Transcriptome analysis reveals dialogues between human trophectoderm and endometrial cells during the implantation period (original) (raw)
Journal Article
,
1
CHU Montpellier, Institut de Recherche en Biothérapie
,
Hôpital Saint-Eloi
,
Montpellier
F-34295
,
France
2
CHU Montpellier, ART/PGD Division, Département de Biologie de la Reproduction
,
Hôpital Arnaud de Villeneuve
,
Montpellier F-34295
,
France
3
INSERM U847
,
Hôpital Saint-Eloi
,
Montpellier F-34295
,
France
4
UFR de Médecine, Laboratoire ‘Développement embryonnaire précoce et cellules souches embryonnaires humaines’
,
Université Montpellier1
,
Montpellier F-34000
,
France
Search for other works by this author on:
,
1
CHU Montpellier, Institut de Recherche en Biothérapie
,
Hôpital Saint-Eloi
,
Montpellier
F-34295
,
France
2
CHU Montpellier, ART/PGD Division, Département de Biologie de la Reproduction
,
Hôpital Arnaud de Villeneuve
,
Montpellier F-34295
,
France
3
INSERM U847
,
Hôpital Saint-Eloi
,
Montpellier F-34295
,
France
4
UFR de Médecine, Laboratoire ‘Développement embryonnaire précoce et cellules souches embryonnaires humaines’
,
Université Montpellier1
,
Montpellier F-34000
,
France
Search for other works by this author on:
,
1
CHU Montpellier, Institut de Recherche en Biothérapie
,
Hôpital Saint-Eloi
,
Montpellier
F-34295
,
France
2
CHU Montpellier, ART/PGD Division, Département de Biologie de la Reproduction
,
Hôpital Arnaud de Villeneuve
,
Montpellier F-34295
,
France
3
INSERM U847
,
Hôpital Saint-Eloi
,
Montpellier F-34295
,
France
4
UFR de Médecine, Laboratoire ‘Développement embryonnaire précoce et cellules souches embryonnaires humaines’
,
Université Montpellier1
,
Montpellier F-34000
,
France
Search for other works by this author on:
,
1
CHU Montpellier, Institut de Recherche en Biothérapie
,
Hôpital Saint-Eloi
,
Montpellier
F-34295
,
France
2
CHU Montpellier, ART/PGD Division, Département de Biologie de la Reproduction
,
Hôpital Arnaud de Villeneuve
,
Montpellier F-34295
,
France
3
INSERM U847
,
Hôpital Saint-Eloi
,
Montpellier F-34295
,
France
4
UFR de Médecine, Laboratoire ‘Développement embryonnaire précoce et cellules souches embryonnaires humaines’
,
Université Montpellier1
,
Montpellier F-34000
,
France
Search for other works by this author on:
,
1
CHU Montpellier, Institut de Recherche en Biothérapie
,
Hôpital Saint-Eloi
,
Montpellier
F-34295
,
France
3
INSERM U847
,
Hôpital Saint-Eloi
,
Montpellier F-34295
,
France
4
UFR de Médecine, Laboratoire ‘Développement embryonnaire précoce et cellules souches embryonnaires humaines’
,
Université Montpellier1
,
Montpellier F-34000
,
France
Search for other works by this author on:
1
CHU Montpellier, Institut de Recherche en Biothérapie
,
Hôpital Saint-Eloi
,
Montpellier
F-34295
,
France
2
CHU Montpellier, ART/PGD Division, Département de Biologie de la Reproduction
,
Hôpital Arnaud de Villeneuve
,
Montpellier F-34295
,
France
3
INSERM U847
,
Hôpital Saint-Eloi
,
Montpellier F-34295
,
France
4
UFR de Médecine, Laboratoire ‘Développement embryonnaire précoce et cellules souches embryonnaires humaines’
,
Université Montpellier1
,
Montpellier F-34000
,
France
*Correspondence address. ART/PDG Division, Département de Biologie de la Reproduction, Hôpital Arnaud de Villeneuve, Montpellier F-34295, France. Tel: +33 4 67 33 64 04; Fax: +
33 4 67 33 62 90
; E-mail: s-hamamah@chu-montpellier.fr
Search for other works by this author on:
Received:
07 January 2011
Revision received:
16 February 2011
Accepted:
22 February 2011
Cite
D. Haouzi, H. Dechaud, S. Assou, C. Monzo, J. de Vos, S. Hamamah, Transcriptome analysis reveals dialogues between human trophectoderm and endometrial cells during the implantation period, Human Reproduction, Volume 26, Issue 6, 1 June 2011, Pages 1440–1449, https://doi.org/10.1093/humrep/der075
Close
Navbar Search Filter Mobile Enter search term Search
Abstract
BACKGROUND
Crosstalk between human trophectoderm (TE) and endometrial cells during the implantation window is a complex and not well-understood process. The aims of this study were (i) to evaluate the global gene expression profile in TE cells from Day 5 human blastocysts issued from IVF, (ii) to compare these data with the transcriptomic profile of endometrial cells in stimulated cycles for IVF and (iii) to identify potential early dialogues between maternal and embryonic cells during the implantation window.
METHODS
Endometrial biopsies (n = 18) from normal responder patients were performed on the day of embryo transfer (Day 5 after human chorionic gonadotrophin administration). TE biopsies from five blastocysts donated for research purposes were mechanically extracted. DNA microarray analysis was carried out to identify the specific gene expression profiles and the biological pathways activated during the implantation window in endometrial and TE cells.
RESULTS
Several cytokines (such as PDGFA, placenta growth factor, IGF2BP1 and IGF2BP3) were up-regulated in human TE cells, whereas some of the corresponding receptors (PDGFRA and KDR) were over-expressed in the receptive endometrium, suggesting that these molecules are involved in the early dialogue between blastocyst and maternal endometrial cells. In addition, several adhesion molecules and extracellular matrix proteins (MCAM, ITGAE and LAMA1) were also over-expressed in the TE, while others (ALCAM, CEACAM1, PECAM1, ITGB8 and LAMA2) were restricted to the receptive endometrium.
CONCLUSION
The present study shows that several growth factors, cytokines, integrins and adhesion molecules are expressed in the TE and endometrium at the time of implantation. These results could contribute to the understanding of the mechanisms involved in the early dialogue between blastocyst and endometrium during implantation. Such results should be confirmed by further studies.
Introduction
The high rate of implantation failure remains a major problem in IVF. More than 80% of such failures are associated with inadequate endometrial receptivity or with defects in embryo-endometrium dialogue (Paulson et al., 1990; Simon et al., 1998). Consequently, the understanding of the mechanisms that regulate implantation is a major issue in assisted reproductive technology (ART). Successful implantation requires a competent embryo, a receptive endometrium and a synchronized mother–embryo crosstalk that is regulated by endocrine, paracrine and autocrine interactions. During the early stages of human embryo implantation, the free-floating blastocyst acts on the endometrium, probably via soluble mediators such as cytokines and growth factors. Then, adhesive interactions between the trophectoderm (TE) (i.e. the outer cell mass of the blastocyst that gives rise to trophoblast and the extra-embryonic structures) and the endometrial surface epithelium occur during the implantation window (6–10 days after the luteinizing hormone peak) followed by embedding of the blastocyst into the endometrium. Temporally- and spatially regulated changes in the expression of adhesion and extracellular matrix (ECM) molecules at the maternal–fetal interface during embryo implantation are crucial for blastocyst attachment, migration and invasion. These changes in gene expression profiles are known to be mediated by many molecules such as hormones, proteolytic enzymes, growth factors, cytokines and chemokines (Huppertz et al., 1998; Miller WL, 1998; Bischof et al., 2000; Seval et al., 2004; Chang et al., 2008; Hannan and Salamonsen, 2008).
