Faculty Opinions recommendation of Successful treatment of unresponsive thin endometrium.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To assess whether inadequate, thin endometrium (< 7 mm), after failure to expand with standard treatment options, will be responsive to cytokine treatment.DESIGN: Prospective cohort study of four patients.SETTING: Two independent IVF centers in New York City.PATIENT(S): Four consecutive women undergoing IVF who, after standard endometrial preparation, still demonstrated highly inadequate endometrium.INTERVENTION(S): Transvaginal endometrial perfusion with granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF).MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): Endometrial thickness on day of ET, with pregnancy as secondary endpoint.RESULT(S): We report successful endometrial expansion to at least minimal thickness of 7 mm after uterine perfusion with G-CSF in four patients previously resistant to treatment with estrogen and vasodilators. All four patients therefore reached ET, and all four also conceived, although one pregnancy required termination because of intramural, corneal ectopic location. Endometrial expansion to minimal thickness occurred within approximately 48 hours from infusion.CONCLUSION(S): Uterine perfusion with G-CSF represents a promising new tool for the currently mostly intractable problem of inadequate, thin endometrium. This treatment also deserves further investigation for its potential to improve implantation chances in association with IVF and, therefore, pregnancy rates.Copyright © 2011 American Society for Reproductive Medicine. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. PMID: 21324451
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 | 0.002 | 0.020 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.051 | 0.016 |
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".