Intro
Infertility is a common problem that affects 8-12% of reproductive-age couples. Over recent
decades, in vitro fertilisation-embryo transfer (IVF-ET) has become an
efficient therapeutic approach for improving fertility rates ( 1 ). Although some cases of IVF
experience repeated failures, IVF-ET has remarkably increased the chance of successful
pregnancy ( 2 ). Clinically, repeated implantation failure (RIF) is characterized by an
inability to conceive after transferring at least four good quality embryos in a minimum of
three fresh or frozen cycles, and it is a challenging issue in clinical medicine ( 1 , 3 ).
Although the precise definition of RIF is controversial, it commonly refers to cases that
have three failed IVF attempts with good quality embryos. The main causes of RIF are
structural and chromosomal abnormalities such as abnormal uterine cavity, hydrosalpinx,
abnormal karyotype, thrombotic events, gene mutation, and autoimmune diseases ( 4 ).
Endometrium function and receptivity are determining factors for successful IVF. The
receptivity of the endometrium to blastocyst implantation occurs in a tightly controlled
interval known as the window of implantation (WOI), which is restricted to a period within
days 16-22 of a 28-day normal menstrual cycle. Displaced WOI appears to have a role in RIF
( 5 ).
Several biofactors play a role in endometrial receptivity (ER), including endothelial cell
adhesion molecule-1 (PECAM-1). PECAM-1 is a 130-kD transmembrane glycoprotein that plays a
key role in ER, in part, by acting on leukocyte migration, inflammatory and immune
responses, and regulation of tumour growth factor-β1 (TGF-β1) expression and function ( 6 ).
PECAM-1 expression levels are lowest during the early proliferative phase
and highest during the mid-secretory phase ( 6 , 7 ). Women with RIF and embryo implantation
failure appear to have reduced circulating levels of PECAM-1 . Low
expression or mutations in PECAM-1 are associated with pregnancy
complications such as preeclampsia, endothelial dysfunction, recurrent pregnancy loss and
unexplained spontaneous miscarriages ( 8 - 10 ).
The precise interaction between maternal and embryo cells is important in successful
implantation. During implantation, extravillous cytotrophoblasts gain the capacity to
migrate, invade, and remodel the maternal spiral arterioles through the
epithelial-mesenchymal transition (EMT) process ( 11 ). A number of genes, including membrane
protein palmitoylated-5 ( MPP5 ), are involved in the EMT process and failure
in this process is associated with pregnancy complications such as preeclampsia and foetal
growth restriction ( 12 ). MPP-5 is expressed in many tissues - the brain,
heart, fallopian tube, endometrium, placenta, and epididymis ( 13 ). It interacts with nectins
and facilitates the surface expression of nectin-1α, nectin-2α, and nectin-3α to improve
cell trafficking and adhesion ( 14 , 15 ). Patients with RIF appear to have decreased
MPP-5 expression ( 16 ). Although MPP-5 expression levels
gradually decrease from the proliferative to the late secretory stages ( 17 ), reduction in
MPP-5 gene expression in trophoblasts can damage angiogenesis, migration,
and vascular invasion ( 18 ). MPP-5 in contribution to other proteins can
determine cell polarity and migration ( 19 ).
The association of microRNAs (miRNAs) with
infertility has been widely studied since their discovery
in 1993. miRNAs are small non-coding RNAs of
approximately 19-25 nucleotides in length. miRNAs in
the human genome, including miR-145, miR-155-5p, and
miR-224 play a central role in the reproductive system and
ER ( 16 ). It has been reported that miRNAs regulate the
expressions of genes involved in the establishment of WOI
and human endometrial disorders. miR-145, miR-155-5p,
miR-20b-3p, and miR-330-5p appear to downregulate
in women with RIF ( 20 , 21 ). miRNA profiles determine
ER in the late proliferative and midsecretory phases in
fertile women ( 14 ). While miRNAs impact adhesion
protein expressions in the reproductive system ( 16 ), the
association of miR-145, miR-155-5p, and miR-224 with
PECAM-1 and MPP-5 expression is unclear.
PECAM-1 and MPP-5 in conjunction with miR-145,
miR-155-5p, and miR-224 play keys roles during fertility
and successful implantation. To date, only a few studies
have investigated the association of RIF with PECAM-1 ,
MPP-5 , miR-145, miR-155-5p, and miR-224 in the
Iranian population. Therefore, the present study aims to
evaluate the circulating and endometrial expression levels
of miR-224, miR-145, miR-155-5p, PECAM-1 , and MPP5 in Iranian RIF patients compared with control subjects.