The new high throughput genomic technologies have allowed the analysis of the shift in gene expression profile that characterizes the passage from the pre-receptive to the receptive stage of human endometrium in natural and stimulated cycles. They have thus provided the opportunity to understand the physiology of endometrial receptivity and to evaluate the impact on endometrial receptivity of controlled ovarian stimulation (COS) during IVF (Carson et al., 2002; Riesewijk et al., 2003; Mirkin et al., 2005; Talbi et al., 2006; Horcajadas et al., 2008; Liu et al., 2008; Haouzi et al., 2009a, 2009b, 2010). By contrast, to date, the mechanisms that control the early dialogue between human blastocyst and endometrium during the implantation window have not been extensively studied as details of the implantation signalling cascades have been mainly investigated indirectly in animal models or in in vitro human models (Dey et al., 2004; Fukuda and Sugihara, 2008; Bazer et al., 2009).
The aim of this study was, therefore, to evaluate the global gene expression profile in human blastocyst TE cells and then to compare it with the transcriptomic profile of stimulated endometrium during the implantation window.
Materials and Methods
Endometrial biopsies
The study population included 18 normal responder patients (normal serum FSH, LH and oestradiol on Day 3), aged <36 years and referred for IVF due to male infertility. The study was approved by the Ethical Committee of the Institut de Recherche en Biothérapie. Patients had COS with a combination of GnRH agonist long or antagonist protocols with either highly purified human menopausal gonadotrophin or recombinant FSH. After having collected the patient's informed consent, one endometrial biopsy was carried out in conditions of the stimulated cycle and on the day of embryo transfer [human chorionic gonadotrophin (hCG + 5 days)]. Each biopsy was frozen at −80°C in RLT RNA extraction buffer (RNeasy Mini kit, Qiagen, Valencia, CA, USA).
Blastocyst culture and TE biopsy
Blastocysts were voluntarily donated for research by infertile couples undergoing IVF treatment. Both partners signed the informed consent form and the research protocol has been approved by national agency of biomedicine. After COS for ICSI, cumulus–oocyte complex (COC) retrieval was performed by vaginal puncture under ultrasound echo-guidance 36 h after administration of 5000 IU hCG. Immediately after ovum retrieval, COCs were placed at 37°C in G-MOPS™ PLUS medium (Vitrolife) for a few minutes and then transferred into G-IVF™ PLUS culture medium (Vitrolife). Oocytes were enzymatically denuded of cumulus cells with 80 UI/mL Hyaluronidase (SynVitroRHyadase, Origio) to assess oocyte nuclear maturity. Mature MII oocytes were fertilized by ICSI. All oocytes were individually cultured in micro-drops of G-1™ PLUS medium (Vitrolife) under paraffin mineral oil. Three days after fertilization, supernumerary embryos were cultured in G-2 PLUS medium (Vitrolife) until the blastocyst stage (Day 5/6 post-fertilization). Only supernumerary embryos that could be donated for research purposes were used to obtain TE biopsies. Blastocyst morphological criteria were assessed according to Gardner's classification: two blastocysts grade B1/B2 and eight blastocysts grade 5BC or 6AB/6BB/6CC (Gardner et al., 1998). TE cells were mechanically extracted from individual blastocysts and immediately frozen at −80°C in RLT RNA extraction buffer. Five TE biopsies from blastocysts of two patients were used for microarray analyses; five additional TE biopsies from blastocysts of three other patients were used for qRT–PCR validation of the microarray data.
Complementary RNA (cRNA) preparation and microarray hybridization
Total RNA (between 50 and 100 ng) was used to prepare twice amplified and labelled cRNA for hybridization with HG-U133 plus 2.0 arrays (Affymetrix™) as described in Haouzi et al. (2009b). Each TE and endometrial biopsy were processed individually on a DNA microarray chip.
Data processing
Scanned GeneChip images were processed using the AGCC (Affymetrix GeneChip Command Console) software. Microarray data were analysed using the Affymetrix Expression Console software and normalization was performed with the RMA (Robust Multiarray Averaging) algorithm to obtain an intensity value signal for each probe set. The microarray data were analysed at our facility following the minimal information about microarray experiment recommendations (Brazma et al., 2001).
Microarray data analysis
We first selected 4 137 probe sets that presented a fold ratio >5 or <0.2 of the mean signal intensity between TE and endometrial cells samples and performed an unsupervised hierarchical cluster with the Cluster and Treeview software packages. Then, the Significant Analysis of Microarrays software (SAM, Stanford University, USA; Tusher et al., 2001) was used to identify genes whose expression varied significantly in the TE and endometrium groups. SAM provides the mean or median fold change values (FC) and a false discovery rate (FDR) confidence percentage based on data permutation. Selected genes (FC >2 and FDR <5%) were then analysed using Ingenuity (http://www.ingenuity.com) and FatiGO+ (http://babelomics2.bioinfo.cipf.es) to identify the biological pathways/functions that are specific to each tissue group.
Quantitative RT–PCR analyses
Amplified RNA (0.35 µg) from endometrial (n = 3) and TE (n = 5) biopsies was used for quantitative reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (qRT–PCR) according to the manufacturer's recommendations (Applied Biosytems). The 10 µl reaction mixture for quantitative PCR consisted of first-strand DNA (2 µl of a 1:3 dilution), 2.5 µM of each primer and 5 µl of 2× LightCycler 480 SYBR Green I Master mix (Roche). The amplification was measured during 45 cycles with annealing temperature at 62°C using the Light Cycler 480 detection system (Roche) and normalized to GAPDH (glyceraldehyde-3-phosphate dehydrogenase) expression for each sample using the following formula: _E_tested primerΔCt/GAPDHΔCt(E = 10−1/slope), ΔCt = Ct control − Ct unknown, where E corresponds to the efficiency of the PCR reaction. The E value is obtained by a standard curve that varies in function of the primers used. One endometrial or TE sample was used as control. Each sample was analysed in duplicate and multiple water blanks were included.
Statistical analyses
Statistical analyses of qRT–PCR data were performed using the SPSS 18.0 software (SPSS Inc., Chicago, IL, USA). A repartition difference between sample groups was considered significant when the Kruskal–Wallis non-parametric test gave a P value < 0.05.
Results
Gene expression profiles of TE and endometrial cells in stimulated cycles during the implantation window
To identify possible dialogues between TE and endometrial cells during the implantation window, a DNA microarray analysis was carried out using TE biopsies from in vitro matured blastocysts and receptive endometrial cells from women in stimulated cycles. Unsupervised clustering (Fig. 1) clearly separated all TE and endometrial samples, suggesting that these two groups are characterized by distinct expression profiles. SAM analysis of the gene expression profiles of the TE and the endometrial groups identified 2737 genes that were differentially expressed in the two groups. Specifically, 1889 (5 ≤ FC ≤ 718.5) genes were up-regulated in endometrial cells and 848 (5 ≤ FC ≤ 529.6) in the TE group (Fig. 2A). The 10 most up-regulated genes in the two groups are listed in Fig. 2B. In addition to these, the TE group was characterized by over-expression of GCM1 (62.8, FDR < 0.0001), HERV-FRD (12.6, FDR < 0.0001), CYP19A1 (34.4, FDR < 0.0001), CYP11A1 (5.4, FDR < 0.0001), HSD17B1 (21.9, FDR < 0.0001), DNMT3A (6.6, FDR < 0.0001) and DNMT3B (29.1, FDR < 0.0001).
Figure 1
Unsupervised clustering of blastocyst trophectoderm and receptive endometrium samples. TE, trophectoderm samples; hCG + 5, endometrial biopsies at Day 5 after hCG injection.
Figure 2
Number of genes that are over-expressed in the blastocyst TE and in the receptive endometrium. (A) SAM analysis identified 848 and 1889 genes that were up-regulated in the blastocyst TE and receptive endometrium, respectively. (B) The 10 most up-regulated genes in the TE group (left) and in the receptive endometrium group (right).
