B-cell lymphoma 6 expression is not associated with live birth in a normal responder in vitro fertilization population
Observational
OA: bronze
CC0
⤵ 2 in-corpus citations
AI-generated summary
This study investigated the association between B-cell lymphoma 6 expression and live birth rates in women undergoing in vitro fertilization who responded normally to ovarian stimulation.
One-sentence paraphrase of the abstract; not a substitute for reading it. No clinical advice. How this works
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To determine whether increased endometrial B-cell lymphoma 6 (BCL6) expression is associated with live birth in a normal responder in vitro fertilization (IVF) population.
DESIGN: Case-control study.
SETTING: University-affiliated infertility center.
PATIENT(S): Two groups of women undergoing IVF with preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy followed by warmed, single, euploid embryo transfer. Group 1 consisted of women who failed to achieve live birth, and group 2 consisted of women who achieved live birth.
INTERVENTION(S): None.
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): Endometrial BCL6 expression measured by immunohistochemistry in endometrial tissue samples. Overexpression was defined by mean HSCORE with a cutoff of positivity of >1.4, as previously described in the literature.
RESULT(S): Twenty-seven patients who achieved live birth and 23 patients who failed to achieve live birth were included. B-cell lymphoma 6 expression/HSCORE and live birth rate were not associated (Odds ratio [OR], 0.78 [0.24-2.55]). Using a cutoff of >1.4 for positivity, 8 of 23 samples were positive for BCL6 in the no live birth group, whereas 7 of 27 were positive in the live birth group. There was no significant association between BCL6 positivity and live birth (OR, 0.66 [0.19-2.21]).
CONCLUSION(S): The proportion of patients with BCL6 positivity did not significantly differ between those who achieved live birth and those who did not. In the population of patients at our center, who compromise of women who respond normally to IVF stimulation, BCL6 overexpression was not associated with IVF success. Physicians implementing BCL6 testing as a diagnostic tool for clinical decision making should counsel patients that results may have limited utility in predicting IVF outcomes in this population.
My notes (saved in your browser only)
MeSH descriptors
Citation neighborhood (2-hop)
Papers in the corpus that this work cites (lower rings, blue) and that cite this one (upper rings, green). Dot size scales with the paper's in-corpus citation count — bigger dot = more influential within the endo/adeno field. Click a dot to open that paper. Outer rings show 2-hop neighbours — papers reached through the immediate citers/citees. [ collapse to 1-hop ]
References (30)
- BCL6 AND SIRT1 expression in unexplained infertility versus unexplained recurrent pregnancy loss via openalex
- Endometriosis via openalex
- Endometriosis and inflammation in infertility via openalex
- Epidemiology of endometriosis among parous women via openalex
- KRAS Activation and over-expression of SIRT1/BCL6 Contributes to the Pathogenesis of Endometriosis and Progesterone Resistance via openalex
- Medical or surgical treatment before embryo transfer improves outcomes in women with abnormal endometrial BCL6 expression via openalex
- Prevalence and genesis of endometriosis via openalex
- Role of laparoscopic treatment of endometriosis in patients with failed in vitro fertilization cycles via openalex
- Secretory changes in preovulatory endometrium during controlled ovarian hyperstimulation with buserelin acetate and human gonadotropins via openalex
- The position of diagnostic laparoscopy in current fertility practice via openalex
- Unexplained infertility via openalex
- doi:10.1016/j.fertnstert.2020.07.052 via openalex
- doi:10.1016/j.fertnstert.2019.10.011 via openalex
- doi:10.1038/s41598-020-79643-x via openalex
- doi:10.1016/j.fertnstert.2017.07.386 via openalex
- doi:10.2174/15665240113139990065 via openalex
- doi:10.1016/j.fertnstert.2015.07.040 via openalex
- doi:10.1097/aog.0b013e318278eeda via openalex
- doi:10.1016/j.mce.2005.11.041 via openalex
- doi:10.1016/j.fertnstert.2020.10.051 via openalex
- W1511967417 via openalex
- doi:10.1016/s0301-2115(97)00126-7 via openalex
- doi:10.1038/nature03147 via openalex
- doi:10.1093/humupd/dmu027 via openalex
- doi:10.1016/j.fertnstert.2017.09.017 via openalex
- doi:10.1093/humrep/dey238 via openalex
- doi:10.1177/1933719116649711 via openalex
- doi:10.1093/humupd/dmg045 via openalex
- doi:10.1093/hropen/hoy022 via openalex
- doi:10.1016/j.fertnstert.2017.05.038 via openalex
Cited by (2)
Source provenance
- europepmc
- last seen: 2026-10-04T09:26:46.659050+00:00
- openalex
- last seen: 2026-05-13T18:38:08.563906+00:00
- pubmed
- last seen: 2026-10-08T21:33:14.624860+00:00
License: CC0
· commercial use OK