STUDY QUESTION Are there specific autoantibody profiles in patients with endometriosis that are different from those in controls? SUMMARY ANSWER This study did not reveal a significantly higher prevalence of autoantibodies in the studied groups of patients. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY Various inflammatory factors are postulated to be involved in the pathomechanisms of endometriosis, and a potential link exists with autoimmune diseases, which may also play an important role. As the diagnosis of endometriosis remains invasive, it can only be confirmed using laparoscopy with histopathological examination of tissues. Numerous studies have focused on identifying useful biomarkers to confirm the disease, but without unequivocal effects. Autoantibodies are promising molecules that serve as potential prognostic factors. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION A multicentre, cross-sectional study was conducted over 18 months (between 2018 and 2019), at eight Departments of Obstetrics and Gynaecology in several cities across Poland on 137 patients undergoing laparoscopic examination for the diagnosis of endometriosis. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTINGS, METHODS During laparoscopy, we obtained plasma samples from 137 patients and peritoneal fluid (PF) samples from 98 patients. Patients with autoimmune diseases were excluded from the study. Autoantibody profiling was performed using HuProt v3.1 human proteome microarrays. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE We observed no significant differences in the expression of autoantibodies in the plasma or PF between the endometriosis and control groups. The study revealed that in the PF of women with Stage II endometriosis, compared with other stages, there were significantly higher reactivity signals for ANAPC15 and GABPB1 (adj. P < 0.016 and adj. P < 0.026, respectively; logFC > 1 in both cases). Comparison of the luteal and follicular phases in endometriosis patients revealed that levels of NEIL1 (adj. P < 0.029), MAGEB4 (adj. P < 0.029), and TNIP2 (adj. P < 0.042) autoantibody signals were significantly higher in the luteal phase than in the follicular phase in PF samples of patients with endometriosis. No differences were observed between the two phases of the cycle in plasma or between women with endometriosis and controls. Clustering of PF and plasma samples did not reveal unique autoantibody profiles for endometriosis; however, comparison of PF and plasma in the same patient showed a high degree of concordance. LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION Although this study was performed using the highest-throughput protein array available, it does not cover the entire human proteome and cannot be used to study potentially promising post-translational modifications. Autoantibody levels depend on numerous factors, such as infections; therefore the autoantibody tests should be repeated for more objective results. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS Although endometriosis has been linked to different autoimmune diseases, it is unlikely that autoimmune responses mediated by specific autoantibodies play a pivotal role in the pathogenesis of this inflammatory disease. Our study shows that in searching for biomarkers of endometriosis, it may be more efficient to use higher-throughput proteomic microarrays, which may allow the detection of potentially new biomarkers. Only research on such a scale, and possibly with different technologies, can help discover biomarkers that will change the method of endometriosis diagnosis. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S) This study was funded by a grant from the Polish Ministry of Health (grant no. 6/6/4/1/NPZ/2017/1210/1352). It was also funded by the Estonian Research Council (grant PRG1076) and the Horizon 2020 Innovation Grant (ERIN; grant no. EU952516), Enterprise Estonia (grant no. EU48695), and MSCA-RISE-2020 project TRENDO (grant no. 101008193). The authors declare that there is no conflict of interest. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER N/A.

No abstract

Laparoscopy as a diagnostic tool for patients with suspected endometriosis is associated with several potentially life-threatening complications. Therefore, it is imperative to identify reliable, non-invasive biomarkers of the disease. The aim of this study was to analyse the concentrations of fibronectin and type IV collagen in peritoneal fluid and plasma to assess their role as potential biomarkers in the diagnosis of endometriosis. Fibronectin and collagen IV protein levels were assessed by surface plasmon resonance imaging (SPRi) biosensors with the usage of monoclonal antibodies. All patients enrolled in the study were referred for laparoscopy for the diagnosis of infertility or chronic pelvic pain (n = 84). The study group included patients with endometriosis confirmed during surgery (n = 49). The concentration of fibronectin in the plasma (329.3 ± 98.5 mg/L) and peritoneal fluid (26.8 ± 11.1 μg/L) in women with endometriosis was significantly higher than in the control group (251.2 ± 84.0 mg/L, 7.0 ± 5.9 μg/L). Fibronectin levels were independent of endometriosis stage (p = 0.874, p = 0.469). No significant differences were observed in collagen IV levels (p = 0.385, p = 0.465). The presence of elevated levels of fibronectin may indicate abnormalities in cell–ECM signalling during the course of endometriosis, and may be a potential biomarker for early detection.

Cadherin 12 (CDH 12) can play a role in the pathogenesis of endometriosis. The aim of this study was to compare the levels of cadherin 12 in the peritoneal fluid between women with and without endometriosis. This was a multicenter cross-sectional study. Eighty-two patients undergoing laparoscopic procedures were enrolled in the study. Cadherin 12 concentrations were determined using the enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay. The level of statistical significance was set at p < 0.05. No differences in cadherin 12 concentrations between patients with and without endometriosis were observed (p = 0.4). Subgroup analyses showed that CDH 12 concentrations were significantly higher in patients with infertility or primary infertility and endometriosis in comparison with patients without endometriosis and without infertility or primary infertility (p = 0.02) and also higher in patients with stage I or II endometriosis and infertility or primary infertility than in patients without endometriosis and infertility or primary infertility (p = 0.03, p = 0.048, respectively). In total, CDH 12 levels were significantly higher in patients diagnosed with infertility or primary infertility (p = 0.0092, p = 0.009, respectively) than in fertile women. Cadherin 12 can possibly play a role in the pathogenesis of infertility, both in women with and without endometriosis.

Zinc finger E-box-binding homeobox 1 (ZEB1) and zinc finger E-box-binding homeobox 2 (ZEB2) are transcription factors that regulate epithelial–mesenchymal transformation (EMT). The aim of this study was to compare levels of ZEB1 and ZEB2 in the peritoneal fluid and plasma between patients with and without endometriosis in order to assess their utility in the diagnostic process. Plasma and peritoneal fluid samples were collected from 50 patients with and 48 without endometriosis during planned surgical procedures in eight clinical centers. Quantitative ZEB1 and ZEB2 levels analyses were performed using a double-antibody sandwich enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA). No significant differences were observed in ZEB1 levels in any of the subanalyses nor any differences regarding ZEB2 levels between patients with and without endometriosis. Plasma ZEB2 levels were significantly higher among patients with infertility compared to fertile women (16.07 ± 12.70 ng/L vs. 12.07 ± 11.92 ng/L; p < 0.04). Both ZEB1 and ZEB2 do not seem to have a significant value in the initial diagnosis of endometriosis as a single marker. The differences in ZEB2 plasma levels between patients with and without infertility indicate the possibility of EMT dysregulation in the pathogenesis of adverse fertility outcomes.