4.7 Article

Progestins Related to Progesterone and Testosterone Elicit Divergent Human Endometrial Transcriptomes and Biofunctions

期刊

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/ijms21072625

关键词

progestins; endometrial stromal fibroblasts; inflammation; angiogenesis; transcriptome

资金

  1. NIH/NIAID P01 grant [AI083050-05]
  2. National Institutes of Health Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute for Child Health and Human Development, Ruth L Kirschstein National Research Service Award [1F32 HD074423-02]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Progestins are widely used for the treatment of gynecologic disorders and alone, or combined with an estrogen, are used as contraceptives. While their potencies, efficacies and side effects vary due to differences in structures, doses and routes of administration, little is known about their effects on the endometrial transcriptome in the presence or absence of estrogen. Herein, we assessed the transcriptome and pathways induced by progesterone (P-4) and the three most commonly used synthetic progestins, medroxyprogesterone acetate (MPA), levonorgestrel (LNG), and norethindrone acetate (NETA), on human endometrial stromal fibroblasts (eSF), key players in endometrial physiology and reproductive success. While there were similar transcriptional responses, each progestin induced unique genes and biofunctions, consistent with their structural similarities to progesterone (P-4 and MPA) or testosterone (LNG and NETA), involving cellular proliferation, migration and invasion. Addition of estradiol (E-2) to each progestin influenced the number of differentially expressed genes and biofunctions in P-4 and MPA, while LNG and NETA signatures were more independent of E-2. Together, these data suggest different mechanisms of action for different progestins, with progestin-specific altered signatures when combined with E-2. Further investigation is warranted for a personalized approach in different gynecologic disorders, for contraception, and minimizing side effects associated with their use.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据