Differential expression of genes with specific biological functions between TE and endometrial cells during the implantation window
A FatiGO+ analysis of the genes that were specifically up-regulated in the TE group was then carried out to identify the biological functions/pathways in which they are involved. The majority of the TE-specific genes were associated with processes linked to transcriptional and translational control of gene activation, such as ‘mitotic phase of the cell cycle' (81.1% in the TE and 18.9% in the endometrial group, adjusted P value = 0.0003), ‘translation' (73.6 and 26.4%, adjusted P value = 0.0003), ‘DNA replication' (78.4 and 21.6%, adjusted P value = 0.02) and ‘RNA metabolism' (100 and 0%, adjusted P value = 0.03). Moreover, most of these genes were localized in ribosomes (88.7% in the TE compared with 11.3% in the endometrial group, adjusted P value = 0.0001), chromosomes (75.3 and 24.7%, adjusted P value = 0.002), nucleus (55 and 45%, adjusted P value = 0.006) and the eukaryotic 48S initiation complex (100 and 0%, adjusted P value = 0.04).
Differential up-regulation of specific growth factors in TE and endometrial cells during the implantation window
To identify potential dialogues between embryonic and maternal cells, we then focused on the growth factors that were specifically over-expressed in each tissue group during the implantation window. Many growth factors and growth factors receptors were found to be differentially up-regulated in TE or receptive endometrial cells (see Table I for a complete list). Particularly, placenta growth factor (PGF) and its receptor KDR were respectively over-expressed in TE and endometrial cells. A similar profile was reported for PDGFA (TE cells) and its receptor PDGFRA (endometrial cells).
Table I
Growth factors, growth factor receptors, adhesion and extracellular matrix molecules that are over-expressed in (A) human blastocyst TE and (B) receptive endometrium cells during the implantation window.
A | B | |||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Gene name | FC | FDR | Gene name | FC | FDR | Gene name | FC | FDR |
IGF2BP1 | 39.1 | 0 | IGF1 | 208.3 | 0 | ALCAM | 26.4 | 0 |
IGF2BP3 | 14.3 | 0 | IGFBP2 | 8.5 | 0 | CEACAM1 | 5.6 | 0 |
PGF | 15.9 | 0 | IGFBP4 | 14.9 | 0 | PECAM1 | 13.7 | 0 |
PDGFA | 12.1 | 0 | IGFBP5 | 80.9 | 0 | LAMA2 | 16.9 | 0 |
GFER | 7.8 | 0 | IGFBP7 | 277.5 | 0 | COL1A1 | 42.3 | 0 |
NENF | 6.5 | 0 | VEGFC | 25.8 | 0 | COL1A2 | 328.7 | 0 |
GDF15 | 6.1 | 0 | HDGFRP3 | 7.8 | 0 | COL3A1 | 718.4 | 0 |
TNFSF9 | 5.9 | 0 | MEGF9 | 9.8 | 0 | COL4A1 | 6.1 | 0 |
INHBC | 5.4 | 0 | TGFB1/1 | 41.9 | 0 | COL4A2 | 8.8 | 0 |
FGFR3 | 29.2 | 0 | TNFAIP3 | 5.1 | 0 | COL4A3BP | 6.5 | 0 |
FGFR4 | 6.7 | 0 | PDGFC | 17.2 | 0 | COL4A5 | 23.9 | 0 |
IL27RA | 5.3 | 0 | IL15 | 26.5 | 0 | COL5A1 | 54.6 | 0 |
ITGAE | 5.9 | 0 | IL1R1 | 18.5 | 0 | COL5A2 | 119.4 | 0 |
COLEC12 | 7.2 | 0 | IL6ST | 23.2 | 0 | COL6A1 | 8.7 | 0 |
MCAM | 11.7 | 0 | ILDR1 | 11.3 | 0 | COL6A2 | 33.5 | 0 |
LAMA1 | 161.8 | 0 | IL10RB | 5.6 | 0 | COL6A3 | 87.5 | 0 |
LAMC1 | 7.3 | 0 | IL13RA1 | 10 | 0 | COL14A1 | 7.9 | 0 |
HAPLN1 | 19.1 | 0 | IL17RD | 6.8 | 0 | COL15A1 | 25.5 | 0 |
HMMR | 7.1 | 0 | IL20RA | 56.9 | 0 | COL18A1 | 12.7 | 0 |
LIFR | 8.8 | 0 | FN1 | 13.5 | 0 | |||
PDGFRA | 35.3 | 0 | FBN1 | 44.1 | 0 | |||
TGFR1 | 7.8 | 0 | DCN | 93.5 | 0 | |||
TGFR2 | 5.9 | 0 | TIMP2 | 52.2 | 0 | |||
PTGFRN | 19.7 | 0 | TIMP3 | 36.5 | 0 | |||
FGFR10P2 | 26.6 | 0 | CD44 | 67.1 | 0 | |||
EDNRA | 95.5 | 0 | SDC2 | 115.5 | 0 | |||
KDR | 7.1 | 0 | ||||||
ITGAV | 12.9 | 0 | ||||||
ITGA9 | 42.7 | 0 | ||||||
ITGB1 | 28.4 | 0 | ||||||
ITGB8 | 277.8 | 0 | ||||||
LGALS1 | 9.9 | 0 | ||||||
LGALS3 | 5.9 | 0 |
A | B | |||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Gene name | FC | FDR | Gene name | FC | FDR | Gene name | FC | FDR |
IGF2BP1 | 39.1 | 0 | IGF1 | 208.3 | 0 | ALCAM | 26.4 | 0 |
IGF2BP3 | 14.3 | 0 | IGFBP2 | 8.5 | 0 | CEACAM1 | 5.6 | 0 |
PGF | 15.9 | 0 | IGFBP4 | 14.9 | 0 | PECAM1 | 13.7 | 0 |
PDGFA | 12.1 | 0 | IGFBP5 | 80.9 | 0 | LAMA2 | 16.9 | 0 |
GFER | 7.8 | 0 | IGFBP7 | 277.5 | 0 | COL1A1 | 42.3 | 0 |
NENF | 6.5 | 0 | VEGFC | 25.8 | 0 | COL1A2 | 328.7 | 0 |
GDF15 | 6.1 | 0 | HDGFRP3 | 7.8 | 0 | COL3A1 | 718.4 | 0 |
TNFSF9 | 5.9 | 0 | MEGF9 | 9.8 | 0 | COL4A1 | 6.1 | 0 |
INHBC | 5.4 | 0 | TGFB1/1 | 41.9 | 0 | COL4A2 | 8.8 | 0 |
FGFR3 | 29.2 | 0 | TNFAIP3 | 5.1 | 0 | COL4A3BP | 6.5 | 0 |
FGFR4 | 6.7 | 0 | PDGFC | 17.2 | 0 | COL4A5 | 23.9 | 0 |
IL27RA | 5.3 | 0 | IL15 | 26.5 | 0 | COL5A1 | 54.6 | 0 |
ITGAE | 5.9 | 0 | IL1R1 | 18.5 | 0 | COL5A2 | 119.4 | 0 |
COLEC12 | 7.2 | 0 | IL6ST | 23.2 | 0 | COL6A1 | 8.7 | 0 |
MCAM | 11.7 | 0 | ILDR1 | 11.3 | 0 | COL6A2 | 33.5 | 0 |
LAMA1 | 161.8 | 0 | IL10RB | 5.6 | 0 | COL6A3 | 87.5 | 0 |
LAMC1 | 7.3 | 0 | IL13RA1 | 10 | 0 | COL14A1 | 7.9 | 0 |
HAPLN1 | 19.1 | 0 | IL17RD | 6.8 | 0 | COL15A1 | 25.5 | 0 |
HMMR | 7.1 | 0 | IL20RA | 56.9 | 0 | COL18A1 | 12.7 | 0 |
LIFR | 8.8 | 0 | FN1 | 13.5 | 0 | |||
PDGFRA | 35.3 | 0 | FBN1 | 44.1 | 0 | |||
TGFR1 | 7.8 | 0 | DCN | 93.5 | 0 | |||
TGFR2 | 5.9 | 0 | TIMP2 | 52.2 | 0 | |||
PTGFRN | 19.7 | 0 | TIMP3 | 36.5 | 0 | |||
FGFR10P2 | 26.6 | 0 | CD44 | 67.1 | 0 | |||
EDNRA | 95.5 | 0 | SDC2 | 115.5 | 0 | |||
KDR | 7.1 | 0 | ||||||
ITGAV | 12.9 | 0 | ||||||
ITGA9 | 42.7 | 0 | ||||||
ITGB1 | 28.4 | 0 | ||||||
ITGB8 | 277.8 | 0 | ||||||
LGALS1 | 9.9 | 0 | ||||||
LGALS3 | 5.9 | 0 |
Table I
Growth factors, growth factor receptors, adhesion and extracellular matrix molecules that are over-expressed in (A) human blastocyst TE and (B) receptive endometrium cells during the implantation window.
