4.7 Article

Do androgens have a direct effect on endometrial function? An in vitro study

期刊

FERTILITY AND STERILITY
卷 74, 期 4, 页码 771-779

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/S0015-0282(00)00711-1

关键词

androgens; cell culture; cell proliferation; endometrium; glycodelin A

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objective: To test the hypothesis that androgens have a direct effect on the function of endometrial epithelial cells. Design: In vitro study. Setting: Academic research center. Patient(s): Endometrial epithelial cells were prepared from biopsy samples obtained from normal fertile women. Interventions: Cells were incubated with androstenedione, testosterone, dihydrotestosterone, and DHEA. Main Outcome Measure(s): Secretion of glycodelin A into the culture fluid was used to assess secretory activity. Uptake of H-3-thymidine and immunostaining for Ki67 was used to assess cell growth. The specific action of the androgens was confirmed by incubation with an antiandrogen, cyproterone acetate. Result(s): Androstenedione (10(-6) M and 10(-7) M) caused a dose-dependent decrease in glycodelin A secretion, uptake of H-3-thymidine, and percentage of positive Ki67 cells in cultured human endometrial epithelial cells. Testosterone, dihydrotestosterone, and DHEA had no effect on glycodelin A secretion or H-3-thymidine uptake. The direct effect of androgens on endometrial function were confirmed by demonstrating the presence of androgen receptors in cultured endometrial epithelial cells and showing that the direct effects of the androgens were not observed when cyproterone acetate was added to the cultures. Conclusion(s): The results suggest that androstenedione can inhibit human endometrial cell growth and secretory activity. Infertility and miscarriage associated with high androgen levels (e.g., that caused by the polycystic ovary syndrome) may be due to an adverse effect of high androgen levels on the endometrium. (Fertil Steril (R) 2000;74:771-9. (C) 2000 by American Society for Reproductive Medicine.).

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