Altered Endometrial Memory T-Cell Profiles During the Window of Implantation in Women with Previous Miscarriage
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Aim: This study aimed to characterize and compare the composition of central (TCM), effector (TEM), tissue-resident (TRM), and terminally differentiated (TEMRA) memory T cells in mid-luteal endometrium during the window of implantation (WOI) in women with and without a previous miscarriage. Methods: Stromal lymphocytes from endometrial samples (P + 5) were analyzed by multicolor flow cytometry to quantify total, CD4+ and CD8+ TCM (CD45RA−CCR7+), TEM (CD45RA−CCR7−), TRM (CD69+), and TEMRA (CD45RA+CCR7−) subsets. Participants were grouped as having no previous miscarriage (n = 38) or ≥1 previous miscarriage (n = 33), and the relative distribution of these memory subsets was compared between groups. Correlations, PCA and logistic regression were used to assess global memory network organization. Results: Women with prior miscarriage exhibited higher TCM proportions among total and CD8+ lymphocytes (p < 0.01), alongside lower CD8+ TEM (p = 0.02) and higher CD4+ TEM (p = 0.01). TRM showed a mild, non-significant increase (p = 0.18), while TEMRA remained stable. TRM correlated positively with both TCM (r = 0.51) and CD4+ TEM (r = 0.40), indicating coordinated organization among memory subsets. Multivariate analyses (PCA and logistic regression) confirmed these trends and identified the TCM/TEM ratio as the most discriminative parameter. Conclusions: Endometrial memory T-cell composition during the WOI differs in women with miscarriage history, characterized by central memory expansion and reduced effector memory proportions, with parallel increases in tissue-resident cells. These changes suggest persistent remodeling of the local immune memory network toward a long-lived, less differentiated phenotype that may influence implantation readiness in subsequent cycles.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".