Abstract
Purpose
The aim of this study was to evaluate whether the number of p16-positive cells in the functional layer of the endometrium could be a useful biomarker to identify women with recurrent implantation failure (RIF) undergoing in vitro fertilization (IVF) at risk of miscarriage.
Methods
Immunohistochemical staining was performed in 311 endometrial biopsies taken during mid-luteal phase using antibody against p16INK4A. The percentage of p16-positive cells was determined in luminal, glandular and stromal endometrial cells. After embryo transfer, women were divided into the following groups: unsuccessful embryo implantation (n = 151), miscarriage (n = 66) and live birth (n = 94). The percentage of p16-positive cells in all endometrial compartments was compared among these groups.
Results
We found that the percentages of p16-positive glandular and luminal epithelial endometrial cells were significantly higher in patients with live births compared to women with miscarriage (9.3% vs. 2.9%, P < 0.001; and 35.2% vs. 11.7%, P = 0.001, respectively). This tendency was not confirmed in thе stroma. The cut-off values with p16-positive luminal cells lower than 12.5% and p16-positive glandular cells lower than 3.2% could be predictive factors for miscarriage (AUC 0.80 and 0.79; sensitivity 71.3% and 74.5%; specificity 74.2% and 71.2%, respectively).
Conclusion
A decreased number of senescent p16-positive cells could be involved in the implantation failures and aetiology of recurrent miscarriage. Women with history of RIF with reduced populations of p16-positive cells in the endometrial glandular and luminal epithelium may be at greater risk for unsuccessful implantation and miscarriage. The percentage of p16-positive luminal epithelial cells may be clinically useful as a biomarker of miscarriage.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Baker DJ, Wijshake T, Tchkonia T, LeBrasseur NK, Childs BG, van de Sluis B, et al. Clearance of p16Ink4a-positive senescent cells delays ageing-associated disorders. Nature. 2011;479:232–6.
Ivanchuk SM, Mondal S, Dirks PB, Rutka JT. The INK4A/ARF locus: role in cell cycle control and apoptosis and implications for glioma growth. J Neuro-Oncol. 2001;51(3):219–29.
Koh J, Enders GH, Dynlacht BD, Harlow E. Tumour-derived p16 alleles encoding proteins defective in cell-cycle inhibition. Nature. 1995;375:506–10.
Lukas J, Parry D, Aagaard L, Mann DJ, Bartkova J, Strauss M, et al. Retinoblastoma-protein-dependent cell-cycle inhibition by the tumour suppressor p16. Nature. 1995;375:503–6.
O’Neill CJ, McCluggage WG. p16 expression in the female genital tract and its value in diagnosis. Adv Anat Pathol. 2006;13:8–15.
Mulvany NJ, Allen DG, Wilson SM. Diagnostic utility of p16INK4a: a reappraisal of its use in cervical biopsies. Pathology. 2008;40:335–44.
McCluggage WG, Jenkins D. p16 immunoreactivity may assist in the distinction between endometrial and endocervical adenocarcinoma. Int J Gynecol Pathol. 2003;22:231–5.
Ansari-Lari MA, Staebler A, Zaino RJ, Shah KV, Ronnett BM. Distinction of endocervical and endometrial adenocarcinomas: immunohistochemical p16 expression correlated with human papillomavirus (HPV) DNA detection. Am J Surg Pathol. 2004;28:160–7.
Iwasaki S, Sudo T, Miwa M, Ukita M, Morimoto A, Tamada M, et al. Endometrial stromal sarcoma: clinicopathological and immunophenotypic study of 16 cases. Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2013;288:385–91.
Moritani S, Ichihara S, Hasegawa M, Iwakoshi A, Murakami S, Sato T, et al. Stromal p16 expression differentiates endometrial polyp from endometrial hyperplasia. Virchows Arch. 2012;461:141–8.
Rajagopalan S, Long EO. Cellular senescence induced byCD158d reprograms natural killer cells to promote vascular remodeling. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2012;109:20596–601.
Brighton PJ, Maruyama Y, Fishwick K, Vrljicak P, Tewary S, Fujihara R, et al. Clearance of senescent decidual cells by uterine natural killer cells in cycling human endometrium. Elife. 2017;6:e31274.
Fluss R, Faraggi D, Reiser B. Estimation of the Youden index and its associated cutoff point. Biom J. 2005;47(4):458–72.
Perkins NJ, Schisterman EF. The Youden index and the optimal cut-point corrected for measurement error. Biom J. 2005;47(4):428–41.
Perkins NJ, Schisterman EF. The inconsistency of “optimal” cut-points using two ROC based criteria. Am J Epidemiol. 2006;163(7):670–5.
