Human granulosa cells of poor ovarian responder patients display telomeres shortening.
Granulosa cell
IVF
Oocyte retrieval
Poor ovarian responders
Telomere
Journal
Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics
ISSN: 1573-7330
Titre abrégé: J Assist Reprod Genet
Pays: Netherlands
ID NLM: 9206495
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Aug 2023
Aug 2023
Historique:
received:
23
04
2023
accepted:
12
06
2023
pmc-release:
01
08
2024
medline:
27
7
2023
pubmed:
11
7
2023
entrez:
11
7
2023
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
We aimed to compare the telomere length in granulosa cells of the young normal and poor ovarian responder patients and elderly patients undergoing ovarian stimulation for IVF. The main outcome measures granulosa cells telomere Length in the 3 study groups of patients undergoing IVF treatment in our center. 1) young normal responder patients (< 35 years); 2) young (< 35 years) poor ovarian responder patients; and 3) Elderly patients (40-45 years). Granulosa cells were obtained at the time of oocyte retrieval. Granulosa cells telomere length was assessed by absolute human telomere length quantification qPCR Assay. The telomere length of the young normal responder was significantly longer as compared to young poor ovarian responder (15.5 vs 9.6 KB, p < 0.001) and the elderly patients (15.5 vs 10.66 KB, p < 0.002). No significant difference was observed in the telomere length between the young poor ovarian responder and the elderly patients. Granulosa cells telomere length of the young normal responder was found to be significantly longer than young poor ovarian responder or elderly patients, highlighting the role of telomere length as a predictor, or contributor to poor oocyte yield following IVF treatment.
Identifiants
pubmed: 37432588
doi: 10.1007/s10815-023-02860-6
pii: 10.1007/s10815-023-02860-6
pmc: PMC10371957
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
1943-1947Informations de copyright
© 2023. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature.
Références
Biol Reprod. 2019 Feb 1;100(2):305-317
pubmed: 30277496
Hum Reprod. 2011 Jul;26(7):1616-24
pubmed: 21505041
Biochim Biophys Acta. 1991 Apr 16;1072(1):1-7
pubmed: 1850299
Gynecol Endocrinol. 1994 Dec;8(4):277-86
pubmed: 7709768
Genes Dev. 2005 Sep 15;19(18):2100-10
pubmed: 16166375
Mech Ageing Dev. 2008 Jan-Feb;129(1-2):3-10
pubmed: 18215413
Cell. 2001 Oct 5;107(1):67-77
pubmed: 11595186
Hum Reprod. 2013 Apr;28(4):929-36
pubmed: 23377770
Nat Rev Genet. 2019 May;20(5):299-309
pubmed: 30760854
Nat Cell Biol. 2007 Dec;9(12):1436-41
pubmed: 17982445
Nature. 2000 Nov 2;408(6808):53-6
pubmed: 11081503
Reproduction. 2015 Mar;149(3):R139-57
pubmed: 25670871
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2004 Apr 27;101(17):6496-501
pubmed: 15084742
Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2005 Jul;272(2):113-6
pubmed: 15868185
Curr Biol. 1998 Feb 26;8(5):279-82
pubmed: 9501072
Dev Genet. 1996;18(2):173-9
pubmed: 8934879
Science. 1998 Jan 16;279(5349):349-52
pubmed: 9454332
Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2005 Apr;192(4):1256-60; discussion 1260-1
pubmed: 15846215
Biol Reprod. 1999 Aug;61(2):358-66
pubmed: 10411512
J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2009 Dec;94(12):4835-43
pubmed: 19864453
Nucleic Acids Res. 2016 Sep 30;44(17):8086-96
pubmed: 27220467
Nucleic Acids Res. 2007;35(22):7417-28
pubmed: 17913751
Mol Hum Reprod. 2001 Oct;7(10):947-55
pubmed: 11574663
PLoS Genet. 2011 Jun;7(6):e1002161
pubmed: 21738493
Fertil Steril. 2016 Jun;105(6):1452-3
pubmed: 26921622
Andrologia. 2013 Oct;45(5):289-304
pubmed: 22928904
Reprod Fertil Dev. 2009;21(1):10-4
pubmed: 19152740
Reprod Biol Endocrinol. 2013 Nov 21;11:108
pubmed: 24261933
Hum Reprod. 2009 May;24(5):1206-11
pubmed: 19202142