Научная статья на тему 'Comorbidity and syntropy of benign proliferative diseases of the female reproductive system: non-genetic, genetic, and epigenetic factors (review)'

Comorbidity and syntropy of benign proliferative diseases of the female reproductive system: non-genetic, genetic, and epigenetic factors (review) Текст научной статьи по специальности «Биологические науки»

CC BY
39
8
i Надоели баннеры? Вы всегда можете отключить рекламу.
Ключевые слова
uterine leiomyoma / endometriosis / endometrial hyperplasia / comorbidity / syntropy

Аннотация научной статьи по биологическим наукам, автор научной работы — Marina S. Ponomarenko, Evgeny A. Reshetnikov, Maria M. Churnosova, Yuliya N. Reshetnikova, Vladimir I. Churnosov

Background: Benign proliferative diseases of the female reproductive system (endometriosis, endometrial hyperplasia, and uterine leiomyoma) are comorbid and often occur together. The aim of the study: To establish common risk factors for the development of benign proliferative diseases of the female reproductive system (endometriosis, endometrial hyperplasia, and uterine leiomyoma). Materials and methods: The review includes up-to-date data from articles found in PubMed and Elibrary on this topic. Results: The article reviews the recent literature about factors determining comorbidity and syntropy of the diseases. Their comorbidity may be based on common environmental risk factors (early menarche, body mass index, induced abortions, etc.) and mechanisms of the pathogenesis, which include hormone-dependent cellular proliferation associated with the action of sex hormones and hormone-independent cellular proliferation processes stimulated by growth factors and cytokines, apoptosis, and pathological neoangiogenesis, etc. These common mechanisms are backed by syntropic genes (e.g., FSHB, COMT). Syntropy and pleiotropy appear to be closely related: syntropic genes manifest pleiotropic effects too. Also, epigenetic factors, such as miRNAs are important determinants of the diseased phenotypes. Conclusion: Identification of the shared factors contributing to the benign proliferative diseases of the female reproductive system helps to determine targets for therapeutic intervention and efficient control of the comorbidity.

i Надоели баннеры? Вы всегда можете отключить рекламу.
iНе можете найти то, что вам нужно? Попробуйте сервис подбора литературы.
i Надоели баннеры? Вы всегда можете отключить рекламу.

Текст научной работы на тему «Comorbidity and syntropy of benign proliferative diseases of the female reproductive system: non-genetic, genetic, and epigenetic factors (review)»

|l Hi^l

DOI: 10.18413/2658-6533-2023-9-4-0-9 УДК 618-019

Comorbidity and syntropy of benign proliferative diseases of the female reproductive system: non-genetic, genetic, and epigenetic factors (review)

Marina S. Ponomarenko , Evgeny A. Reshetnikov , Maria M. Churnosova , Yuliya N. Reshetnikova , Vladimir I. Churnosov , Irina V. Ponomarenko

Belgorod State National Research University, 85 Pobedy St., Belgorod, 308015, Russia Corresponding author: Marina S. Ponomarenko ([email protected])

Abstract

Background: Benign proliferative diseases of the female reproductive system (endometriosis, endometrial hyperplasia, and uterine leiomyoma) are comorbid and often occur together. The aim of the study: To establish common risk factors for the development of benign proliferative diseases of the female reproductive system (endometriosis, endometrial hyperplasia, and uterine leiomyoma). Materials and methods: The review includes up-to-date data from articles found in PubMed and Eli-brary on this topic. Results: The article reviews the recent literature about factors determining comorbidity and syntropy of the diseases. Their comorbidity may be based on common environmental risk factors (early menarche, body mass index, induced abortions, etc.) and mechanisms of the pathogenesis, which include hormone-dependent cellular proliferation associated with the action of sex hormones and hormone-independent cellular proliferation processes stimulated by growth factors and cytokines, apoptosis, and pathological neoangiogenesis, etc. These common mechanisms are backed by syntropic genes (e.g., FSHB, COMT). Syntropy and pleiotropy appear to be closely related: syn-tropic genes manifest pleiotropic effects too. Also, epigenetic factors, such as miRNAs are important determinants of the diseased phenotypes. Conclusion: Identification of the shared factors contributing to the benign proliferative diseases of the female reproductive system helps to determine targets for therapeutic intervention and efficient control of the comorbidity.