The findings of this study may further provide a good
predictor for differentiation of discrepant ER and RIF.
Results
Table 1 lists the clinical characteristics of RIF
patients and the control group. There were no
significant differences in terms of age, body mass
index (BMI), anti-Mullerian hormone (AMH), and
cause of infertility between control subjects and RIF
patients. Also, there was no significant difference
between the average number of retrieved oocytes and
embryos between the two groups. According to Table
1, the RIF group had a significantly lower implantation
rate (5.9%) compared to the control group (29.4%,
P=0.17). One woman from the RIF group became
pregnant after endometrial scratching, which resulted
in a live birth, and 5 women from the control group
continued to pregnancy after 20 weeks.
Demographic characteristics of study participants
1 ;Independent sample t test, 2 ;Mann-Whitney U test, 3
;Chi-square test, RIF; Repeated implantation failure, SD; Standard deviation, BMI;
Body mass index, IQR; Interquartile range, and AMH; Anti-Mullerian hormone.
The endometrial expression level of miR-155 in patients with RIF was significantly lower
than the control group (P=0.03, Fig .1A ). Endometrial miR-224 and miR-145 had significantly
higher expression levels in RIF patients compared to the control group (P<0.0001,
Fig .1B, C , respectively). There was no significant difference between circulating
miR-155-5p expression levels of RIF and control subjects (P=0.547, Fig .1D ). Circulating
miR-224 had significantly higher expression levels in RIF patients compared to the control
group (P<0.0001, Fig .1E ). The circulating miR-145 expression levels were also
higher in patients with RIF compared to control subjects (P<0.0001, Fig .1F ). Both
endometrial PECAM-1 and MPP-5 had significantly lower expressions in patients with RIF
than control subjects (P<0.001 and P<0.05, respectively, Fig .1G, H ).
The expression levels of endometrial and circulating miR-155-5p, miR224, miR145,
PECAM-1 and MMP-5 in RIF patients and control subjects.
A-C. The expression levels of endometrial miR-155-5p, miR224, and
miR145, respectively. D-F. The expression levels of circulating
miR-155-5p, miR224, and miR145, respectively. G. Endometrial endothelial
cell adhesion molecule-1 ( PECAM-1 ) expression levels. H.
Endometrial membrane protein palmitoylated-5 ( MPP-5 ) expression
levels. ****; P<0.0001, ***; P<0.001, *; P<0.05, and ns; Not
significant.
Significant positive correlation was observed
between circulating and endometrial miR-155-5p
expression levels (P<0.001, Fig .2A ) in the control
group. There was also a significant positive correlation
between expression levels of endometrial miR-145 and
circulating miR-155-5p (P<0.05, Fig .2B ); however,
the correlation between endometrial and circulating
miR-224 expression levels was significantly negative
(P<0.05, Fig .2C ). We observed a significant positive
correlation between expression levels of endometrial
and circulating miR-155-5p in the RIF group (P<0.05,
Fig .3A ). The correlation between expression levels
of circulating miR-224 and endometrial miR-155-
5p was significantly positive (P<0.01, Fig .3B ). We
also found a positive significant correlation between
expression levels of miR-155-5p and endometrial
PECAM-1 (P<0.01, Fig .3C ). There was no significant
correlation between the other variables.
Receiver operator characteristic (ROC) curve analysis ( Fig .4 ) was used to examine the
probability of MPP5, PECAM-1 , miR-224, miR-145, and miR-155-5p for RIF.
Circulating miR-155-5p [area under the curve (AUC): 0.577, (95% confidence interval (CI):
0.378, 0.770), P=0.425] showed a poor discriminatory power; however, endometrial miR-224
[AUC: 0.878, (95% CI: 0.753, 1 ), P<0.01], circulating miR-224 [AUC: 0.872, (95% CI:
0.753, 1 ), P<0.01], endometrial miR-145 [AUC: 0.854, (95% CI: 0.708, 1 ),
P<0.01], and endometrial PECAM-1 [AUC: 0.850, (95% CI:
0.718,0.981), P<0.01] showed high discriminatory power to detect RIF. Endometrial
miR155-5p [AUC: 0.686, (95% CI: 0.512,0.860), P<0.05] and endometrial MPP5 [AUC:
0.719, (95% CI: 0.553,0.885), P=0.024] had moderate power as a biomarker of RIF.