A | B | |||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Gene name | FC | FDR | Gene name | FC | FDR | Gene name | FC | FDR |
IGF2BP1 | 39.1 | 0 | IGF1 | 208.3 | 0 | ALCAM | 26.4 | 0 |
IGF2BP3 | 14.3 | 0 | IGFBP2 | 8.5 | 0 | CEACAM1 | 5.6 | 0 |
PGF | 15.9 | 0 | IGFBP4 | 14.9 | 0 | PECAM1 | 13.7 | 0 |
PDGFA | 12.1 | 0 | IGFBP5 | 80.9 | 0 | LAMA2 | 16.9 | 0 |
GFER | 7.8 | 0 | IGFBP7 | 277.5 | 0 | COL1A1 | 42.3 | 0 |
NENF | 6.5 | 0 | VEGFC | 25.8 | 0 | COL1A2 | 328.7 | 0 |
GDF15 | 6.1 | 0 | HDGFRP3 | 7.8 | 0 | COL3A1 | 718.4 | 0 |
TNFSF9 | 5.9 | 0 | MEGF9 | 9.8 | 0 | COL4A1 | 6.1 | 0 |
INHBC | 5.4 | 0 | TGFB1/1 | 41.9 | 0 | COL4A2 | 8.8 | 0 |
FGFR3 | 29.2 | 0 | TNFAIP3 | 5.1 | 0 | COL4A3BP | 6.5 | 0 |
FGFR4 | 6.7 | 0 | PDGFC | 17.2 | 0 | COL4A5 | 23.9 | 0 |
IL27RA | 5.3 | 0 | IL15 | 26.5 | 0 | COL5A1 | 54.6 | 0 |
ITGAE | 5.9 | 0 | IL1R1 | 18.5 | 0 | COL5A2 | 119.4 | 0 |
COLEC12 | 7.2 | 0 | IL6ST | 23.2 | 0 | COL6A1 | 8.7 | 0 |
MCAM | 11.7 | 0 | ILDR1 | 11.3 | 0 | COL6A2 | 33.5 | 0 |
LAMA1 | 161.8 | 0 | IL10RB | 5.6 | 0 | COL6A3 | 87.5 | 0 |
LAMC1 | 7.3 | 0 | IL13RA1 | 10 | 0 | COL14A1 | 7.9 | 0 |
HAPLN1 | 19.1 | 0 | IL17RD | 6.8 | 0 | COL15A1 | 25.5 | 0 |
HMMR | 7.1 | 0 | IL20RA | 56.9 | 0 | COL18A1 | 12.7 | 0 |
LIFR | 8.8 | 0 | FN1 | 13.5 | 0 | |||
PDGFRA | 35.3 | 0 | FBN1 | 44.1 | 0 | |||
TGFR1 | 7.8 | 0 | DCN | 93.5 | 0 | |||
TGFR2 | 5.9 | 0 | TIMP2 | 52.2 | 0 | |||
PTGFRN | 19.7 | 0 | TIMP3 | 36.5 | 0 | |||
FGFR10P2 | 26.6 | 0 | CD44 | 67.1 | 0 | |||
EDNRA | 95.5 | 0 | SDC2 | 115.5 | 0 | |||
KDR | 7.1 | 0 | ||||||
ITGAV | 12.9 | 0 | ||||||
ITGA9 | 42.7 | 0 | ||||||
ITGB1 | 28.4 | 0 | ||||||
ITGB8 | 277.8 | 0 | ||||||
LGALS1 | 9.9 | 0 | ||||||
LGALS3 | 5.9 | 0 |
A | B | |||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Gene name | FC | FDR | Gene name | FC | FDR | Gene name | FC | FDR |
IGF2BP1 | 39.1 | 0 | IGF1 | 208.3 | 0 | ALCAM | 26.4 | 0 |
IGF2BP3 | 14.3 | 0 | IGFBP2 | 8.5 | 0 | CEACAM1 | 5.6 | 0 |
PGF | 15.9 | 0 | IGFBP4 | 14.9 | 0 | PECAM1 | 13.7 | 0 |
PDGFA | 12.1 | 0 | IGFBP5 | 80.9 | 0 | LAMA2 | 16.9 | 0 |
GFER | 7.8 | 0 | IGFBP7 | 277.5 | 0 | COL1A1 | 42.3 | 0 |
NENF | 6.5 | 0 | VEGFC | 25.8 | 0 | COL1A2 | 328.7 | 0 |
GDF15 | 6.1 | 0 | HDGFRP3 | 7.8 | 0 | COL3A1 | 718.4 | 0 |
TNFSF9 | 5.9 | 0 | MEGF9 | 9.8 | 0 | COL4A1 | 6.1 | 0 |
INHBC | 5.4 | 0 | TGFB1/1 | 41.9 | 0 | COL4A2 | 8.8 | 0 |
FGFR3 | 29.2 | 0 | TNFAIP3 | 5.1 | 0 | COL4A3BP | 6.5 | 0 |
FGFR4 | 6.7 | 0 | PDGFC | 17.2 | 0 | COL4A5 | 23.9 | 0 |
IL27RA | 5.3 | 0 | IL15 | 26.5 | 0 | COL5A1 | 54.6 | 0 |
ITGAE | 5.9 | 0 | IL1R1 | 18.5 | 0 | COL5A2 | 119.4 | 0 |
COLEC12 | 7.2 | 0 | IL6ST | 23.2 | 0 | COL6A1 | 8.7 | 0 |
MCAM | 11.7 | 0 | ILDR1 | 11.3 | 0 | COL6A2 | 33.5 | 0 |
LAMA1 | 161.8 | 0 | IL10RB | 5.6 | 0 | COL6A3 | 87.5 | 0 |
LAMC1 | 7.3 | 0 | IL13RA1 | 10 | 0 | COL14A1 | 7.9 | 0 |
HAPLN1 | 19.1 | 0 | IL17RD | 6.8 | 0 | COL15A1 | 25.5 | 0 |
HMMR | 7.1 | 0 | IL20RA | 56.9 | 0 | COL18A1 | 12.7 | 0 |
LIFR | 8.8 | 0 | FN1 | 13.5 | 0 | |||
PDGFRA | 35.3 | 0 | FBN1 | 44.1 | 0 | |||
TGFR1 | 7.8 | 0 | DCN | 93.5 | 0 | |||
TGFR2 | 5.9 | 0 | TIMP2 | 52.2 | 0 | |||
PTGFRN | 19.7 | 0 | TIMP3 | 36.5 | 0 | |||
FGFR10P2 | 26.6 | 0 | CD44 | 67.1 | 0 | |||
EDNRA | 95.5 | 0 | SDC2 | 115.5 | 0 | |||
KDR | 7.1 | 0 | ||||||
ITGAV | 12.9 | 0 | ||||||
ITGA9 | 42.7 | 0 | ||||||
ITGB1 | 28.4 | 0 | ||||||
ITGB8 | 277.8 | 0 | ||||||
LGALS1 | 9.9 | 0 | ||||||
LGALS3 | 5.9 | 0 |
Differential expression of adhesion and extracellular matrix molecules at the maternal–fetal interface
During the implantation window, only one member of the Integrin family, ITGAE was over-expressed in TE cells, whereas ITGAV, ITGA9, ITGB1 and ITGB8 were specifically up-regulated in receptive endometrial cells (FCs and FDR were shown in Table I). Similarly, only COLEC12, among the Lectin family members, was over-expressed in the TE group compared with LGALS1, LGALS3, LGALS3BP and LGALS8 in endometrial cells (Table I; data not shown). Concerning cell adhesion molecules (CAM), only MCAM was up-regulated in the TE group, whereas in endometrial cells ALCAM, CEACAM1 and PECAM1 were over-expressed. In addition, LAMA1 and LAMC1, two members of the laminin family, were over-expressed in the TE group compared with only LAMA2 in the endometrial group. Several members of the Collagen family, as well as other ECM components, were exclusively up-regulated in the endometrium (Table I).
