Altered Gene Expression Profile in Vaginal Polypoid Endometriosis Resembles Peritoneal Endometriosis and Is Consistent with Increased Local Estrogen Production
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: In a university hospital setting, a 25-year-old woman presented with large vaginal and cervical polyps. Past medical history was significant for stage IV endometriosis. Polypectomy was performed and the polyps were histologically consistent with endometriosis. Gene expression was compared with control vaginal tissue to assess if the altered gene expression profile was similar to peritoneal endometriosis. METHODS AND RESULTS: Using quantitative reverse transcription, real-time PCR, estrogen receptor-β expression was found to be upregulated 10-fold while estrogen receptor-α expression was downregulated 5-fold in the vaginal polyp relative to control vaginal tissue. The estrogen-synthesizing enzyme aromatase was upregulated 8-fold and 3β-hydroxysteroid dehydrogenase was upregulated 400-fold in the polyp. Immunohistochemical staining revealed altered cell type localization for progesterone receptor in the polyp and increased cell proliferation in polyp stromal cells relative to control. CONCLUSIONS: Increased proliferation in the vaginal polypoid endometriotic tissue may be due to increased local estrogen production. The altered gene expression profile was very similar to the altered gene expression profile seen in peritoneal endometriosis.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".