Advertisement

Journal of Molecular Histology

, Volume 50, Issue 6, pp 563–572 | Cite as

Localization of Mucin 1 in endometrial luminal epithelium and its expression in women with reproductive failure during implantation window

  • Fangrong Wu
  • Di Mao
  • Yingyu Liu
  • Xiaoyan Chen
  • Hui Xu
  • Tin Chiu Li
  • Chi Chiu WangEmail author
Original Paper
  • 102 Downloads

Abstract

Pinopode and Mucin 1 (MUC1) have both been proposed as morphological and molecular markers of endometrial receptivity for implantation. However, their spatial relationship in luminal epithelium and its association with reproductive failure are still unclear. This was a prospective cohort study conducted at a university assisted reproductive unit including 9 receptive control women, 18 infertile women, and 22 women with recurrent implantation failure (RIF) and 22 women with recurrent miscarriage (RM). Endometrial tissues were obtained at 7 days after luteinizing hormone surge during implantation window. Luminal epithelium was examined by scanning electron microscopy (SEM). MUC1 localization in luminal epithelium was detected by scanning immunoelectron microscopy (SIM) and compared by modified double immunofluorescence (mIF) staining without antigen retrieval. SEM did not show any significant difference in percentage of secretory cells, any stage of pinopodes, and ciliated cells between control, infertility, RIF and RM groups. SIM identified MUC1 was mainly localized on surface of ciliated cells and at the bottom of cilia, not secretory cells and pinopodes, and its specific localization was validated by mIF staining. MUC1 expression in ciliated cells in control women was significantly higher than those women with reproductive failure, but there was no significant difference between RIF and RM. In conclusion, MUC1 is mainly expressed in ciliated cells, not secretory cells and pinopodes, of the endometrial luminal epithelium during implantation window. The specific expression of MUC1 in the ciliated cells in receptive control women is higher than that of women with reproductive failure during implantation window.

Keywords

Endometrium Luminal epithelium Endometrial receptivity MUC1 Reproductive failure 

Notes

Acknowledgements

The authors are grateful to Ms. Josie Lai, Mr. Samuel Wong, Ms. Anny Cheung, and Ms. Jean Kung from Microscopy and Imaging Core laboratory, School of Biomedical Science, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, for their tremendous help in the electron microscopy studies.

Funding

This work was partially supported by Innovative and Technology Fund (ITF) from Innovative and Technology Commission of Hong Kong Special Administrative Region (ITS/376/15FX) to T.C.L and C.C.W.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors report no conflict of interests.

Supplementary material

10735_2019_9848_MOESM1_ESM.xlsx (11 kb)
Supplementary material 1 (XLSX 10 kb)