Among the proteoglycans, HAPLN1 (×19.1, FDR < 0.0001) and hyaluronan-mediated motility receptor (HMMR; 7.1, FDR < 0.0001) were over-expressed in TE cells and CD44 (67.1, FDR < 0.0001) and SDC2 (115.5, FDR < 0.0001) were over-expressed in receptive endometrial cells (Table 1).
Validation of gene expression
Some of the results of the microarray analysis were validated by quantitative RT–PCR using independent TE and endometrial biopsies (Fig. 3).
Figure 3
Gene expression validation. Bars represent the mean ± SEM. The Kruskal–Wallis non-parametric test was used to assess the values (mean ± SEM) from TE and endometrial samples; *P < 0.05 was considered significant.
Discussion
The initial steps of the implantation process involve a complex dialogue between embryonic and endometrial cells. In the current study, we report the differential expression of growth factors and growth factor receptors in the TE and endometrium cells during the implantation window, suggesting a potential role of these molecules in the early dialogue between blastocyst and uterus. In addition, we also found tissue-specific differences in the expression profiles of adhesion and extracellular matrix molecules that might play a role in blastocyst attachment and its subsequent invasion of the endometrium. Most of these results are novel and offer the opportunity to better understand the mechanisms ,which control the early stages of human embryo implantation.
The gene expression pattern of human blastocyst TE cells: embryonic genome activation
In the present study, the analysis of the transcriptome of blastocyst TE cells revealed the presence of many over-expressed genes involved in DNA replication, transcription, RNA metabolism and translation, confirming previous studies performed in whole blastocysts (Zeng et al., 2004; Sudheer and Adjaye, 2007; Bell et al., 2008; Jaroudi et al., 2009). In mammals, after fertilization, the genome of the newly formed embryo is at first transcriptionally inactive and embryo development relies on maternal proteins and transcripts synthesized during oogenesis. At later cell cycles, following activation of the zygotic genome, newly synthesized RNA and proteins are crucial for further embryonic development (Bettegowda et al., 2008). Epigenetic chromatin remodelling, including post-translational modifications (such as methylation and acetylation) of histones, non-histone proteins and DNA, is now proposed to be a key mechanism by which the embryonic genome is activated. In particular, de novo methylation has been observed in the blastocyst and it involves two DNA methyltransferase, DNMT3A and DNMT3B, as well as the DNA methyltransferase-like DNMT3L, which are all essential for mammalian development and regulation of genomic imprinting (Okano et al., 1999; Chedin et al., 2002). Here we found a strong expression of DNMT3A, DNMT3B and DNMT3L in blastocyst TE cells. This finding is in agreement with the study by Rahnama et al. (2006) showing that depletion of both DNMT3A and DNMT3B in a choriocarcinoma cell line affected human trophoblast migration (Rahnama et al., 2006). In addition, the offspring from female Dnmt3L−/− mice are non-viable presumably due by placental defects (Li et al., 1992). It has to be noted, however, that these enzymes present species-specific features. For instance, in mouse blastocysts, de novo methylation is restricted to the inner cell mass (Watanabe et al., 2002), whereas in bovine preimplantation embryos, methylation is higher in TE cells (Hou et al., 2007).
Potential paracrine interactions between human TE and endometrium during the implantation window
The differential expression of various growth factors and their receptors in endometrium and TE during the preimplantation period suggests that some of these molecules are important for implantation. Particularly, PDGFA, a member of the platelet-derived growth factor family, was strongly expressed in TE cells, whereas its receptor PDGFRA was up-regulated in endometrial cells. PDGFA transcripts have been previously found in human unfertilized oocytes and embryos from the 8-cell to blastocyst stage, while PDGFRA has been detected in 4-cell and 8-cell embryos and blastocysts but not in oocytes (Osterlund et al., 1996). Although it has been shown that, in in vitro conditions, human blastocysts respond to PDGF by promoting cell growth and differentiation of early human embryos (Lopata and Oliva, 1993), we do not think that PDGFA signalization is associated with autocrine signalling. Rather, since our findings suggest that PDGFA is produced by the blastocyst TE, we suggest a potential paracrine action of PDGFA from the blastocyst to the endometrium, which expresses strongly PDGFRA. Moreover, our microarray analysis shows for the first time that PGF, a member of the vascular endothelial growth factor family of pro-angiogenic factors, is strongly expressed in TE cells of early human embryos. Indeed, previously PGF has been detected in human choriocarcinoma cell lines, term placenta, isolated term cytotrophoblast cells and in vitro differentiated syncytiotrophoblast cells (Hauser and Weich, 1993; Khaliq et al., 1996; Shore et al., 1997; Athanassiades et al., 1998; Desai et al., 1999). Our finding is supported by the TE-specific expression of GCM1 (glial cells missing homologue 1), which transcriptionally regulates PGF in human choriocarcinoma cell lines as well as trophoblast-specific genes, including syncytin and aromatase (Yamada et al., 1999; Chang et al., 2008). The early expression of PGF suggests a possible role for PGF in trophoblast function via an autocrine mechanism. Moreover, the concomitant expression of KDR, a PGF receptor, in endometrial cells (Hauser and Weich, 1993), but not in TE cells (Clark et al., 1996; Vuckovic et al., 1996; Shore et al., 1997), implies that PGF could act also in a paracrine fashion to modulate angiogenesis and vessel remodelling during implantation and placentation.
Finally, Syncytin-1 (ERVWE1) and Syncytin-2 (HERV-FRD), which encode highly fusogenic retroviral envelope proteins that are expressed in the syncytiotrophoblast layer generated by fusion of mononuclear cytotrophoblast cells at the maternal–fetal interface (Lyden et al., 1994; Blond et al., 2000; Frendo et al., 2003; Prudhomme et al., 2005; Dunlap et al., 2006), as well as specific aromatases, such as CYP19A1 (an enzyme involved in the oestrogen biosynthesis), CYP11A1 and HSD3B1 (two enzymes controlling progesteronee biosynthesis) were also up-regulated in blastocyst TE (data not shown; Fig. 2). Their expression was previously reported in human placenta (Mahendroo et al., 1991; Yamada et al., 1995; Harada et al., 2003; Rama et al., 2004; Yashwanth et al., 2006), which is the primary site of oestrogen and progesteronee synthesis in pregnant women after the first trimester of pregnancy. The early presence of these genes is in agreement with previous studies which further showed that trophoblast-associated hormones induce blastulation and neurulation during early human embryogenesis (Gallego et al., 2009).
Adhesion and extracellular matrix molecules expressed in TE and endometrium: potential role in blastocyst attachment during implantation
The initial attachment of TE to the uterine walls involves low-affinity carbohydrate ligand-binding molecules such as selectins, galectins, heparin sulphate proteoglycans and heparin-binding growth factors (Bazer et al., 2009). Among the selectin family, only COLEC12 was up-regulated in TE cells, while several other selectin members were strongly expressed in the receptive endometrium. COLEC12 is part of the C-lectin family that is characterized by the presence of collagen-like sequences and carbohydrate recognition domains. These structural features suggest that this molecule might be involved in the initial TE attachment to the receptive endometrium, which expresses many collagen types (see Fig. 4).
Figure 4
Schematic representation of the distribution of adhesion and extracellular matrix molecules at the maternal–fetal interface. LE, luminal epithelium; BM, basement membrane; TE, trophectoderm.
