EndoTime: non-categorical timing estimates for luteal endometrium.


Journal

Human reproduction (Oxford, England)
ISSN: 1460-2350
Titre abrégé: Hum Reprod
Pays: England
ID NLM: 8701199

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
01 04 2022
Historique:
received: 31 07 2021
revised: 09 12 2021
pubmed: 30 1 2022
medline: 5 4 2022
entrez: 29 1 2022
Statut: ppublish

Résumé

Can the accuracy of timing of luteal phase endometrial biopsies based on urinary ovulation testing be improved by measuring the expression of a small number of genes and a continuous, non-categorical modelling approach? Measuring the expression levels of six genes (IL2RB, IGFBP1, CXCL14, DPP4, GPX3 and SLC15A2) is sufficient to obtain substantially more accurate timing estimates and to assess the reliability of timing estimates for each sample. Commercially available endometrial timing approaches based on gene expression require large gene sets and use a categorical approach that classifies samples as pre-receptive, receptive or post-receptive. Gene expression was measured by RTq-PCR in different sample sets, comprising a total of 664 endometrial biopsies obtained 4-12 days after a self-reported positive home ovulation test. A further 36 endometrial samples were profiled by RTq-PCR as well as RNA-sequencing. A computational procedure, named 'EndoTime', was established that models the temporal profile of each gene and estimates the timing of each sample. Iterating these steps, temporal profiles are gradually refined as sample timings are being updated, and confidence in timing estimates is increased. After convergence, the method reports updated timing estimates for each sample while preserving the overall distribution of time points. The Wilcoxon rank-sum test was used to confirm that ordering samples by EndoTime estimates yields sharper temporal expression profiles for held-out genes (not used when determining sample timings) than ordering the same expression values by patient-reported times (GPX3: P < 0.005; CXCL14: P < 2.7e-6; DPP4: P < 3.7e-13). Pearson correlation between EndoTime estimates for the same sample set but based on RTq-PCR or RNA-sequencing data showed a high degree of congruency between the two (P = 8.6e-10, R2 = 0.687). Estimated timings did not differ significantly between control subjects and patients with recurrent pregnancy loss or recurrent implantation failure (P > 0.05). The RTq-PCR data files are available via the GitHub repository for the EndoTime software at https://github.com/AE-Mitchell/EndoTime, as is the code used for pre-processing of RTq-PCR data. The RNA-sequencing data are available on GEO (accession GSE180485). Timing estimates are informed by glandular gene expression and will only represent the temporal state of other endometrial cell types if in synchrony with the epithelium. Methods that estimate the day of ovulation are still required as these data are essential inputs in our method. Our approach, in its current iteration, performs batch correction such that larger sample batches impart greater accuracy to timing estimations. In theory, our method requires endometrial samples obtained at different days in the luteal phase. In practice, however, this is not a concern as timings based on urinary ovulation testing are associated with a sufficient level of noise to ensure that a variety of time points will be sampled. Our method is the first to assay the temporal state of luteal-phase endometrial samples on a continuous domain. It is freely available with fully shared data and open-source software. EndoTime enables accurate temporal profiling of any gene in luteal endometrial samples for a wide range of research applications and, potentially, clinical use. This study was supported by a Wellcome Trust Investigator Award (Grant/Award Number: 212233/Z/18/Z) and the Tommy's National Miscarriage Research Centre. None of the authors have any competing interests. J.L. was funded by the Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council (UK) through the Midlands Integrative Biology Training Partnership (MIBTP, BB/M01116X/1).

Identifiants

pubmed: 35092277
pii: 6517177
doi: 10.1093/humrep/deac006
pmc: PMC8971653
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

747-761

Subventions

Organisme : Wellcome Trust
Pays : United Kingdom
Organisme : Wellcome Trust
ID : 212233/Z/18/Z
Pays : United Kingdom

Informations de copyright

© The Author(s) 2022. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology.