References

  1. Aplin JD, Hey NA, Graham RA (1998) Human endometrial MUC! Carries keratin sulphate: characteristic glycoforms in the luminal epithelium at receptivity. Glycobiol 8:269–276CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bentin-Ley U, Sjögren A, Nilsson L, Hamberger L, Larsen JF, Horn T (1999) Presence of uterine pinopodes at the embryo–endometrial interface during human implantation in vitro. Hum Reprod 14:515–520CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bowen JA, Bazer FW, Burghardt RC (1997) Spatial and temporal analyses of integrin and Muc-1 expression in porcine uterine epithelium and trophectoderm in vitro. Biol Reprod 56:409–415CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Coughlan C, Ledger W, Wang Q, Liu F, Demirol A, Gurgan T, Cutting R, Ong K, Sallam H, Li TC (2014) Recurrent implantation failure: definition and management. Reprod Biomed Online. 28(1):14–38CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Coy S, Du Z, Sheu SH, Woo T, Rodriguez FJ, Kieran MW, Santagata S (2016) Distinct patterns of primary and motile cilia in Rathke’s cleft cysts and craniopharyngioma subtypes. Mod Pathol 29:1446–1459CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. DeSouza MM, Mani SK, Julian J, Carson DD (1998) Reduction of mucin-1 expression during the receptive phase in the rat uterus. Biol Reprod 58:1503–1507CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Gendler SJ, Lancaster CA, Taylor-Papadimitriou J, Duhig T, Peat N, Burchell J, Pemberton L, Lalani E, Wilson D (1990) Molecular cloning and expression of human tumor-associated polymorphic epithelial mucin. J Biol Chem 265:15286–15293PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. Gipson IK, Blalock T, Tisdale A, Spurr-Michaud S, Allcorn S, Stavreus-Evers A, Gemzell K (2008) MUC16 is lost from the uterodome (Pinopode) surface of the receptive human endometrium: in vitro evidence that MUC16 is a barrier to trophoblast adherence. Biol Reprod 78:134–142CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Hagiwara H, Shibasaki S, Ohwada N (1992) Ciliogenesis in the human oviduct epithelium during the normal menstrual cycle. J Electron Microsc (Tokyo) 41:321–329Google Scholar
  10. Hey NA, Li TC, Devine PL, Graham RA, Saravelos H, Aplin JD (1995) MUC1 in secretory phase endometrium: expression in precisely dated biopsies and flushings from normal and recurrent miscarriage patients. Hum Reprod 10:2655–2662CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Horne AW, White JO, Lalani-el N, Moberley MA, Margara RA, Trew GH, Ryder TA (2002) Analysis of epitopes on endometrial epithelium by scanning immunoelectron microscopy. Biochem Biophys Res Commun 292:102–108CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Ishikawa H, Marshall WF (2011) Ciliogenesis: building the cell’s antenna. Nat Rev Mol Cell Biol 12:222–234CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Jauniaux E, Farquharson RG, Christiansen OB, Exalto N (2006) Evidence-based guidelines for the investigation and medical treatment of recurrent miscarriage. Hum Reprod 21:2216–2222CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Jin XY, Zhao LJ, Luo DH, Liu L, Dai YD, Hu XX, Wang YY, Lin X, Hong F, Li TC, Zhang SY (2017) Pinopode score around the time of implantation is predictive of successful implantation following frozen embryo transfer in hormone replacement cycles. Hum Reprod 32:2394–2403CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Lejeune B, Van Hoeck J, Leroy F (1981) Transmitter role of the luminal uterine epithelium in the induction of decidualization in rats. J Reprod Fert 61:235–240CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Margarit L, Taylor A, Roberts MH, Hopkins Davies C, Brenton AG, Conlan RS, Bunkheila A, Joels L, White JO, Gonzales D (2010) MUC1 as a discriminator between endometrium from fertile and infertile patients with PCOS and endometriosis. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 95:5320–5329CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Meseguer M, Pellicer A, Simón C (1998) MUC1 and endometrial receptivity. Mol Hum Reprod 4:1089–1098CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Nakakura T, Suzuki T, Nemoto T, Tanaka H, Asano-Hoshino A, Arisawa K, Nishijima Y, Kiuchi Y, Hagiwara H (2016) Intracellular localization of α-tubulin acetyltransferase ATAT1 in rat ciliated cells. Med Mol Morphol 49:133–143CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Nikas G, Psychoyos A (1997) Uterine Pinopodes in Peri-implantation human endometrium. Clinical Relevance. Ann N Y Acad Sci 129-42CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Quinn C, Ryan E, Claessens EA, Greenblatt E, Hawrylyshyn P, Cruickshank B, Hannam T, Dunk C, Casper RF (2007) The presence of pinopodes in the human endometrium does not delineate the implantation window. Fertil Steril 87:1015–1021CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Sheng YH, Triyana S, Wang R, Das I, Gerloff K, Florin TH, Sutton P, McGuckin MA (2012) MUC1 and MUC13 differentially regulate epithelial inflammation in response to inflammatory and infectious stimuli. Mucosal Immunol 6:557–568CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Strous GJ, Dekker J (1992) Mucin-type glycoproteins. Crit Rev Biochem Mol Biol 27:57–92CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Surveyor GA, Gendler SJ, Pemberton L, Das SK, Chakraborty I, Julian J, Pimental RA, Wegner CC, Dey SK, Carson DD (1995) Expression and steroid hormonal control of muc-1 in the mouse uterus. Endocrinology 136:3639–3647CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. The International Committee for Monitoring Assisted Reproductive Technology (ICMART) and the World Health Organization (WHO) Revised Glossary on ART Terminology (2009) https://www.who.int/reproductivehealth/publications/infertility/art_terminology2/en/accessed on 10 Mar 2019
  25. Wu FR, Chen XY, Liu YY, Liang B, Xu H, Li TC, Wang CC (2018) Decreased MUC1 in endometrium is an independent receptivity marker in recurrent implantation failure during implantation window. Reprod Biol Endocrinol 16(1):60CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Zhang Q, Hao J, Wang Y, Xu B, JingZ Zhao J (2017) Clinical validation of pinopode as a marker of endometrial receptivity: a randomized controlled trial. Fertil Steril 108:513-17.e2Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature B.V. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Faculty of MedicineThe Chinese University of Hong KongShatinHong Kong
  2. 2.Assisted Reproductive Technology Unit, Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Faculty of MedicineThe Chinese University of Hong KongShatinHong Kong
  3. 3.Li Ka Shing Institute of Health Sciences, Faculty of MedicineThe Chinese University of Hong KongShatinHong Kong
  4. 4.School of Biomedical Sciences, Faculty of MedicineThe Chinese University of Hong KongShatinHong Kong

Personalised recommendations