Galectins are a newly defined family of galactose-binding lectins with conserved carbohydrate recognition domains that can bind to several glycoconjugates such as the basement membrane glycoproteins, laminin and fibronectin, and are involved in many biological events including development, differentiation, cell–cell adhesion, cell–matrix interaction and growth regulation. Galectin-3 was previously found in both the endometrium and all trophoblastic lineages, including villous cytotrophoblasts and extravillous trophoblasts, while galectin-1 was restricted to the endometrium (Maquoi et al., 1997; Lei et al., 2009). Galectin-8 expression is reported here for the first time in the endometrium. The implication of endometrial galectins in the initial steps of the implantation process has not yet been demonstrated. However, the expression of laminin in TE cells suggests a possible interaction with endometrial galectins.
The microarray analysis also identified over-expression of HMMR and hyaluronan and proteoglycan link protein 1 (HAPLN1) in TE, and up-regulation of the receptor for hyaluronic acid (CD44) and of syndecan 2 (SDC2) in the endometrium. It was recently reported that up-regulation of CD44 is coincident with the period in which the endometrium is receptive to embryo implantation (Afify et al., 2006), while SDC2 is the most strongly expressed syndecan throughout the menstrual cycle (Germeyer et al., 2007). In addition to its contribution to the endometrial glycocalyx in the secretory phase, CD44 might play a role in blastocyst attachment via its interaction with sulphated proteoglycans expressed in early human embryos (Weber et al., 1996; Horne et al., 2002). Hamilton et al. (2007) reported that CD44 can act with HMMR leading to high basal motility of invasive breast cancer cells, suggesting their potential implication in blastocyst attachment to the receptive endometrium via the TE.
Stable adhesion through integrins expressed in blastocyst TE and in the endometrial luminal epithelium and their ECM ligands are required for implantation. Here we show that blastocyst-stage TE cells express only few genes of this family, including integrin αE, which was previously described to be preferentially expressed in human intestinal intraepithelial lymphocytes (Ebert et al., 1998). On the other hand, we could not confirm previous findings showing that human blastocysts express the integrin subunits αV, α3, β1, β3, β4 and β5 (Campbell et al., 1995).
MCAM is a membrane-bound glycoprotein that mediates cell–cell adhesion and plays a role in several biological processes, including tumour progression, and possibly in implantation and placentation (Shih et al., 1998; Guezguez et al., 2007). MCAM is expressed in extravillous trophoblasts in both human choriocarcinoma cell lines and human chorionic villous explant cultures, but not in the villous trophoblast, suggesting a role of MCAM in trophoblast differentiation (Shih and Kurman, 1996; Higuchi et al., 2003). Here, we report a strong MCAM expression in TE cells suggesting its implication also in other functions, for instance trophoblast invasion as already proposed by Liu et al. (2004).
Limitations
Finally, we cannot exclude the possibility that the expression profiles we identified as potentially involved in the early dialogues between blastocyst and endometrium in IVF conditions do not completely reflect the conditions in natural cycles due to the impact of the COS protocol on endometrial receptivity (Horcajadas et al., 2008; Haouzi et al., 2009b, 2010) and of the in vitro manipulation on oocytes. Indeed human IVF embryos often show abnormal or delayed cell division (Trounson and Bongso, 1996) and data from animal models indicate that blastocysts produced in vitro show altered gene expression (Rizos et al., 2002; Lonergan et al., 2003; Gutiérrez-Adán et al., 2004; Whitworth et al., 2005; Corcoran et al., 2006, 2007; Balasubramanian et al., 2007; Giritharan et al., 2007; Bauer et al., 2010). Specifically, genes involved in transcription and translation are often down-regulated in _in vitro_-produced compared with in vivo bovine embryos (Lonergan et al., 2003; Corcoran et al., 2006, 2007). Giritharan et al. (2007) reported that genes involved in development, cell division and apoptosis are up-regulated following IVF in mouse blastocysts. Bauer et al. (2010) recently showed up-regulation of genes involved in transcription, translation and development and down-regulation of genes involved in protein glycosylation and phosphorylation, cell structure and motility, fatty acid and steroid metabolism and transcription regulation in porcine blastocysts produced in vitro. On the other hand, Whitworth et al. (2005) reported less dramatic effects on pig embryos at the blastocyst stage than at the 4-cell stage, suggesting that differences in gene expression do not persist throughout embryonic development.
Conclusion
The transcriptomic pattern of endometrial and TE cells at the time of implantation under IVF conditions reveals differential expression of specific growth factors and their receptors as well as ECM molecules that might play a role during the early stages of human embryo implantation. This study contributes to the understanding of the mechanisms that control human embryo implantation after IVF. Moreover, some of these genes could be used as biomarkers of the synchronization between maternal and embryonic tissues by checking either expression of these genes from blastocyst TE biopsy and/or from endometrial biopsy at Day 5 post-fertilization. However, additional studies need to be carried out in order to determine the relevance of such biomarkers.
Authors' roles
H.D. involved in concept design, analysis and interpretation of data and participated in manuscript preparation. D.H. performed endometrial biopsies. A.S. and D.J. involved in concept design. M.C. gave technical assistance. H.S. involved in concept design, manuscript preparation and approved the final version.
Funding
This work was partially supported by a grant from Ferring and Genevrier Pharmaceutical Companies.
Acknowledgements
We thank the direction of the University Hospital of Montpellier for support and the ART team for their assistance during this study.
References
, , .
Temporal variation in the distribution of hyaluronic acid, CD44s, and CD44v6 in the human endometrium across the menstrual cycle
,
Appl Immunohistochem Mol Morphol
,
2006
, vol.
14
(pg.
328
-
333
)
, .
Role of placenta growth factor (PlGF) in human extravillous trophoblast proliferation, migration and invasiveness
,
Placenta
,
1998
, vol.
19
(pg.
465
-
473
)
, , , , , , , .
Expression pattern of oxygen and stress-responsive gene transcripts at various developmental stages of in vitro and in vivo preimplantation bovine embryos
,
Theriogenology
,
2007
, vol.
68
(pg.
265
-
275
)
, , , , , , , , .
Transcriptional profiling by deep sequencing identifies differences in mRNA transcript abundance in in vivo-derived versus in vitro-cultured porcine blastocyst stage embryos
,
Biol Reprod
,
2010
. PMID: 20668257
, , , , .
Comparative aspects of implantation
,
Reproduction
,
2009
, vol.
138
(pg.
195
-
209
)
, , .
Genomic RNA profiling and the programme controlling preimplantation mammalian development
,
Mol Hum Reprod
,
2008
, vol.
14
(pg.
691
-
701
)
, , .
Cytoplasmic and nuclear determinants of the maternal-to-embryonic transition
,
Reprod Fertil Dev
,
2008
, vol.
20
(pg.
45
-
53
)
, , .
Paracrine and autocrine regulators of trophoblast invasion—a review
,
Placenta
,
2000
, vol.
21
(pg.
S55
-
S60
)
, , , , , , , , .
An envelope glycoprotein of the human endogenous retrovirus HERV-W is expressed in the human placenta and fuses cells expressing the type D mammalian retrovirus receptor
,
J Virol
,
2000
, vol.
74
(pg.
3321
-
3329
)
, , , , , , , , , , et al.
Minimum information about a microarray experiment (MIAME)-toward standards for microarray data
,
Nat Genet
,
2001
, vol.
29
(pg.
365
-
371
)
, , , , .
Cell adhesion molecules on the oocyte and preimplantation human embryo
,
Hum Reprod
,
1995
, vol.
10
(pg.
1571
-
1578
)
, , , , , , , , .
Changes in gene expression during the early to mid-luteal (receptive phase) transition in human endometrium detected by high-density microarray screening
,
Mol Hum Reprod
,
2002
, vol.
8
(pg.
871
-
879
)
, , , , , .
Glial cell missing 1 regulates placental growth factor (PGF) gene transcription in human trophoblast
,
Biol Reprod
,
2008
, vol.
78
(pg.
841
-
851
)
, , .
The DNA methyltransferase-like protein DNMT3L stimulates de novo methylation by Dnmt3a
,
Proc Natl Acad Sci USA
,
2002
, vol.
99
(pg.
16916
-
16921
)
, , , .
Localization of VEGF and expression of its receptors flt and KDR in human placenta throughout pregnancy
,
Hum Reprod
,
1996
, vol.
11
(pg.