Table 2 shows the true positive (TP), true negative (TN), false positive (FP),
and false negative (FN) values associated with MPP5, PECAM-1 , miR-224,
miR-145, and miR-155-5p that can be used to assess the performance of each biomarker in
predicting RIF disease status. Circulating miR-224 and miR-145, and endometrial miR145 had
the same TN ( 16 ), TP ( 18 ), FN ( 3 ), and TN ( 3 ) values. Endometrial MPP5
had higher FN ( 6 ) and FP ( 8 ) compared to PECAM-1 and the miRNAs.
Pearson’s correlation coefficient analysis for correlations between expression levels of
miR-155-5p, miR-145 and miR-224 in the control group. A. Endometrial
miR-155-5p versus circulating miR-155-5p, B. endometrial miR-145 versus
circulating miR-155-5p, and C. endometrial miR-224 versus circulating
miR224.
Pearson’s correlation coefficient analysis for correlations between expression levels of
miR-155-5p, miR-224, and PECAM-1 in RIF patients. A.
Endometrial miR-155-5p versus circulating miR-155-5p, B. Endometrial
miR-155-5p versus circulating miR-224, and C. Circulating miR-155-5p
versus endothelial cell adhesion molecule-1 ( PECAM-1 ) in the repeated
implantation failure (RIF) group.
Receiver operator characteristic (ROC) curve analysis for examining the probability of
MPP-5 , PECAM-1 , miR-224, miR-145, and miR-155-5p
for RIF. A. Endometrial miR-155-5p, B. Circulating
miR-155-5p, C. Endometrial miR-224, D. Circulating miR-224,
E. Endometrial miR-145, F. Circulating miR-145,
G. Endometrial membrane protein palmitoylated-5 (MMP-5), and
H. Endometrial endothelial cell adhesion molecule-1
( PECAM-1 ) in patients with repeated implantation failure (RIF).
Prediction of outcome according to ROC curve analysis
ROC; Receiver operator characteristic, TP; True positive, TN; True negative, FN; False negative, and FP; False positive.
Discussion
Accumulating evidences show that cell adhesion molecules
(CAMs), including PECAM-1 and MPP-5 , and an array of
endometrial miRNAs have the capability to predict RIF ( 2 ,
12 ); however, exploring the correlation between PECAM-1
and MPP-5 with miRNAs presents a complex and challenging
matter. Our findings showed decreased expression levels of
PECAM-1 and MMP-5 in women with RIF compared to
normal pregnant females. We observed decreased expression
of endometrial miR-155-5p, and increased expressions of
endometrial and circulating miR-145 and miR-224 in women
with RIF. Circulating miR-224, endometrial miR-145, and
PECAM-1 could be potential biomarkers for detection of RIF.
The function of PECAM-1 in regulation of embryo implantation is poorly understood despite
reports that a number of CAMs are expressed in the decidual endothelial cell and in the
trophoblast, and are necessary for correct implantation ( 6 , 7 ). However, consistent with our
findings, the expression level of PECAM-1 was reported to decrease in the
early proliferation and late proliferative phases. The expression level of
PECAM-1 reduces in women with RIF, which indicates that this molecule can
be a good predictor for RIF ( 6 ). There is a significant positive correlation between
expression levels of PECAM-1 and vascular damage, which suggests that
reduced expression levels of PECAM-1 can justify a reduction in trophoblast
invasion ( 9 , 23 ), and lead to the embryo’s inability to implant. PECAM-1
has an important role in TGF-β1 expression and regulation. Reduced
expression levels of PECAM-1 and TGF-β1 have been found in
women with RIF ( 6 ), which indicates that PECAM-1 may have a key role in
regulation of TGF-β1 expression followed by proper implantation.
Few studies have assessed the association between MPP-5 and implantation
in humans. In line with our finding, a mutation in MPP-5 has been reported
to delay epithelial polarization and decrease transepithelial electrical resistance ( 24 ),
which may be followed by implantation failure. A reduction in MPP-5
expression may lead to a decreased interaction of MMP-5 with other CAMs and result in
failure of the embryo to migrate ( 25 , 26 ) followed by implantation failure. The results of a
study in mice indicated that an interaction between MPP-5 with other CAMs is essential for
the maintenance of polarity during different stages of embryo and implantation development
( 27 ); therefore, a reduction in MPP-5 levels can upset polarity of the
embryo and result in implantation failure. On the contrary, the results of a cross-sectional
study on preeclampsia showed that MPP-5 had higher expression in the severe
early-onset preeclampsia group compared to control subjects. This discrepancy can be
justified by the stage of pregnancy and vascular damage that happens in preeclampsia.