Keywords: uterine leiomyoma; endometriosis; endometrial hyperplasia; comorbidity; syntropy

For citation: Ponomarenko MS, Reshetnikov EA, Churnosova MM, et al. Comorbidity and syntropy of benign proliferative diseases of the female reproductive system: non-genetic, genetic, and epige-netic factors (review). Research Results in Biomedicine. 2023;9(4):544-556. DOI: 10.18413/26586533-2023-9-4-0-9

Introduction. Benign proliferative diseases of the female reproductive system - endometriosis, endometrial hyperplasia, and uterine leiomyoma, prevail in the structure of the overall gynecological morbidity [1, 2, 3]. Uterine leiomyoma (UL), commonly known as

fibroids, is a benign tumor of the smooth muscle in the uterus [1, 4]. About 30 percent of reproductive-age women are diagnosed with UL, which is considered as a major factor of gynecologic morbidity, one of the primary causes of hospitalizations for gynecological disorders, and the most frequent reason for hysterectomy

in the USA [1]. Endometriosis (EM) is a condition when endometrial tissue proliferates in ectopic locations, such as the pelvic peritoneum, ovaries, and rectovaginal septum [3, 5]. Endometriosis is diagnosed in 6-10% of women of reproductive age and in 20-50% of infertile women [5, 6]. Endometrial hyperplasia (EH) is defined as excessive growth and thickening of the endometrium. This process increases the glands/stroma ratio [7, 8]. In the structure of gynecological morbidity in women of reproductive age, EH possesses a significant segment. In developed countries, there are an estimated 200,000 new cases of EH per annum [2].

Benign proliferative diseases of the female reproductive system are comorbid and quite commonly occur together [9-12]. Nezhat et al. [9] reported the co-occurrence of uterine leiomyoma and endometriosis in 87.1% of women who underwent laparoscopic myomec-tomy/hysterectomy for symptomatic uterine leiomyoma. Simple endometrial hyperplasia occurs in 22.7% of patients with uterine leiomyoma [10]. Among patients with endometrial hyperplasia, uterine fibroid occurs in 51.54% and endometriosis in 35.19% [11], with uterine fibroid occurring in 52.40% and endometrial hyperplasia in 46.33% of patients with endometriosis [12].

The aim of the study. To establish common risk factors for the development of benign proliferative diseases of the female reproductive system (endometriosis, endometrial hyperplasia, and uterine leiomyoma).

Materials and methods: The review includes up-to-date data from articles found in PubMed and Elibrary on this topic.

Results and Discussion. One of the causes for comorbidity of the above benign proliferative diseases may be common environmental and/or endogenous risk factors. Risk factors for UL are endogenous hormones, early menarche or late menopause, obesity, induced abortions, family history, genetic factors, polycystic ovary syndrome, age, ethnicity, oral contraceptives, lifestyle, diet, and others (Fig. 1, 2, 3) [1, 4, 13, 14, 15].

The continuous overstimulation of the endometrium by estrogen was recognized among the primary factors of the EH patho-physiology [8]. The other EH risk factors are

quite diverse and include early menarche or late menopause, overweight, diabetes mellitus, infertility, hypertension, family history, genetic factors, induced abortions, chronic anovulation, polycystic ovary syndrome, tamoxifen therapy, estrogen hormone replacement therapy, post-menopausal status, and others [2, 7, 8, 11].

Endometriosis was associated with body weight, age at menarche, duration of menstrual discharge and menstrual cycle, reproductive factors, family history, genetic factors, induced abortions, diet, and others [3, 5, 6, 12, 16, 17, 18].

In general, it appears that factors affecting the level of endogenous estrogen (early menarche, body mass index, and others), family history, genetic factors, induced abortions, etc., are shared factors for the risk of benign proliferative disorders of the female reproductive system (uterine leiomyoma, endometrio-sis, and endometrial hyperplasia) and can determine their comorbidity.