1090
-
1098
)
, , , , , , , , , , et al.
Suppressed expression of genes involved in transcription and translation in in vitro compared with in vivo cultured bovine embryos
,
Reproduction
,
2006
, vol.
131
(pg.
651
-
660
)
, , , , .
Temporal expression of transcripts related to embryo quality in bovine embryos cultured from the 2-cell to blastocyst stage in vitro or in vivo
,
Mol Reprod Dev
,
2007
, vol.
74
(pg.
972
-
977
)
, , , , .
Signal transduction and biological function of placenta growth factor in primary human trophoblast
,
Biol Reprod
,
1999
, vol.
60
(pg.
887
-
892
)
, , , , , , .
Molecular cues to implantation
,
Endocr Rev
,
2004
, vol.
25
(pg.
341
-
373
)
, , , , , , .
Endogenous retroviruses regulate periimplantation placental growth and differentiation
,
Proc Natl Acad Sci USA
,
2006
, vol.
103
(pg.
14390
-
14395
)
, , , , , , .
CD8 + CD103+ T cells analogous to intestinal intraepithelial lymphocytes infiltrate the pancreas in chronic pancreatitis
,
Am J Gastroenterol
,
1998
, vol.
93
(pg.
2141
-
2147
)
, , , , , , , , .
Direct involvement of HERV-W Env glycoprotein in human trophoblast cell fusion and differentiation
,
Mol Cell Biol
,
2003
, vol.
23
(pg.
3566
-
3574
)
, .
An integrated view of L-selectin and trophinin function in human embryo implantation
,
J Obstet Gynaecol Res
,
2008
, vol.
34
(pg.
129
-
136
)
, , , , .
Opioid and progesteronee signaling is obligatory for early human embryogenesis
,
Stem Cells Dev
,
2009
, vol.
18
(pg.
737
-
740
)
, , , , , .
A prospective randomized trial of blastocyst culture and transfer in in vitro fertilization
,
Hum Reprod
,
1998
, vol.
13
(pg.
3434
-
3440
)
, , , , , , .
Expression of syndecans, cell–cell interaction regulating heparan sulfate proteoglycans, within the human endometrium and their regulation throughout the menstrual cycle
,
Fertil Steril
,
2007
, vol.
87
(pg.
657
-
663
)
, , , , , .
Effect of in vitro fertilization on gene expression and development of mouse preimplantation embryos
,
Reproduction
,
2007
, vol.
134
(pg.
63
-
72
)
, , , , , .
Dual role of melanoma cell adhesion molecule (MCAM)/CD146 in lymphocyte endothelium interaction: MCAM/CD146 promotes rolling via microvilli induction in lymphocyte and is an endothelial adhesion receptor
,
J Immunol
,
2007
, vol.
179
(pg.
6673
-
6685
)
, , , , , , , .
Effect of speed of development on mRNA expression pattern in early bovine embryos cultured in vivo or in vitro
,
Mol Reprod Dev
,
2004
, vol.
68
(pg.
441
-
448
)
, , , , , , , , , .
The hyaluronan receptors CD44 and Rhamm (CD168) form complexes with ERK1,2 that sustain high basal motility in breast cancer cells
,
J Biol Chem
,
2007
, vol.
282
(pg.
16667
-
16680
)
, .
CX3CL1 and CCL14 regulate extracellular matrix and adhesion molecules in the trophoblast: potential roles in human embryo implantation
,
Biol Reprod
,
2008
, vol.
79
(pg.
58
-
65
)
, , , , , , , , .
Identification of new biomarkers of human endometrial receptivity in the natural cycle
,
Hum Reprod
,
2009a
, vol.
24
(pg.
198
-
205
)
, , , , , , , .
Gene expression profile of the human endometrial receptivity: comparison between natural and stimulated cycles for the same patients
,
Hum Reprod
,
2009b
, vol.
24
(pg.
1436
-
1445
)
, , , , , , .
Controlled ovarian hyperstimulation for in vitro fertilization alters endometrial receptivity in humans: protocol effects
,
Biol Reprod
,
2010
, vol.
82
(pg.
679
-
686
)
, , .
Unique regulation of expression of human aromatase in the placenta
,
J Steroid Biochem Mol Biol
,
2003
, vol.
86
(pg.
327
-
334
)
, .
A heparin-binding form of placenta growth factor (PlGF-2) is expressed in human umbilical vein endothelial cells and in placenta
,
Growth Factors
,
1993
, vol.
9
(pg.
259
-
268
)
, , , , , , , , , .
Cyclic AMP enhances the expression of an extravillous trophoblast marker, melanoma cell adhesion molecule, in choriocarcinoma cell JEG3 and human chorionic villous explant cultures
,
Mol Hum Reprod
,
2003
, vol.
9
(pg.
359
-
366
)
, , , , , , , .
Controlled ovarian stimulation induces a functional genomic delay of the endometrium with potential clinical implications
,
J Clin Endocrinol Metab
,
2008
, vol.
93
(pg.
4500
-
4510
)
, , .
Adhesion molecules and the normal endometrium
,
BJOG
,
2002
, vol.
109
(pg.
610
-
617
)
, , , , , .
Genomic DNA methylation patterns in bovine preimplantation embryos derived from in vitro fertilization
,
Sci China C Life Sci
,
2007
, vol.
50
(pg.
56
-
61
)
, , , , .
Immunohistochemistry of matrix metalloproteinases (MMP), their substrates, and their inhibitors (TIMP) during trophoblast invasion in the human placenta
,
Cell Tissue Res
,
1998
, vol.
291
(pg.
133
-
148
)
, , , , , , , .
Expression profiling of DNA repair genes in human oocytes and blastocysts using microarrays
,
Hum Reprod
,
2009
, vol.
24
(pg.
2649
-
2655
)
, , , , , , , .
Localisation of placenta growth factor (PGF) in human term placenta
,
Growth Factors
,
1996
, vol.
13
(pg.
243
-
250
)
, , , .
Interactions between galectin-3 and integrinbeta3 in regulating endometrial cell proliferation and adhesion
,
Hum Reprod
,
2009
, vol.
24
(pg.
2879
-
2889
)
, , .
Targeted mutation of the DNA methyltransferase gene results in embryonic lethality
,
Cell
,
1992
, vol.
69
(pg.
915
-
926
)
, , , , , .
Pre-eclampsia is associated with the failure of melanoma cell adhesion molecule (MCAM/CD146) expression by intermediate trophoblast
,
Lab Invest
,
2004
, vol.
84
(pg.
221
-
228
)
, , , , .
Gene expression profiling of human peri-implantation endometria between natural and stimulated cycles
,
Fertil Steril
,
2008
, vol.
90
(pg.
2152
-
2164
)
, , , , , , .
Temporal divergence in the pattern of messenger RNA expression in bovine embryos cultured from the zygote to blastocyst stage in vitro or in vivo
,
Biol Reprod
,
2003
, vol.
69
(pg.
1424
-
1431
)
, .
Chorionic gonadotrophin secretion by human blastocysts
,
Hum Reprod
,
1993
, vol.
8
(pg.
932
-
938
)
, , , .
Ultrastructural characterization of endogenous retroviral particles isolated from normal human placentas
,
Biol Reprod
,
1994
, vol.
51
(pg.
152
-
157
)
, , , .
Tissue-specific expression of human P-450AROM. The promoter responsible for expression in adipose tissue is different from that utilized in placenta
,
J Biol Chem
,
1991
, vol.
266
(pg.
11276
-
11281
)
, , , .
Changes in the distribution pattern of galectin-1 and galectin-3 in human placenta correlates with the differentiation pathways of trophoblasts
,
Placenta
,
1997
, vol.
18
(pg.
433
-
439
)
.
Steroid hormone biosynthesis and actions in the materno-feto-placental unit
,
Clin Perinatol
,
1998
, vol.
25
(pg.
799
-
817
)
, , , , , , , .
In search of candidate genes critically expressed in the human endometrium during the window of implantation
,
Hum Reprod
,
2005
, vol.
20
(pg.
2104
-
1217
)
, , , .
