, systemic activation of the immune system and reproductive success in infertile women, utilizing 2 distinct infertile patient cohorts. METHODS: In Group 1, we investigated 322 women (ages 38.6+/-5.4 years) at initial presentation; in Group 2 125 women undergoing in vitro fertilization (169 IVF cycles, ages 38.9+/-5.5 years). In Group 1, we assessed androgens and an immune panel, previously demonstrated to discriminate between activated quiescent immune systems; in Group 2, utilizing the same immune panel, we investigated whether immune system activation relates to embryo quality in IVF cycles. RESULTS: No individual immune test within the immune panel was associated with androgen levels. The total/free testosterone ratio (TT/FT) was, however, significantly associated with presence of gammopathies (in IgG, IgM, IgA, IgE; P=0.026). Surprisingly, immune system activation was associated with significantly improved embryo quality (P=0.008), a finding persistent after adjustment for age and repeat IVF cycles (P=0.006). CONCLUSIONS: Association of immune system activation with improved embryo quality concurs with previously reported immune activation in association with normal functional ovarian reserve (FOR) and normal androgen levels, while, counter intuitively, hypoandrogenism and low FOR are associated with lack of immune system activation. Mild immune system activation, therefore, likely appears essential for establishment of pregnancy, and may be regulated by androgens.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".