At the same time, benign proliferative diseases of the female reproductive system, along with common risk factors, have common pathogenetic mechanisms of development: hormone-dependent cellular proliferation associated with the action of sex hormones (absolute, relative and local hyperestrogenism); hormone-independent cellular proliferation processes, stimulated by growth factors and cytokines, and causing uncontrolled cellular proliferation, apoptosis, and pathological neo-angiogenesis; processes involving pro- and anti-inflammatory cytokines caused by genital infections, invasive intrauterine interventions; immune disorders associated with immunolog-ical resistance, etc. [1-4, 7, 8].

Age at menarche has been suggested as a risk factor for UL, EH, and EM [1, 2, 7, 18]. Women with early onset of menarche have, on average, a longer period of menstruations in their life and thus a greater overall exposure to estrogens, which may induce the growth of UL and promote EH [1, 7]. Cell division rate in the myometrium is highest during the luteal phase of the menstrual cycle, therefore, a longer history of cycling may increase the risk of UL [1]. Continuing exposure to estrogens in the absence of progesterone seems to promote the development of EH [2].

GWAS-significant loci associated with UL

(the loci reported by two and more GWAS are shown)

WNT4, CDC42 (lp36.12)

TERC (3q26.2) LNX1, PDGFUi (4ql2) SULT1B1 (4ql3.3) TERT(5p 15.33) ZNF346, UIMC1 (5q35.2) SM/, ESR1(6q25.2) ANKRD15 (9p24.3)

OBFCI, £L£(i0q24.3)

WTl (llpl3) PDHX, CD44 (llpl3) FSHB (1 lpl4.1) RICSA, BET1L (llpl5.5) CllorfS5, KDELC2 (llq22.3) FOXOl (13ql4.ll) SHBG, TP53 (17pl3.1) MCM8, TRMT6 (20pl2.3) TNRC6B (22ql3.1) RAP2C (Xp26.2) MED 12 fXal3.n

Epigeiietic factors of UL

• aberrant hypoinethylation genes:

CYP1B1, CACNA1C, COL4A1, COL4A2, COL6A3, IRS!, KIAA1199, POPDC2, PRL, RAD51L1, TACR2, UNC5D, VCAN, WBSCRi 7, etc.

• aberrant hypermethylation genes:

AIM1, ANXA3, CD74, CFB, DAPK1, DLEC1, DPP4, DUSP6; EFEMP1, EPAS1, EZR, FOXP1, GATA2, GSTM5, HTATIP2, IGF2BP3, KAT2B, KDR, KLF11, KRT19, LDB2, LI MAI, MEOX2, MYEF2, NR3C1, NR4A2, NR4A3, NR5A2, NTRK2, NUAK1, PLCE1, SDPR, SORBS2, SPTBN1, TIAM1, etc.

• downregulated miRNAs: miR-146b-5p, miR-335-3p, miR-335-5p, miR-135b-5p, miR-10a-3p, miR-10a-5p, miR-200a-3p, etc.

• npregulated miKNAs: miR-146a-5p, miR-576-3p, miR-122-5p, miR-1246, miR-595, miR-658, miR-4284, miR-924, let-7b, etc.

Uterine leiomyoma

J_

UL risk factors

family history blade race

premenopausal state

level of endogenous estrogen and

progesterone

obesity and overweight

early menarche or late menopause

parity

iiulliparous

infertility

age at first term birth time since last birth use of oral contraceptives hypertension diabetes mellitus polycystic ovary syndrome insulin resistance hypermsulinemia induced abortions infection or inflammation stress and physical activity vitamin D deficiency smoking and alcohol dietarv habits and caffeine

Clinical importance

estimated prevalence ranging from 20-77%

27% of gynecological hospitalization

30% of all hysterectomies among women aged 1B-44 years

symptoms, that seriously affect a woman's quality of life: dysmenorrhea, pelvic pain, abnormal bleeding, bladder or bowel dysfunction 2-3% of cases of infertility, and increased risk of miscarriase

