Cited by 68Endometriosis Research and TreatmentEpigenetics and DNA MethylationPlant and fungal interactions

The influence of menstrual cycle and endometriosis on endometrial methylome

Open access
Saare, Merli, Modhukur, Vijayachitra, Suhorutshenko, Marina, Rajashekar, Balaji, Rekker, Kadri, Sõritsa, Deniss, Karro, Helle, Soplepmann, Pille +8 more·2016·Clinical Epigenetics

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Alterations in endometrial DNA methylation profile have been proposed as one potential mechanism initiating the development of endometriosis. However, the normal endometrial methylome is influenced by the cyclic hormonal changes, and the menstrual cycle phase-dependent epigenetic signature should be considered when studying endometrial disorders. So far, no studies have been performed to evaluate the menstrual cycle influences and endometriosis-specific endometrial methylation pattern at the same time. RESULTS: Infinium HumanMethylation 450K BeadChip arrays were used to explore DNA methylation profiles of endometrial tissues from various menstrual cycle phases from 31 patients with endometriosis and 24 healthy women. The DNA methylation profile of patients and controls was highly similar and only 28 differentially methylated regions (DMRs) between patients and controls were found. However, the overall magnitude of the methylation differences between patients and controls was rather small (Δβ ranging from -0.01 to -0.16 and from 0.01 to 0.08, respectively, for hypo- and hypermethylated CpGs). Unsupervised hierarchical clustering of the methylation data divided endometrial samples based on the menstrual cycle phase rather than diseased/non-diseased status. Further analysis revealed a number of menstrual cycle phase-specific epigenetic changes with largest changes occurring during the late-secretory and menstrual phases when substantial rearrangements of endometrial tissue take place. Comparison of cycle phase- and endometriosis-specific methylation profile changes revealed that 13 out of 28 endometriosis-specific DMRs were present in both datasets. CONCLUSIONS: The results of our study accentuate the importance of considering normal cyclic epigenetic changes in studies investigating endometrium-related disease-specific methylation patterns.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1186/s13148-015-0168-z

Cites

45 of 45 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • Endometrial biopsy by pipelle or curette is minimally invasive and can be useful to test endometrial receptivity in infertile women and as a diagnostic tool for endometriosis in an outpatient setting.

    “The method of obtaining endometrial sample by either pipelle or curette is minimally invasive; however, aside from minimal discomfort for the patient, biopsy can prove to be a useful not only to test endometrial receptivity in infertile women with or without endometriosis (81), but also as a diagnostic tool for endometriosis in an outpatient setting (82).”

    From Biomarkers in endometriosis: Challenges and opportunities (2017) · cites this paper as [82]

  • Saare et al. discourage the use of endometrial DNA methylome as biomarkers for endometriosis because significant methylation pattern differences in endometrium were not found that could discriminate patients from healthy women with acceptable sensitivity and specificity.

    “Already, findings by Saare et al. discourage the use of endometrial DNA methylome as biomarkers for endometriosis, because significant methylation pattern differences in the endometrium were not found that could discriminate patients from healthy women with acceptable sensitivity and specificity (82).”

    From Biomarkers in endometriosis: Challenges and opportunities (2017) · cites this paper as [82]

  • Methylation patterns between endometriosis and control endometrium were not robust enough to be useful as diagnostic biomarkers independently from menstrual cycle.

    “For example, despite finding significant methylation differences in CpG islands in the secretory phase of the menstrual cycle when endometrium samples are compared by disease (with or without endometriosis), the methylation patterns between disease and control were not simply robust to be useful as diagnostic biomarkers independently from menstrual cycle (82,100,104).”

    From Biomarkers in endometriosis: Challenges and opportunities (2017) · cites this paper as [82]

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Saare, M., Modhukur, V., Suhorutshenko, M., Rajashekar, B., Rekker, K., Sõritsa, D., Karro, H., Soplepmann, P., Sõritsa, A., Lindgren, C. M., Rahmioglu, N., Drong, A., Becker, C. M., Zondervan, K. T., Salumets, A., & Peters, M.
Affiliations
  • Tartu University Hospital (EE)
  • University of Tartu (EE)
  • Competence Centre on Health Technologies (Estonia) (EE)
  • Centre for Human Genetics (GB)
  • University of Oxford (GB)
Corresponding author
Saare, Merli
Venue
Clinical Epigenetics
Published
2016-01-12
Volume
8
Issue
1
Pages
2-2
ISSN
  • 1868-7075 (ISSN-L)
  • 1868-7083
OpenAlex
W2233824638
Cited by
68
References
45
Citations by year
2025: 7 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 14 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 9 · 2019: 7 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 8 · 2016: 4
FWCI
10.63
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by
Locations
  • Clinical Epigenetics (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DSpace repository (University of Tartu) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
Funders
  • Estonian Ministry of Education and Research (IUT34-16)
  • Ettevõtluse Arendamise Sihtasutus (EU48695)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Reproductive Medicine › Endometriosis Research and Treatment
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Epigenetics and DNA Methylation
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics › Plant and fungal interactions
Keywords
endometriosis, endometrium, DNA methylation, menstrual cycle, epigenetics, differentially methylated regions, luteal phase, menstrual cycle phases, epigenetic biomarkers
MeSH terms
Adult, Endometriosis, Endometrium, Female, Humans, Menstrual Cycle, Case-Control Studies, DNA Methylation, Oligonucleotide Array Sequence Analysis, Epigenesis, Genetic, Genome-Wide Association Study

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