Endometriosis is an inflammatory chronic pain condition caused by uterine tissue growing outside of the uterus that afflicts at least 11% of women (and people assigned female at birth) worldwide. This condition results in a substantial burden to these women, and society at large. Although endometriosis was first identified over 160 years ago, substantial knowledge gaps remain, including confirmation of the disease's etiology. Research funding for endometriosis is limited, with funding from bodies like the National Institutes of Health (NIH) constituting only 0.038% of the 2022 health budget—for a condition that affects 6.5 million women in the US alone and over 190 million worldwide. A major issue is that diagnosis of endometriosis is frequently delayed because surgery is required to histologically confirm the diagnosis. This delay increases symptom intensity, the risk of central and peripheral sensitization and the costs of the disease for the patient and their nation. Current conservative treatments of presumed endometriosis are pain management and birth control. Both of these methods are flawed and can be entirely ineffective for the reduction of patient suffering or improving ability to work, and neither addresses the severe infertility issues or higher risk of certain cancers. Endometriosis research deserves the funding and attention that befits a disease with its substantial prevalence, effects, and economic costs. This funding could improve patient outcomes by introducing less invasive and more timely methods for diagnosis and treatment, including options such as novel biomarkers, nanomedicine, and microbiome alterations.

Endometriosis is a chronically painful, invasive, inflammatory disease, with limited treatment options and long delays to diagnosis, which impacts 10% of females in New Zealand.IntroductionAs part of a larger group discussion study, this paper covers three themes associated with endometriosis patient experiences: intensity of pain, diagnostic tool shortcomings and perspectives of treatment options.Materials and methodsThe goal of this research was the inclusion of patient voices to guide research priorities. In early 2022, 50 New Zealand endometriosis patients participated in anonymous, asynchronous, text-based group discussions on the VisionsLive platform. The patients ranged in age from 18–48. The patients answered 50 questions, 23 text-based and 27 quantitative, and then took part in online group discussions.Results and discussionThe average age of symptom onset was 15.3 years, while the average delay from symptom onset to a working or surgically confirmed diagnosis was 7.91 years. The top five reported symptoms within the cohort were pain-based, and the participants discussed the many impacts of this pain on their work and education. The four main diagnostic tools employed on this cohort were abdominal ultrasound (72%), transvaginal ultrasound (68%), laparoscopy (82%) and sharing their symptom history with a medical practitioner (88%). The most common emotions patients experienced following receiving a diagnosis of endometriosis were relief (86%), feeling overwhelmed (54%), and anger (32%). The main treatments offered to this cohort were pain relief (96%), laparoscopic surgery (84%) and the combined oral contraceptive pill (80%). Of these three treatments, only laparoscopic surgery was viewed positively by the majority of users, with 67% considering laparoscopy an effective treatment, compared to 46% of users for pain relief, and 25% of users for the combined oral contraceptive pill.ConclusionsGathering the voice of patients revealed that long delays to diagnosis and dismissal by medical practitioners frequently manifests as a reaction of relief by patients once diagnosed. Results also showed treatment options such as pain relief and hormonal medications were often considered ineffective, but were routinely offered as the first, or only, options for patients. It is therefore important that both quicker routes to diagnosis and more effective treatment options be developed.

IntroductionEndometriosis is a common condition with average delays to diagnosis in New Zealand of almost 9 years.MethodsIn total, 50 endometriosis patients participated in anonymous, asynchronous, online group discussions about their priorities, and their experiences with the development of symptoms, seeking a diagnosis, and receiving appropriate treatment.ResultsHigher subsidy of care was the top change endometriosis patients wanted, followed by more research funding. When asked to choose whether research should be focused on improving diagnosis or improving treatment methods, the results were evenly split. Within this cohort, patients highlighted that they did not know the difference between normal menstrual discomfort and pathological endometriotic pain. If, upon seeking help, medical practitioners classified their symptoms as “normal,” these dismissals could instill doubt in patients, which made it more difficult for them to continue to seek a diagnosis and effective treatments. Patients who did not express dismissal had a significantly shorter delay from symptom onset to diagnosis of 4.6 ± 3.4 years vs. 9.0 ± 5.2 years.ConclusionDoubt is a frequent experience for endometriosis patients in New Zealand, which was reinforced by some medical practitioners who were dismissive of their pain and thus prolonged the patient's delay to diagnosis.

Endometriosis is an invasive condition that affects 10% of women (and people assigned as female at birth) worldwide. The purpose of this study was to characterize the relative invasiveness of three available endometriotic cell lines (EEC12Z, iEc-ESCs, tHESCs) to cancer cell lines (MDA-MB-231, SW1353 and EM-E6/E7/TERT) and assess whether the relative invasiveness was consistent across different invasion assays. All cell lines were subjected to transwell, spheroid drop, and spheroid-gel invasion assays, and stained for vimentin, cytokeratin, E-Cadherin and N-Cadherin to assess changes in expression. In all assays, endometriotic cell lines showed comparable invasiveness to the cancer cell lines used in this study, with no significant differences in invasiveness identified. EEC12Z cells that had invaded within the assay periods showed declines in E-Cadherin expression compared to cells that had not invaded within the assay period, without significant changes in N-Cadherin expression, which may support the hypothesis that an epithelial-to-mesenchymal transition is an influence on the invasiveness shown by this peritoneal endometriosis cell line.