Assessing brain-derived neurotrophic factor as a novel clinical marker of endometriosis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate novel clinical markers of endometriosis including the neurotrophins brain-derived neurotrophic factor (BDNF), nerve growth factor (NGF), and neurotrophin 4/5 (NT4/5) and compare them to others previously reported in the literature including cancer antigen 125 (CA-125) and C-reactive protein (CRP). DESIGN: Prospective study. SETTING: University hospital. PATIENT(S): One hundred thirty-eight women were prospectively and consecutively recruited (April 2011-April 2015; cases: undergoing endometriosis surgery, n = 96; controls: benign gynecological surgery, n = 24 combined with healthy women, no history of pelvic pain, not undergoing surgery, n = 18). INTERVENTION(S): Collection of peripheral blood, gynecological and demographic information, eutopic biopsy in women undergoing laparoscopy. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): Circulating BDNF, NGF, NT4/5, CA-125, and CRP were quantified by ELISA. RESULT(S): Plasma concentrations of BDNF were significantly greater in women with endometriosis (1,091.9 pg/mL [640.4-1,683.1]; n = 68, untreated) than in controls (731.4 pg/mL [352.1-1,176.2]; n = 36), whereas circulating NGF, NT4/5, CA-125, and CRP were not different. When assessed for their ability to differentiate between women with revised Classification of the American Society of Reproductive Medicine stage 1 and 2 or stage 3 and 4 disease and controls, BDNF was the only putative marker able to identify stage 1 and 2 disease, with a sensitivity and specificity of 91.7% and 69.4%, respectively, using an arbitrary cutoff value of 1,000 pg/mL. We also demonstrated that circulating BDNF in women with endometriosis who were receiving ovarian suppression for disease was equivalent to that in the control group. This suggests that BDNF may also offer the opportunity to monitor patient response to treatment. CONCLUSION(S): Plasma BDNF is a potentially useful clinical marker of endometriosis that is superior to NGF, NT4/5, CA-125, and CRP.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.027 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".