English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Zendy Plus

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Zendy Tools

Zendy Open

As a heterogenous disease with likely multiple pathogeneses and as-yet-undefined subtypes, progress in endometriosis treatment is currently limited by a lack of appropriate models and cohorts for research. Almost half of all publicly available datasets labelled as ‘endometriosis’ do not represent true disease as they are based on eutopic endometrium. Eutopic endometrial cells and tissues are frequently being used to represent endometriotic lesions, despite the unequivocal differences at both the tissue and cellular levels. As preclinical endometriosis research increases, it is important that the unique cellular and molecular profiles of endometrium and endometriosis are distinguished. Whilst each of these biospecimens can provide invaluable information to better understand disease aetiology and identify targets for diagnosis and treatment, it is imperative that the appropriate biospecimen and model are used to answer the relevant research question because endometriosis is not the endometrium.

Endometriosis is not the endometrium: Reviewing the over-representation of eutopic endometrium in endometriosis research