Peritoneal fluid progesterone and progesterone resistance in superficial endometriosis lesions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Peritoneal fluid in ovulatory women is an ovarian exudate with higher estrogen and progesterone concentrations than in plasma. In the follicular phase, progesterone concentrations are as high as plasma concentrations in the luteal phase. After ovulation, estrogen and progesterone concentrations in the peritoneal fluid are 5-10 times higher than in plasma, both in women with and without endometriosis. The histologically proliferative aspect without secretory changes of most superficial subtle lesions is not compatible with the progesterone concentrations in the peritoneal fluid. Therefore, we have to postulate a strong progesterone resistance in these lesions. The mechanism is unclear and might be a peritoneal fluid effect in women with predisposing defects in the endometrium, or isolated endometrial glands with progesterone resistance, or subtle lesions originating from the basal endometrium: the latter hypothesis is attractive since in basal endometrium progesterone does not induce secretory changes while progesterone withdrawal, not occurring in peritoneal fluid, is required to resume mitotic activity and proliferation. Hormone concentrations in the peritoneal fluid are an important factor in understanding the medical therapy of endometriosis. The effect of oestro-progestin therapy on superficial endometriosis lesions seems to be a consequence of the decreased estrogen concentrations rather than a direct progestin effect. In conclusion, the peritoneal fluid, being a secretion product of the ovarian follicule, deserves more attention in the pathophysiology and treatment of 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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| 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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".