Cited by 42Endometriosis Research and TreatmentAnimal testing and alternativesEctopic Pregnancy Diagnosis and Management

The translational challenge in the development of new and effective therapies for endometriosis: a review of confidence from published preclinical efficacy studies

Pullen, Nick, Birch, Claire L., Douglas, Garry J., Hussain, Qasim, Pruimboom-Brees, Ingrid, Walley, Rosalind J.·2011·Human Reproduction Update

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Endometriosis is a benign gynaecological condition that presents symptoms of chronic pelvic pain and the ectopic growth of endometrial lesions at sites on the peritoneum. Few new approaches to the management of the disease symptoms and progression have emerged in decades. The cornerstone of developing new therapies is the confidence and translational value placed in the preclinical models used to assess efficacy of emerging approaches. METHODS: We systematically reviewed preclinical efficacy data from rodent and non-human primates, evaluating the effects of an investigational agent or target reported in PubMed between 2000 and 2010. We evaluated the reports for which model and end-points had been used to determine efficacy, whether there was evidence of independent replication, whether techniques had been incorporated into the experimental design to eliminate potential bias and whether there was a confirmation of drug exposure or target engagement in the study. RESULTS: We identified 94 publications that met our criteria for review. Efficacy studies were conducted in a wider range of different models with no clear consensus on which model or end-point has the most translational value. The large majority of studies either did not report what measures were incorporated into the design to address potential bias or account for it or did not confirm whether the specified target was engaged. CONCLUSIONS: Greater scrutiny of the preclinical efficacy models, end-points and experimental designs is needed if the desire of translating novel treatment approaches is to be realized for women with endometriosis.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1093/humupd/dmr030

Cites

74 of 74 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Pullen, N., Birch, C. L., Douglas, G. J., Hussain, Q., Pruimboom-Brees, I., & Walley, R. J.
Affiliations
Pfizer (United Kingdom) (GB)
Venue
Human Reproduction Update
Published
2011-07-06
Volume
17
Issue
6
Pages
791-802
ISSN
  • 1355-4786 (ISSN-L)
  • 1460-2369
OpenAlex
W2108636417
Cited by
42
References
74
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 4 · 2015: 4 · 2014: 2 · 2013: 4 · 2012: 2
FWCI
0.41
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Human Reproduction Update (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Reproductive Medicine › Endometriosis Research and Treatment
  • Health Sciences › Veterinary › Small Animals › Animal testing and alternatives
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Ectopic Pregnancy Diagnosis and Management
Keywords
endometriosis, translational research, rodent models, nonhuman primate model, target engagement, drug exposure, chronic pelvic pain
MeSH terms
Animals, Disease Models, Animal, Endometriosis, Female, Humans, Primates, Rodentia, Treatment Outcome, Cyclooxygenase 2 Inhibitors, Translational Research, Biomedical

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review