Changes in the PGC-1α and mtDNA copy number may play a role in the development of pelvic organ prolapse in pre-menopausal patients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The alternations of mtDNA may play an important role in the molecular pathogenesis and process of Pelvic Organ Prolapse (POP) formation in both pre-menopausal and post-menopausal women. The aim of the present study is to analyze the association between the mitochondrial biogenesis gene and development of POP in the uterosacral ligaments (UL) of pre-menopausal women. Seventy one pre-menopausal women, all below 52 years of age, were enrolled in this study. UL biopsies were obtained from uterine specimens taken from 33 women with POP (n = 33, study group) and 38 myoma patients without POP (n = 38, control group). Quantitative Real-Time PCR was performed to measure mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) copy number and mtDNA4977. Western blotting and immunohistochemistry were used to assess the protein expression of PGC-1α, TFAM, NRF-1 and NRF-2. Statistical analysis was performed using SPSS statistical software and the Mann–Whitney U test, and the continuous variables were analyzed using the Student's t-test in demographic data. There were no significant differences in the patient demographics between the two groups (p > 0.05). The mtDNA copy number in the UL of pre-menopausal patients with prolapse was significantly higher than that in the no prolapse group (p = 0.008). There were no significant differences between the mtDNA4977 of the POP and non-POP groups, but a significantly higher expression of PGC-1α in the POP group compared to the non-POP group (1.59 ± 1.30 v.s. 0.66 ± 0.53; p = 0.036). The expression of TFAM in the POP group was higher than in the non-POP group). There was no significant difference in the TFAM(p = 0.377), NRF-1 and NRF-2 expression between the POP and non-POP groups (p = 0.647; p = 0.682). Changes in the PGC-1α and mtDNA copy number may play a role in the development of Pelvic Organ Prolapse in pre-menopausal patients.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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) | 0.002 | 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".