Noninvasive biomarkers of endometriosis: myth or reality?
Abstract
Endometriosis affects 10% of premenopausal women and 35-50% of women with infertility, pelvic pain, or both. At present, endometriosis can only be diagnosed with surgery, where laparoscopy is considered a gold standard. Noninvasive biomarkers are thus urgently needed. In 2010, the peripheral biomarkers of endometriosis were systematically reviewed by May et al. However, with the introduction of '-omics' technologies, we have witnessed immense progress in biomarker discovery, which now calls for an overview of recent studies. This report looks at potential blood and urine biomarkers of endometriosis published in the last 3 years. The current status of noninvasive diagnostic biomarkers of endometriosis is discussed, with the limitations of these studies identified and recommendations for future biomarker discovery provided.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
Since 2010, only 11% of reported endometriosis biomarker studies were urine-based.
“Since 2010, only 11% of reported endometriosis biomarker studies were urine-based [99].”
From Update on biomarkers for the detection of endometriosis (2015) · cites this paper as [99]
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 87 · Cited by 52
- Authors
- Lanišnik Rižner, T.
- Venue
- Expert Review of Molecular Diagnostics
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2014-03-21
- Volume
- 14
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 365-385
- ISSN
- 1473-7159 (ISSN-L)
- 1744-8352
- OpenAlex
- W2055527762
- Semantic Scholar
- 2af6e52f6315172073c52d0c73bc74c612ac0d11
- Cited by
- 52
- References
- 87
- Citations by year
- 2026: 3 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 4 · 2014: 2
- FWCI
- 0.63
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Update notices
- correction (2014-05-21)
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Expert Review of Molecular Diagnostics (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Reproductive Medicine › Endometriosis Research and Treatment
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Ectopic Pregnancy Diagnosis and Management
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Obstetrics and Gynecology › Gynecological conditions and treatments
- Keywords
- endometriosis, non-invasive biomarkers, blood biomarkers, urinary biomarkers, endometriosis diagnosis, omics technologies, biomarker discovery, infertility, pelvic pain
- MeSH terms
- Endometriosis, Female, Humans, Biomarkers, Proteome, Molecular Diagnostic Techniques, Proteomics, Transcriptome
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
