Potential biomarker candidates for improving diagnosis and disease treatment in adenomyosis

Aitana Merino-Pérez, Merino-Pérez A, Albert AB, Ana Belén Albert, Del Mar Mascarell-López M, María Del Mar Mascarell-López, María del Mar Mascarell‐López, Antonio Pellicer, António Pellicer, Pellicer A, Ana Corachán, Corachán A, Ferrero H, Hortensia Ferrero
EBioMedicine · 2026 · pp. 106481 · doi:10.1016/j.ebiom.2026.106481 · PMID:42971819 · W7225095003
Review OA: gold public-domain-us
🔓 Open OA copy View on OpenAlex View on PubMed View at publisher

Abstract

Adenomyosis remains challenging to diagnose due to its unclear pathogenesis and clinical overlap with conditions such as endometriosis and uterine fibroids. While non-invasive imaging techniques like transvaginal ultrasound and magnetic resonance imaging have improved adenomyosis detection, histopathological examination remains the gold standard. As this typically requires hysterectomy, it limits fertility-preserving diagnostic options. Therefore, the search for potential biomarkers is essential to improve the diagnosis of adenomyosis. This review summarises current evidence on genomic, transcriptomic, proteomic, metabolomic and microbiome biomarkers identified using conventional molecular techniques and high-throughput multi-omics approaches in eutopic endometrium, blood, urine, faeces, cervicovaginal lavage and vaginal swab samples with potential clinical applicability, enhancing diagnostic accuracy, and enabling early detection and monitoring. In addition, describing adenomyosis biomarkers may enhance the understanding of adenomyosis pathogenesis and help identify new therapeutic approaches. Although numerous candidate biomarkers have shown promising results (e.g. STEAP1, TOMM20, GLT8D2, and NME5, hsa_circ_008959/hsa-miR-124-3p/SLC15A4 + VAS score, miR-92a-3p or Weissella confusa, and Lactobacillus zeae), the current evidence remains insufficient for their implementation in routine clinical practice owing to the lack of external validation, standardised methodologies, and large multicentre studies.

My notes (saved in your browser only)

Citation neighborhood

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. [ expand to 2 hops ] — adds papers reached through this work's immediate citers/citees. Heavier; up to 60 extra dots.

References (68)

Cited by (4)

Source provenance

europepmc
last seen: 2026-11-04T06:09:08.831786+00:00
openalex
last seen: 2026-11-04T06:00:20.553374+00:00
pubmed
last seen: 2026-11-04T06:01:57.642567+00:00
License: public-domain-us · commercial use OK · attribution required
Courtesy of the U.S. National Library of Medicine