Fig. 1. Risk factors (environmental, genetic and epigenetic) and clinical importance of UL

GWAS-significant loci associated with EM

(the loci reported by two aud more

GWAS are shown) WNT4, CDC42 (lp36.12) ILIA (2ql3) ETAA1 (2pL4) GREB l(2p25 A) FN! (2q35) KDR (4ql2) ID4 (6p22.3) CCDC170 (6q25.1) SYNE], ESRl(6q25 .2) 7pl2.3

AC010719.1, ACQ}8706.1 (7pl5.2) CDKN2B-AS1 (9p21.3) FSHB (lip 14.1) VEZT (12q22)

Epigenetic factors of EM

• aberrant hypermethylation genes: HOXA1Q, EDARADD, ADAP1, JAKMIP3, SLC16A3, HOXDIO, HOXD11, TBC1D2, PIK3AP1, DRD4ATP HA, DTNA, FXYD3, AGPAT3, etc.

• aberrant h yp om ethyl ation genes: PRSLiG2, ANOl, SCARB1, PIGR, etc.

• downregulated miRNAs: miR-20a, miR-23a, miR-23b, miR-25, miR-141. miR-183, m\R-196b, miR-199a, miR-200a, miR-200b, miR-200c, miR-424, miR-3613, let-7b, etc.

• npregnlated miRNAs: miR-1, miR-29c, miR-99a, miR-99b, miR-100, miR-125a, miR-125b, miR-143, miR-145, miR-150, miR-194, miR-223, miR-342, miR-365, miR-370, miR-375, etc.

• aberrant histone acetylation and alterations in levels of histone acetylases

and t is tone deacetylases: HOXAIO, ESR1, CDKN1A, CDKN1B, CDKN2A, CHEK2. CEBPA, INK4a, DR6, CDH1, etc.

EM risk factors

family history level of endogenous estrogen and progesterone low BMI early menarche short menstrual cycle length long and heavy menstruation nulliparity

use of oral contraceptives induced abortions infection or inflammation alcohol intake dietarv habits

Endometriosis

T

Clinical importance

the prevalence late of symptomatic EM is estimated to be 10% and a further 11% of undiagnosed cases

symptoms that seriously affect a woman's quality of life: chronic pelvic pain, dysmenorrhea, dyspareunia, irregular uterine bleeding, infertility affects 20-50% of women with infertility

affects 25%-70% of women and adolescents with chronic pelvic pain or pelvic pain and dvsmenorrhea

Fig. 2. Risk factors (environmental, genetic and epigenetic) and clinical importance of EM

Ponomarenko MS, et al. Comorbidity and syntropy of benign .

EH risk factors

family history peri/postmenopausal status chronic anovulation level of endogenous estrogen hyperestrogenism chronic exposure to estrogen unopposed by progesterone insulin resistance hyperinsulinemia and reduced sex hormone binding globulin early menarche or late menopause

overweight and obesity

polycystic ovary syndrome

induced abortions

chronic endometritis

tamoxifen therapy

estrogen hormone replacement

therapy

metabolic syndrome diabetes mellitus hypertension infertility nulliparous

Genetic and epigenetic factors of EH

(the candidate gene reported by association studies are shown)

• tumor necrosis factors and their receptors (TNFa, Lta, TNFR1, TNFR2)

• chemokines (MIP1fi, MCP1, SDF1)

• growth factors (TGFbl, IGF1, VEGF, FGFR2)

• interleukins (IL-6, IL-10, IL-5)

• detoxification enzymes (GSTPI, CYPIAI, CYP1A2, SULT1A1, UGT2B4)

• folate metabolism (TYMS)

• lipid metabolism (FTO);

• metabolism of sex hormones (FSHB, FSHR, LHCGR, ESR2, COMT)

• miRNAs (miR-20a, miR-21, miR-26a, etc)

Endometrial hyperplasia

Clinical importance

estimates range from 133-208 cases per 100,000 woman-years for overall EH incidence 10 - 18% of gynecological hospitalization

symptom that seriously affect a woman's quality of life: abnormal uterine bleeding (men-orrhagia, intermenstrual bleeding, postmenopausal bleeding, etc) risk for transformation into malignant tumors (EH with atypia)

iНе можете найти то, что вам нужно? Попробуйте сервис подбора литературы.

