MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4283724252 · doi:10.1093/humrep/deac107.390

P-413 Non-autologous human platelet lysate stimulates <i>in vitro</i> proliferation of primary human endometrial cells from patients with recurrent implantation failure

2022· article· en· W4283724252 on OpenAlexaffabout
T.T.T.N Nguyen, Yat Sze Sheila Kwok, Stewart J. Russell, Clifford Librach

Bibliographic record

VenueHuman Reproduction · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicReproductive System and Pregnancy
Canadian institutionsCReATe Fertility Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEndometriumIn vitroStromal cellTrophoblastAndrologyBiologyCell cultureInternal medicineMedicineEndocrinologyImmunologyPregnancyFetusPlacenta

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Study question Does patient diagnosis impact induction of primary human endometrial cell proliferation by commercial non-autologous human platelet lysate (HPL)? Summary answer HPL stimulates in vitro proliferation of both primary endometrial epithelial cells (EECs) and stromal cells (ESCs) from patients with and without recurrent implantation failure (RIF). What is known already Inadequate endometrial receptivity and thickness are major causes for RIF. Our preliminary results suggested that non-autologous HPL stimulates in vitro proliferation of primary human EECs and ESCs isolated from patients with a history of RIF, with and without a thin endometrium (TE). In addition, using an in vitro model of embryo attachment, we reported that 48-hour treatment with HPL significantly augments the attachment of trophoblast spheroids (generated with HTR-8/SVneo cells) to EECs, suggesting an increase in endometrial receptivity following treatment. This suggests that HPL may standardize future clinical treatments for a TE and endometrial origins of RIF. Study design, size, duration Endometrial tissue was collected from five patients without RIF (control) and eighteen RIF patients at the CReATe Fertility Centre, Toronto, Canada. The eighteen RIF patients were further classified into three groups (N = 6 each) based on endometrial phenotype: 1) proliferative phase RIF only (without a TE), 2) secretory phase RIF only (without a TE), and 3) secretory phase RIF+TE (with a TE). Primary EECs and ESCs were enzymatically isolated and cultured separately. Participants/materials, setting, methods Primary EECs and ESCs were serum-starved with serum-free culture media (SFM) for 24 hours and then treated for 48 hours with the following treatment media: SFM (negative control), or SFM supplemented with 1% HPL for EECs, or 10% HPL for ESCs. Cell viability and proliferation were assessed using the metabolic assay PrestoBlue reagent and immunocytochemistry to quantify cells actively expressing the nuclear proliferation marker Ki67. Main results and the role of chance The metabolic assay demonstrated that 48-hour treatment with non-autologous HPL stimulates a similar significant increase in EEC viability and proliferation for all patient groups. EECs from patients without RIF (control) had the highest fold increase (1.49-fold, P &amp;lt;0.001), followed by proliferative phase RIF only (1.41-fold, P &amp;lt;0.001), secretory phase RIF+TE (1.39-fold, P &amp;lt;0.001), and secretory phase RIF only (1.24-fold, P &amp;lt;0.05). For ESCs, HPL stimulated a significant 2.69-fold increase in cell viability and proliferation for the secretory phase RIF+TE patient group (P &amp;lt;0.01). Pairwise comparison of the ratio of actively proliferating (Ki67+) cells between SFM and HPL treatment revealed that EECs isolated from control patients had the highest and most significant increase by 27.3% (P &amp;lt;0.05) after HPL treatment. Although not statistically significant, EECs isolated from all RIF patients displayed a similar trend of increased Ki67+ cells after HPL treatment. Whereas HPL treatment significantly increased the ratio of Ki67+ cells for ESCs isolated from both the proliferative phase (by 23.9%, P &amp;lt;0.05) and secretory phase (by 29.9%, P &amp;lt;0.05) endometrium of RIF only patients. Limitations, reasons for caution Although our data suggests that HPL treatment significantly stimulates primary endometrial cell proliferation in vitro, our sample size per group is small (N = 5-6). A larger sample size and future randomized controlled trials are needed to determine the efficacy of HPL as a treatment for a TE and/or RIF. Wider implications of the findings Our study provides the groundwork to improve clinical treatment of a TE and endometrial origins of RIF. We anticipate that in addition to stimulating cell proliferation, HPL will also induce a broad transcriptional response towards improved endometrial receptivity. We will next focus on characterizing the transcriptomic profile following HPL treatment. Trial registration number not applicable

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.144
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.012
GPT teacher head0.229
Teacher spread0.217 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHuman ReproductionSame topicReproductive System and PregnancyFrench-language works237,207