Endometrial and circulating miRNAs can predict ER and are recognized as potential reliable
biomarkers for implantation and RIF ( 25 , 28 ). Consistent with our findings, it has been
reported that miR-145, miR155-5p, and miR-224 play critical roles in infertility and
implantation ( 29 ). An increased expression level of miR-145 has been detected in infertile
women with endometriosis ( 30 ). miR-145 has been reported to over-express in women with
recurrent pregnancy loss relative to normal pregnant women ( 31 ). MiR145 has been shown to
regulate the expression of a number of genes associated with adhesion molecules, and make a
substantial contribution to endometrial receptivity, placentation and implantation ( 20 , 32 ).
Abnormal miR-145 expression can be correlated to abnormal expression of tyrosine kinase
receptor ( RTKN ), oestrogen receptor ( ER-α ), insulin-like
growth factor 1 receptor (IGF-1R) and other signalling factors that can damage ER and result
in implantation failure ( 33 , 34 ). Research has shown a link between miR-224 overexpression
and implantation failure, which supported the results of the current study ( 33 ). MiR-224
overexpression negatively affects embryo development ( 35 ) and resultant implantation
failure. MiR-224 upregulation leads to implantation defects in women with recurrent
miscarriage ( 36 ).
In the present study we have shown that the expression level of circulating miR-155-5p did
not significantly change in RIF patients; however, the expression levels of endometrial
miR-155-5p significantly decreased in RIF patients compared to control subjects. MiR-155-5p
is a crucial regulator of a number of genes, including TGFβ and
MMP , by which it modulates the inflammatory and immune responses and
proper implantation ( 34 ). In contrast to our Cell J, Vol 25, No 6, June 2023 finding,
miR-155-5p has been reported to upregulate in the RIF patients ( 22 ). Decreased expression
levels of miR-155-5p were found to increase extracellular matrix degradation and the
decidualization process of proper implantation ( 37 ). Overexpression of miR155-5p could
inhibit the smad2/3 signalling pathway and repress cell proliferation, migration, apoptosis,
and invasion in the endometrium, which leads to suppression of implantation ( 38 ). More
experimental and clinical research are required to elucidate the exact association of
miR-155-5p with implantation failure in RIF patients.
We observed a positive correlation between
expression levels of endometrial miR-155-5p and
circulating miR-155-5p and miR-224 in patients
with RIF. This correlation might be the result of
the common signalling pathways and regulatory
mechanisms behind endometrial miR-155-5p and
circulating miR-155-5p and miR-224 action on their
target tissues and cells ( 28 ). Our findings did not show
any significant correlation between the expression
levels of endometrial and circulating miR-244 in RIF
patients, which indicates that the factors associated
with expression profiles of endometrial and circulating
miR-244 are likely different; however, more molecular
research is required to determine the factors associated
with miR-244 expression in RIF patients. Unlike the
RIF group, we observed a negative correlation between
circulating and endometrial miR-224, and a positive
correlation between circulating and endometrial miR145 and miR-155-5p in the control subjects, which
suggests that the expression profiles of miR-224, miR145, and miR-155-5p follow different pathways in RIF
patients. It has been shown that adipocytes release
numerous miRNAs in plasma, and this indicates
that plasma miRNAs can be suitable biomarkers for
evaluation of certain diseases ( 39 ). ROC and Pearson
analysis in the current study demonstrated a significant
correlation between circulating and endometrial miR155-5p and miR-224 in RIF patients, which suggests
that miR-155-5p and miR-224 are released from
endometrial tissue into circulation; therefore, they
can be proper biomarkers for evaluation of RIF. The
discrepancy between miRNAs signature in control
subjects and RIF patients highlights the importance
of the physiological and pathophysiological state of
ER and susceptibility to implantation failure. It is
suggested that an endogenous miRNA regulatory and
control mechanism to normalize circulating miRNA
levels might be absent ( 8 ).
Conclusions
Our findings show that downregulation of
PECAM-1 , MPP-5 , miR-145, and miR-224 along
with upregulation of miR-145 and miR-224 most
likely result in decreased ER and implantation defects in RIF patients. In addition, circulating miR-224,
endometrial miR-145, and PECAM-1 appear to be
potential biomarkers for prediction of RIF. Although
we observed a positive correlation between circulating
miR-155-5p and endometrial PECAM-1 expression,
the correlation between miR-145 and miR-224, and
endometrial PECAM-1 , and association of miR-145,
miR-224, miR-155-5p with endometrial PECAM-1 and
MPP-5 expression remains to be elucidated.