DNA methyltransferases Dnmt3a and Dnmt3b are essential for de novo methylation and mammalian development
,
Cell
,
1999
, vol.
99
(pg.
247
-
257
)
, , .
Temporal expression of platelet-derived growth factor (PDGF)-A and its receptor in human preimplantation embryos
,
Mol Hum Reprod
,
1996
, vol.
2
(pg.
507
-
512
)
, , .
Embryo implantation after human in vitro fertilization: importance of endometrial receptivity
,
Fertil Steril
,
1990
, vol.
53
(pg.
870
-
874
)
, , .
Endogenous retroviruses and animal reproduction
,
Cytogenet Genome Res
,
2005
, vol.
110
(pg.
353
-
364
)
, , , , .
Epigenetic regulation of human trophoblastic cell migration and invasion
,
Endocrinology
,
2006
, vol.
147
(pg.
5275
-
5283
)
, , .
Hormonal regulation of human trophoblast differentiation: a possible role for 17beta-estradiol and GnRH
,
Mol Cell Endocrinol
,
2004
, vol.
218
(pg.
79
-
94
)
, , , , , , , .
Gene expression profiling of human endometrial receptivity on days LH + 2 versus LH + 7 by microarray technology
,
Mol Hum Reprod
,
2003
, vol.
9
(pg.
253
-
64
)
, , , , , , .
Analysis of differential messenger RNA expression between bovine blastocysts produced in different culture systems: implications for blastocyst quality
,
Biol Reprod
,
2002
, vol.
66
(pg.
589
-
595
)
, , , .
Distribution patterns of matrix metalloproteinase (MMP)-2 and -9 and their inhibitors (TIMP-1 and TIMP-2) in the human decidua during early pregnancy
,
Acta Histochem
,
2004
, vol.
106
(pg.
353
-
362
)
, , , , .
Expression of Mel-CAM in implantation site intermediate trophoblastic cell line, IST-1, limits its migration on uterine smooth muscle cells
,
J Cell Sci
,
1998
, vol.
111
Pt 17
(pg.
2655
-
2664
)
, .
Expression of melanoma cell adhesion molecule in intermediate trophoblast
,
Lab Invest
,
1996
, vol.
75
(pg.
377
-
388
)
, , , , , .
Vascular endothelial growth factor, placenta growth factor and their receptors in isolated human trophoblast
,
Placenta
,
1997
, vol.
18
(pg.
657
-
665
)
, , , .
Cytokines and embryo implantation
,
J Reprod Immunol
,
1998
, vol.
39
(pg.
117
-
131
)
, .
Functional genomics of human preimplantation development
,
Brief Funct Genomic Proteomic
,
2007
, vol.
6
(pg.
120
-
132
)
, , , , , , , , , , et al.
Molecular phenotyping of human endometrium distinguishes menstrual cycle phases and underlying biological processes in normo-ovulatory women
,
Endocrinology
,
2006
, vol.
147
(pg.
1097
-
1121
)
, .
Fertilization and development in humans
,
Curr Top Dev Biol
,
1996
, vol.
32
(pg.
59
-
101
)
, , .
Significance analysis of microarrays applied to the ionizing radiation response
,
Proc Natl Acad Sci USA
,
2001
, vol.
98
(pg.
5116
-
5121
)
, , , , , .
Expression of the vascular endothelial growth factor receptor, KDR, in human placenta
,
J Anat
,
1996
, vol.
188
Pt 2
(pg.
361
-
366
)
, , , .
Stage- and cell-specific expression of Dnmt3a and Dnmt3b during embryogenesis
,
Mech Dev
,
2002
, vol.
118
(pg.
187
-
190
)
, , , .
Receptor—ligand interactions between CD44 and osteopontin
,
Science
,
1996
, vol.
271
(pg.
509
-
512
)
, , , , , , , , , .
Transcriptional profiling of pig embryogenesis by using a 15-K member unigene set specific for pig reproductive tissues and embryos
,
Biol Reprod
,
2005
, vol.
72
(pg.
1437
-
1451
)
, , , .
Regulation of placenta-specific expression of the aromatase cytochrome P-450 gene. Involvement of the trophoblast-specific element binding protein
,
J Biol Chem
,
1995
, vol.
270
(pg.
25064
-
25069
)
, , , , .
A GCM motif protein is involved in placenta-specific expression of human aromatase gene
,
J Biol Chem
,
1999
, vol.
274
(pg.
32279
-
32286
)
, , , .
Role of estrogen in regulation of cellular differentiation: a study using human placental and rat Leydig cells
,
Mol Cell Endocrinol
,
2006
, vol.
246
(pg.
114
-
120
)
, , .
Transcript profiling during preimplantation mouse development
,
Dev Biol
,
2004
, vol.
272
(pg.
483
-
496
)
© The Author 2011. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com
Topic:
- cytokine
- cell adhesion molecules
- integrins
- placenta growth factor
- biopsy
- chorionic gonadotropin
- fertilization in vitro
- extracellular matrix proteins
- activated-leukocyte cell adhesion molecule
- adhesions
- cd31 antigens
- embryo stage 3
- embryo
- embryo transfer
- gene expression profiling
- genes
- growth factor
- mothers
- platelet-derived growth factor alpha receptor
- endometrium
- dna microarrays
- endometrial biopsy
- molecule
Advertisement intended for healthcare professionals
Citations
Views
Altmetric
Metrics
Total Views 2,326
1,487 Pageviews
839 PDF Downloads
Since 2/1/2017
Month: | Total Views: |
---|---|
February 2017 | 6 |
March 2017 | 13 |
April 2017 | 13 |
May 2017 | 12 |
June 2017 | 10 |
July 2017 | 15 |
August 2017 | 12 |
September 2017 | 9 |
October 2017 | 31 |
November 2017 | 9 |
December 2017 | 27 |
January 2018 | 17 |
February 2018 | 13 |
March 2018 | 21 |
April 2018 | 17 |
May 2018 | 20 |
June 2018 | 27 |
July 2018 | 16 |
August 2018 | 22 |
September 2018 | 21 |
October 2018 | 17 |
November 2018 | 17 |
December 2018 | 24 |
January 2019 | 20 |
February 2019 | 30 |
March 2019 | 18 |
April 2019 | 44 |
May 2019 | 32 |
June 2019 | 29 |
July 2019 | 37 |
August 2019 | 16 |
September 2019 | 12 |
October 2019 | 16 |
November 2019 | 13 |
December 2019 | 43 |
January 2020 | 22 |
February 2020 | 28 |
March 2020 | 19 |
April 2020 | 26 |
May 2020 | 17 |
June 2020 | 51 |
July 2020 | 24 |
August 2020 | 15 |
September 2020 | 17 |
October 2020 | 27 |
November 2020 | 21 |
December 2020 | 22 |
January 2021 | 15 |
February 2021 | 23 |
March 2021 | 39 |
April 2021 | 30 |
May 2021 | 22 |
June 2021 | 28 |
July 2021 | 30 |
August 2021 | 21 |
September 2021 | 31 |
October 2021 | 24 |
November 2021 | 23 |
December 2021 | 29 |
January 2022 | 21 |
February 2022 | 23 |
March 2022 | 21 |
April 2022 | 20 |
May 2022 | 45 |
June 2022 | 16 |
July 2022 | 29 |
August 2022 | 32 |
September 2022 | 29 |
October 2022 | 30 |
November 2022 | 29 |
December 2022 | 24 |
January 2023 | 25 |
February 2023 | 35 |
March 2023 | 11 |
April 2023 | 26 |
May 2023 | 16 |
June 2023 | 16 |
July 2023 | 41 |
August 2023 | 37 |
September 2023 | 21 |
October 2023 | 25 |
November 2023 | 46 |
December 2023 | 60 |
January 2024 | 44 |
February 2024 | 64 |
March 2024 | 37 |
April 2024 | 55 |
May 2024 | 37 |
June 2024 | 23 |
July 2024 | 37 |
August 2024 | 34 |
September 2024 | 14 |
Citations
78 Web of Science
×
Email alerts
Citing articles via
Advertisement intended for healthcare professionals