Coates A, Kung A, Mounts E, Hesla J, Bankowski B, Barbieri E, et al. Optimal euploid embryo transfer strategy, fresh versus frozen, after preimplantation genetic screening with next generation sequencing: a randomized controlled trial. Fertil Steril. 2017;107(3):723–730.e3.
Cozzolino M, Vitagliano A, Di Giovanni MV, Laganà AS, Vitale SG, Blaganje M, et al. Ultrasound-guided embryo transfer: summary of the evidence and new perspectives. A systematic review and meta-analysis. Reprod BioMed Online. 2018;36(5):524–42.
Lessey BA. Assessment of endometrial receptivity. Fertil Steril. 2011;96(3):522–9.
Martins RS, Oliani AH, Oliani DV, de Oliveira JM. Continuous endometrial volumetric analysis for endometrial receptivity assessment on assisted reproductive technology cycles. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2020;20:663.
Chan C, Virtanen C, Winegarden NA, Colgan TJ, Brown TJ, Greenblatt EM. Discovery of biomarkers of endometrial receptivity through a minimally invasive approach: a validation study with implications for assisted reproduction. Fertil Steril. 2013;100(3):810–7.
Messaoudi S, El Kasmi I, Bourdiec A, et al. 15 years of transcriptomic analysis on endometrial receptivity: what have we learnt? Fertil Res Pract. 2019;5:9.
Lessey BA, Yeh I, Castelbaum AJ, Fritz MA, Ilesanmi AO, Korzeniowski P, et al. Endometrial progesterone receptors and markers of uterine receptivity in the window of implantation. Fertil Steril. 1996;65(3):477–83.
Krylova Y, Polyakova V, Kvetnoy I, Kogan I, Dzhemlikhanova L, Niauri D, et al. Immunohistochemical criteria for endometrial receptivity in I/II stage endometriosis IVF-treated patients. Gynecol Endocrinol. 2016;32(sup2):33–6.
Yang H, Xie Y, Yang R, Wei SL, Xi Q. Expression of p16INK4a in mouse endometrium and its effect during blastocyst implantation. Sheng Li Xue Bao. 2008;60(4):547–52.
Tomari H, Kawamura T, Asanoma K, Egashira K, Kawamura K, Honjo K, et al. Contribution of senescence in human endometrial stromal cells during proliferative phase to embryo receptivity. Biol Reprod. 2020;103(1):104–13.
Hapangama DK, Kamal A, Saretzki G. Implications of telomeres and telomerase in endometrial pathology. Hum Reprod Update. 2017;23:166–87.
Williams CD, Boggess JF, LaMarque LR, Meyer WR, Murray MJ, Fritz MA, et al. A prospective, randomized study of endometrial telomerase during the menstrual cycle. The Journal of Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism. 2001;86(8):3912–7.
Radpour R, Barekati Z, Haghighi M, et al. Correlation of telomere length shortening with promoter methylation profile of p16/Rb and p53/p21 pathways in breast cancer. Mod Pathol. 2010;23:763–72.
Valentijn AJ, Saretzki G, Tempest N, Critchley HO, Hapangama DK. Human endometrial epithelial telomerase is important for epithelial proliferation and glandular formation with potential implications in endometriosis. Hum Reprod. 2015;30(12):2816–28.
Lucas ES, Dyer NP, Murakami K, Lee YH, Chan YW, Grimaldi G, et al. Loss of endometrial plasticity in recurrent pregnancy loss. Stem Cells. 2016;34:346–56.
Lucas ES, Vrljicak P, Muter J, Diniz-da-Costa MM, Brighton PJ, Kong CS, et al. Recurrent pregnancy loss is associated with a pro-senescent decidual response during the peri-implantation window. Commun Biol. 2020;3:37.
Schumacher A, Sharkey DJ, Robertson SA. Zenclussen AC. Immune cells at the fetomaternal interface: how the microenvironment modulates immune cells to foster fetal development J Immunol. 2018;201(2):325–34.
Acknowledgements
The authors are grateful to Marta Pulido, M.D., for editing the manuscript and editorial assistance.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Contributions
All authors qualify for authorship by contributing substantially to this article. DP and GS developed the original concept and design of the study. DP, RG and NV collected the data, DP performed the statistical analysis and DP, RG and GS provided input to the interpretation of the data. All authors have contributed to critical discussion and reviewed the final version of the article and approved it for publication.
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
The protocol of the study and the informed consent forms have been approved by the IRB committee of the Nadezhda Women’s Health Hospital and conform to the ethical principles of the Declaration of Helsinki for medical research involving human subjects.
Conflict of interest
The authors declare no competing interests.
Additional information
Publisher’s note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Parvanov, D., Ganeva, R., Vidolova, N. et al. Decreased number of p16-positive senescent cells in human endometrium as a marker of miscarriage. J Assist Reprod Genet 38, 2087–2095 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10815-021-02182-5
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10815-021-02182-5