Materials Methods
This case control study was approved by the Ethics
Committee of Tehran University of Medical Sciences,
Tehran, Iran (IR.TUMS.Medicine.REC.1400.1207) and
carried out between June 2021-July 2022. All participants
provided written informed consent for study participation.
Sample size was calculated using the confidence interval
method and we enrolled 34 women - 17 women with
a history of RIF and 17 women who had previous
spontaneous term pregnancy with a live birth (control
group).
Seventeen women less than 42 years of age who referred
to the Medical Centre of Arash Hospital, Tehran, Iran with
RIF were included in this study. The RIF patients previously
underwent IVF/intracytoplasmic sperm injection (IVF/
ICSI) and had at least three foetal transmission failures
with at least four morphological high-grade embryos.
The control group comprised 17 women with secondary
infertility who had no prior history of IVF. The causes of
their infertility included male infertility, tubal factors, or
unexplained reasons, and they had successfully achieved
a spontaneous term pregnancy resulting in a live birth.
Patients were assessed via vaginal ultrasound,
hysteroscopy, laparoscopy, karyotype, or hormonal and
immunological tests and excluded if they did not meet
the eligibility criteria. Subjects with poor embryo quality
(less than eight cells on day 3 after oocyte retrieval or
less than 12 cells after oocyte retrieval on day 4 of the
embryonic stage); poor ovarian response (less than
four oocytes on adequate ovarian stimulation); known
disorders of the uterus or endometrial pathology, such
as uterine malformation, hydrosalpinx or endometriosis
(diagnosed by ultrasound or laparoscopy); hereditary or
acquired thrombophilia; diabetes or thyroid diseases;
and all subjects with intrauterine pathologies (congenital
uterus disorders, fibroids, polyps, intrauterine adhesion);
polycystic ovary syndrome; endometriosis; adenomyosis;
couples with abnormal chromosomal karyotypes;
history of miscarriage; positive anti-lupus anticoagulant;
infectious diseases; endocrine diseases (abnormal blood
glucose or thyroid dysfunction); or use of contraceptives
were excluded from the study.
Inclusion criteria for both the patient and control groups consisted of a regular ovulation period (28–32 days) and
normal endocrine profile.
In accordance with a recent study ( 22 ), endometrial
tissue samples were collected from both RIF and control
subjects 5-7 days after ovulation. In RIF subjects, the
samples were obtained via hysteroscopy, while in control
subjects, the samples were collected using a Pipelle
catheter. Plasma sampling was performed within 5 to 7
days after ovulation in all subjects. We chose hysteroscopy
because it can detect intrauterine pathologies that are
commonly missed by other investigative modalities.
Ovulation time was determined by assessing morning
luteinising hormone (LH) and transvaginal ultrasound
(Phillips Afinity 70). The window period was defined as
LH+7 days. The day of LH surge was considered to be
LH 0. Endometrial tissue and plasma samples were sent
to the laboratory immediately after sampling and frozen at
-80°C for total RNA extraction. IVF/ICSI was performed
using local protocols. All subjects had indications for
IVF/ICSI treatment and underwent routine fertility tests
and ovarian hyperstimulation with recombinant follicular
stimulating hormone (Cinnal-F, Cinnal-F, Iran) or human
menopausal gonadotropin (Menotropin, Pooyesh Darou
Biopharmaceutical Co., Iran). In order to prevent LH surge,
the pituitary gland was suppressed by a gonadotropinreleasing hormone antagonist (Cetronax, Ronak, Iran/
Cetrotide, Merck Serono, Germany). Final follicle
maturation was triggered using 10 000 international units
of human chorionic gonadotropin (HCG, Gonarx, Ronak,
Iran). Oocyte retrieval was performed 36 hours after the
HCG injection via guided ultrasound. In the control group,
a single fresh blastocyst embryo with grade A quality
was transferred using a catheter (Rada, Behrad, Iran).
On the other hand, in the RIF group, two fresh blastocyst
embryos with grade A quality were transferred using the
same catheter.
Intravaginal progesterone (800 mg/day, Fertigest,
Aburayhan, Iran) was administered for luteal phase support
in both groups. Among the initial 37 patients enrolled in
the RIF group, 20 patients with Müllerian malformation,
hypothyroidism, chromosomal abnormalities, and
antiphospholipid syndrome were excluded and 17 RIF
patients who met the inclusion criteria were selected for
the study.