Références

Endocr Rev. 2014 Dec;35(6):851-905
pubmed: 25141152
Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2017 Jan;216(1):40.e1-40.e11
pubmed: 27503621
Genome Biol. 2009;10(3):R25
pubmed: 19261174
EBioMedicine. 2020 Jan;51:102597
pubmed: 31928963
Clin Chem Lab Med. 2015 Jun;53(7):1099-108
pubmed: 25720077
Sci Immunol. 2021 Feb 19;6(56):
pubmed: 33617461
Hum Reprod. 2021 Mar 18;36(4):1065-1073
pubmed: 33394013
Sci Rep. 2016 Jan 22;6:19411
pubmed: 26797113
Trends Endocrinol Metab. 1995 Mar;6(2):60-9
pubmed: 18406685
Reprod Sci. 2021 Jan;28(1):69-78
pubmed: 32725589
Hum Reprod. 2009 Jan;24(1):198-205
pubmed: 18835874
Fertil Steril. 1999 Jun;71(6):1040-7
pubmed: 10360907
Hum Reprod. 2018 Feb 1;33(2):220-228
pubmed: 29315421
Bioinformatics. 2015 Jan 15;31(2):166-9
pubmed: 25260700
Fertil Steril. 2019 Oct;112(4 Suppl1):e93-e115
pubmed: 31623748
BMJ. 2019 Mar 20;364:l869
pubmed: 30894356
Chronobiol Int. 2011 Feb;28(1):1-9
pubmed: 21182399
Fertil Steril. 2004 Nov;82(5):1264-72
pubmed: 15533340
Fertil Steril. 2011 Jul;96(1):150-155.e5
pubmed: 21601191
Fertil Steril. 2009 Jun;91(6):2602-10
pubmed: 18684446
Fertil Steril. 2003 Jul;80(1):146-56
pubmed: 12849817
Mol Hum Reprod. 2021 Mar 24;27(4):
pubmed: 33576824
Genome Biol. 2014;15(12):550
pubmed: 25516281
Fertil Steril. 2011 Jan;95(1):50-60, 60.e1-15
pubmed: 20619403
Fertil Steril. 2004 May;81(5):1333-43
pubmed: 15136099
Acta Histochem. 2010 May;112(3):203-14
pubmed: 19481785
FASEB J. 2015 Apr;29(4):1603-14
pubmed: 25573754
Eur J Contracept Reprod Health Care. 2015;20(6):438-50
pubmed: 26018113
Hum Reprod. 2018 Nov 1;33(11):2074-2086
pubmed: 30295736
J Assist Reprod Genet. 2006 Jul-Aug;23(7-8):299-303
pubmed: 16983518
Stem Cells. 2021 Aug;39(8):1067-1080
pubmed: 33764639
Reprod Biol Endocrinol. 2012 Dec 07;10:106
pubmed: 23216986
Commun Biol. 2020 Jan 21;3(1):37
pubmed: 31965050
Bioinformatics. 2009 May 1;25(9):1105-11
pubmed: 19289445
Hum Reprod. 1998 Jun;13 Suppl 3:247-58; discussion 259-61
pubmed: 9755427
Nat Med. 2020 Oct;26(10):1644-1653
pubmed: 32929266
Hum Reprod Open. 2020 Apr 16;2020(2):hoaa011
pubmed: 32328534
Elife. 2017 Dec 11;6:
pubmed: 29227245
Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2020 Aug;223(2):167-176
pubmed: 32008730
Hum Reprod. 2018 Apr 1;33(4):626-635
pubmed: 29452422
Bioinformatics. 2009 Aug 15;25(16):2078-9
pubmed: 19505943
Fertil Steril. 2013 Sep;100(3):818-24
pubmed: 23756099

Auteurs

Julia Lipecki (J)

School of Life Sciences, University of Warwick, Coventry, UK.

Andrew E Mitchell (AE)

Warwick Medical School, University of Warwick, Coventry, UK.

Joanne Muter (J)

Warwick Medical School, University of Warwick, Coventry, UK.
Tommy's National Centre for Miscarriage Research, University Hospitals Coventry and Warwickshire National Health Service Trust, Coventry, UK.

Emma S Lucas (ES)

Warwick Medical School, University of Warwick, Coventry, UK.

Komal Makwana (K)

Warwick Medical School, University of Warwick, Coventry, UK.

Katherine Fishwick (K)

Warwick Medical School, University of Warwick, Coventry, UK.

Joshua Odendaal (J)

Warwick Medical School, University of Warwick, Coventry, UK.

Amelia Hawkes (A)

Warwick Medical School, University of Warwick, Coventry, UK.

Pavle Vrljicak (P)

Warwick Medical School, University of Warwick, Coventry, UK.

Jan J Brosens (JJ)

Warwick Medical School, University of Warwick, Coventry, UK.
Tommy's National Centre for Miscarriage Research, University Hospitals Coventry and Warwickshire National Health Service Trust, Coventry, UK.

Sascha Ott (S)

Warwick Medical School, University of Warwick, Coventry, UK.
Bioinformatics RTP, Research Technology Platforms, University of Warwick, Coventry, UK.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH