MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4322718524 · doi:10.1093/humupd/dmad004

Angiogenesis in abnormal uterine bleeding: a narrative review

2023· review· en· W4322718524 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Mei‐An Middelkoop, Emma E. Don, Wouter J.K. Hehenkamp, Nicole J. Polman, Arjan W. Griffioen, Judith A.F. Huirne

Bibliographic record

VenueHuman Reproduction Update · 2023
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicUterine Myomas and Treatments
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersKWF KankerbestrijdingAmsterdam University Medical Centers
KeywordsNarrativeUterine bleedingAngiogenesisMedicineGynecologyInternal medicineLiteratureArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Abnormal uterine bleeding (AUB) has a significant socioeconomic impact since it considerably impacts quality of life. Therapeutic options are frequently based on trial and error and do not target disease aetiology. Pathophysiological insight in this disease is required for the development of novel treatment options. If no underlying cause is found for the AUB (e.g. fibroids, adenomyosis, polyps), endometrial-AUB (AUB-E) is usually caused by a primary endometrium disorder. When AUB is induced by prescribed (exogenous) hormones, it is classified as iatrogenic-AUB (AUB-I). Considering vascular modulation and function, AUB-E and AUB-I both could potentially result from abnormal vascularization in the endometrium due to alterations in the process of angiogenesis and vascular maturation. OBJECTIVE AND RATIONALE: We aim to investigate the fundamental role of angiogenesis and vascular maturation in patients with AUB and hypothesize that aberrant endometrial angiogenesis has an important role in the aetiology of both AUB-E and AUB-I, possibly through different mechanisms. SEARCH METHODS: A systematic literature search was performed until September 2021 in the Cochrane Library Databases, Embase, PubMed, and Web of Science, with search terms such as angiogenesis and abnormal uterine bleeding. Included studies reported on angiogenesis in the endometrium of premenopausal women with AUB-E or AUB-I. Case reports, letters, reviews, editorial articles, and studies on AUB with causes classified by the International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics as myometrial, oncological, or infectious, were excluded. Study quality was assessed by risk of bias, using the Cochrane tool and the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. OUTCOMES: Thirty-five out of 2158 articles were included. In patients with AUB-E, vascular endothelial growth factor A and its receptors (1 and 2), as well as the angiopoietin-1:angiopoietin-2 ratio and Tie-1, were significantly increased. Several studies reported on the differential expression of other pro- and antiangiogenic factors in patients with AUB-E, suggesting aberrant vascular maturation and impaired vessel integrity. Overall, endometrial microvessel density (MVD) was comparable in patients with AUB-E and controls. Interestingly, patients with AUB-I showed a higher MVD and higher expression of proangiogenic factors when compared to controls, in particular after short-term hormone exposure. This effect was gradually lost after longer-term exposure, while alterations in vessel maturation were observed after both short- and long-term exposures. WIDER IMPLICATIONS: AUB-E and AUB-I are most likely associated with aberrant endometrial angiogenesis and impaired vessel maturation. This review supports existing evidence that increased proangiogenic and decreased antiangiogenic factors cause impaired vessel maturation, resulting in more fragile and permeable vessels. This matches our hypothesis and these mechanisms appear to play an important role in the pathophysiology of AUB-E and AUB-I. Exploring the alterations in angiogenesis in these patients could provide treatment targets for AUB.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.002
Bibliometrics0.0080.009
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.109
GPT teacher head0.413
Teacher spread0.304 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations48
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHuman Reproduction UpdateSame topicUterine Myomas and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207