Peripheral blood samples (5 mL) were obtained from
patients and control subjects during WOI, at the same time
as endometrial sampling before IVF. The blood samples
were collected in EDTA tubes, stored on ice, and processed
within 30 minutes. Each specimen was centrifuged at
1500 g for 15 minutes at 4°C to enable plasma separation.
The supernatant was collected from each tube and stored
at -80°C until miRNA isolation. Quantification of plasma
exosomes miR-224, miR-145, and miR-155-5p was
carried out using an miRNeasy Mini kit (Qiagen, USA)
according to the manufacturer’s protocol. The circulating
miRNAs were detected in small vesicles (exosomes) in
plasma.
An obstetrician-gynecologist obtained a small sample
of endometrial tissue from each participant in the study.
Endometrial tissue lysates were used for total RNA
extraction with an miRNeasy Mini kit (Qiagen, USA)
according to the manufacturer’s instructions. A NanoDrop
spectrophotometer (Shimadzo, UV 160) and 3% agarose
gel electrophoresis were used to assay the concentration
and purity of the extracted RNA. A total of 300 ng total
RNA was used for first strand cDNA synthesis and
miRNA expression profiling with the MI Script II RT Kit
(Qiagen, Germany).
The MI Script SYBR® Green PCR Kit (Qiagen, Germany) and specific primers were used to
determine the expressions of miR-224, miR-145, miR-155-5p, PECAM-1, MPP-5, U6
snRNA, and β-actin genes (Qiagen, Germany) via quantitative
real time-polymerase chain reaction (qRT-PCR). The primers were:
MPP5-
F: 5′-AGGCACCAAACCCAACATCT-3´
R: 3′-GCCAGAACCAGCGATCCTTA-5′
PECAM-1-
F: 5′-ACGTGCAGTACGGAAGTT-3′
R: 3′-GGAGCCTTCCGTTCTAGAGT-5′
miR-224-
F: 5′-GCGAGGTCAAGTCACTAGTGGT-3′
R: 5′-CGAGAAGCTTGCATCACCAGAGAACG-3′
miR-145-
F: 5′-GTCCAGTTTTCCCAGGAATCC-3′
R: 5′-CAGTGCAGGGTCCGAGGTAT-3′
miR-155-5p-
F: 5′-UAAUACCGUCUUAAAACCGU-3′
R: 5′-UUCUGGGAACGUGAAACCT-3′
β-Actin-
F: 5´-TTCCAGCCTTCCTTCTTG-3´
R: 3´-GGAGCCAGAGCAGTAATC-5´
U6 snRNA-
F: 5′-CTCGCTTCGGCAGCACATATACT-3′
R: 5′-ACGCTTCACGAATTTGCGTGTC-3′
All the reaction mixtures were incubated in a 96-well plate at 95°C for 10 minutes,
followed by 40 cycles at 95°C for 15 seconds and at 60°C for 40 seconds. ABIStep-One
(Applied Biosystems, USA) was used for PCR amplification. MPP5, PECAM-1 ,
and the miRNA expression levels were estimated by the 2 -ΔΔCt method and
normalized to β-actin (for MPP5 and
PECAM-1 ) and U6 snRNA for the miRNAs.
We used the SPSS Software Package version 18.0
(IBM Corporation, USA) for statistical analyses.
Normality was assessed by the Shapiro-Wilk test.
Categorical data were presented as frequency and
continuous data as mean ± standard error of the mean
or standard deviation (SD). The t test, chi-square
and Mann -Whitney U tests were used to compare
continuous data between groups, depending on the
normality of the data. In addition, Pearson correlation
coefficient analysis was performed to determine the
correlation between miRNA expression levels and
biochemical parameters. Analysis of covariance
(ANCOVA) was performed to eliminate the possible
effect of covariance on the miRNA expression levels.
In addition, we performed linear logistic regression
to assess the risk of failed implantation according to
miRNA expression. One-way analysis of variance
was performed to evaluate the number of variables
followed by Tukey’s post-hoc test. P<0.05 indicated
statistical significance.
Text is read by the "Ask this paper" AI Q&A widget below.
Extraction quality varies by source — PMC NXML preserves structure
cleanly, OA-HTML may include some navigation residue, and OA-PDF can
have broken hyphenation. The publisher copy
(via DOI)
is the canonical version.