MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 20 genes were selected from the list of up-regulated genes for the validation assay. The qPCR confirmed that 19 out of the 20 genes were up-regulated in endometrial cancer compared with normal endometrium. RNA interference (RNAi) was used to knockdown the expression of the upregulated genes in ECC-1 and HEC-1A endometrial cancer cell lines and its effect on proliferation, migration and invasion were examined.
RESULTS: Knockdown of MIF, SOD2, HIF1A and SLC7A5 by RNAi significantly decreased the proliferation of ECC-1 cells (p < 0.05). Our results also showed that the knockdown of MIF, SOD2 and SLC7A5 by RNAi significantly decreased the proliferation and migration abilities of HEC-1A cells (p < 0.05). Moreover, the knockdown of SLC38A1 and HIF1A by RNAi resulted in a significant decrease in the proliferation of HEC1A cells (p < 0.05).
CONCLUSION: We have identified the biological roles of SLC38A1, MIF, SOD2, HIF1A and SLC7A5 in endometrial cancer, which opens up the possibility of using the RNAi silencing approach to design therapeutic strategies for treatment of endometrial cancer.
STUDY DESIGN: Peripheral maternal blood from 495 women was used for extraction of DNA and genotyping was carried out using the Sequenom MassARRAY platform. Maternal plasma was used to measure IL1B levels.
RESULTS: There was no significant association between the allelic and genotype distribution of IL1B single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) (rs1143634, rs1143627, rs16944) and the risk of PTB among Malaysian Malay women (rs1143634, P=0.722; rs1143627, P=0.543; rs16944, P=0.615). However, IL1B levels were significantly different between women who delivered preterm compared with those who delivered at term (P=0.030); high mean levels were observed among Malay women who delivered at preterm (mean=32.52) compared with term (mean=21.68). IL1B SNPs were not associated with IL1B plasma levels.
CONCLUSION: This study indicates a significant association between IL1B levels and reduced risk of PTB among the Malaysian Malay women. This study shows the impact of IL1B levels on susceptibility to PTB disease; however, the high levels of IL1B observed among women in the preterm group are not associated with IL1B SNPs investigated in this study; IL1B high levels may be because of other factors not explored in this study and therefore warrant further investigation.
DATA SOURCES: We searched studies published between 1980 and 2014 on endometriosis and ART outcome. We searched MEDLINE, PubMed, ClinicalTrials.gov, and Cochrane databases and performed a manual search.
METHODS OF STUDY SELECTION: A total of 1,346 articles were identified, and 36 studies were eligible to be included for data synthesis. We included published cohort studies and randomized controlled trials.
TABULATION, INTEGRATION, AND RESULTS: Compared with women without endometriosis, women with endometriosis undertaking in vitro fertilization and intracytoplasmic sperm injection have a similar live birth rate per woman (odds ratio [OR] 0.94, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.84-1.06, 13 studies, 12,682 patients, I=35%), a lower clinical pregnancy rate per woman (OR 0.78, 95% CI 0.65-0.94), 24 studies, 20,757 patients, I=66%), a lower mean number of oocyte retrieved per cycle (mean difference -1.98, 95% CI -2.87 to -1.09, 17 studies, 17,593 cycles, I=97%), and a similar miscarriage rate per woman (OR 1.26, 95% CI (0.92-1.70, nine studies, 1,259 patients, I=0%). Women with more severe disease (American Society for Reproductive Medicine III-IV) have a lower live birth rate, clinical pregnancy rate, and mean number of oocytes retrieved when compared with women with no endometriosis.
CONCLUSION: Women with and without endometriosis have comparable ART outcomes in terms of live births, whereas those with severe endometriosis have inferior outcomes. There is insufficient evidence to recommend surgery routinely before undergoing ART.
METHODS: We enrolled 160 women with hyperemesis gravidarum in a double-blind randomized trial. Participants were randomized to intravenous 4 mg ondansetron or 10 mg metoclopramide every 8 hours for 24 hours. Participants kept an emesis diary for 24 hours; at 24 hours, they expressed their well-being using a 10-point visual numeric rating scale and answered an adverse effects questionnaire. Nausea intensity was evaluated using a 10-point visual numeric rating scale at enrollment and at 8, 16, and 24 hours. Primary analysis was on an intention-to-treat basis.
RESULTS: Eighty women each were randomized to ondansetron or metoclopramide. Median well-being visual numeric rating scale scores were 9 (range, 5-10) compared with 9 (range, 4-10) (P=.33) and vomiting episodes in the first 24 hours were 1 (range, 0-9) compared with 2 (range, 0-23) (P=.38) for ondansetron compared with metoclopramide, respectively. Repeat-measures analysis of variance of nausea visual numeric rating scale showed no difference between study drugs (P=.22). Reported rates of drowsiness (12.5% compared with 30%; P=.01; number needed to treat to benefit, 6), xerostomia (10.0% compared with 23.8%; P
METHODS: Women at their first hospitalization for hyperemesis gravidarum were approached when intravenous antiemetic therapy was needed. They were randomly assigned to receive 25 mg promethazine or 10 mg metoclopramide every 8 hours for 24 hours in a double-blind study. Primary outcomes were vomiting episodes by diary and well-being visual numerical rating scale score (10-point scale) in the 24-hour main study period. Participants also filled out an adverse-effects questionnaire at 24 hours and a nausea visual numerical rating scale score at recruitment and at 8, 16, and 24 hours.
RESULTS: A total of 73 and 76 women, randomized to metoclopramide and promethazine, respectively, were analyzed. Median vomiting episodes were one (range 0-26) compared with two (range 0-26) (P=.81), and well-being visual numerical rating scale scores were 8 (range 1-10) compared with 7 (range 2-10) (P=.24) for metoclopramide and promethazine, respectively. Repeat-measures analysis of variance of the nausea visual numerical rating scale scores showed no significant difference between study drugs (F score=0.842, P=.47). Reported drowsiness (58.6% compared with 83.6%, P=.001, number needed to treat to benefit [NNTb] 5), dizziness (34.3% compared with 71.2%, P