Fig. 3. Risk factors (environmental, genetic and epigenetic) and clinical importance of EH

Likewise, an increased lifelong exposure to menstruation due to early menarche may also increase the risk of EM [18]. The relationship between age at menarche and the proliferative benign diseases is further supported by that candidate genes for age at menarche were associated with EH and EM [11, 12, 19].

Age at menopause has also been suggested to affect the risk of UL and EH [1, 2, 7]. Late menopause has a similar effect to early menarche: it extends a lifelong exposure to estrogens, which may promote the growth of UL and promote EH [1, 7].

One more risk factor for UL and EH is obesity/overweight/high body mass index [1, 2, 7, 8, 14, 15]. A direct correlation between BMI and UL was reported: the risk increased by 20% per each 10 kg of weight gain [14]. Obese women (BMI >30 kg/m2) showed a nearly 4-fold increase in the incidence of atypical EH, as compared to non-obese ones. Furthermore, women with BMI of 40 kg/m2 had a 13-fold higher risk of atypical EH and a 23fold increased risk of non-atypical EH as compared to the women with normal BMI [8]. This relationship can be explained by that androgens produced by the adrenal glands and ovaries are converted into estrogens in the fat tissue. Excessive fat promotes the development of insulin resistance and reduced synthesis of globulin, which binds sex hormones [8]. As a result, obese women have a higher level of free circulating estrogens that can promote the development of UL and EH. Besides, hyperinsu-linemia, one of the main elements of the metabolic syndrome, is associated with higher serum levels of the insulin-like growth factor-1 and epidermal growth factor [20], which, in turn, induce secretion of estrogen in ovaries or promote cell proliferation in the endometrium and myometrium [1, 2].

BMI is a risk factor for EM too, but the effect is opposite to the mentioned above: low BMI increases the risk of EM [5, 17]. The recent meta-analysis reported that the EM risk decreased (0R=0.67) per each 5 kg/m2 BMI gain [17]. One of the possible explanations of these results is that obese women usually have a higher estrogen level that may lead to anovulatory and irregular menses and, respectively, lower chances of the retrograde menstruation [16].

The history of induced abortions significantly increases the risk of UL, EH, and EM [11, 12, 13, 16]. Induced abortions in the first trimester of pregnancy may cause multiple health complications, including polycystic ovary syndrome, hyperprolactinemia, anovula-tory menstruation, post-abortion endometritis, and the others [21]. Induced recurring abortions result in injuries of the uterus. Uterine injuries may induce the expression of the growth factor that speed-ups cellular proliferation, suppresses apoptosis, and increases production of the extracellular matrix [1]. The risk for UL, EH, and EM directly correlates with the number of abortions in the anamnesis [11, 12, 13]. A higher number of induced abortions was associated with an increased UL risk (one induced abortion - OR = 1.32, two induced abortions - OR = 1.45, and >3 induced abortions -OR = 1.62) [13], EH (it increases from OR=2.00 in the case of two abortions up to OR=6.54 with four and more abortions) [11] and EM (it increases from OR = 2.05 in the case of 2 abortions up to OR = 5.87 with 4 and more abortions) [12]. Induced abortions may also be associated with other hormone-related diseases (e.g., breast cancer) [22].

Another important risk factor for UL, EH, and EM is a family history of the disease [1-4]. A risk to develop UL is 2.5-fold greater for first-degree relatives of affected women than the population average [23] and the concordance among monozygotic twins is almost twice that of dizygotic twins [15]. Heritability estimates of UL from twin studies vary from 26 to 69% in European populations [15]. Genetic factors are important for the development of EM [3, 6]. Results of twin studies estimate their contribution at 51% [6]. As to the relative contribution of genetic factors to the development of EH, no family or twin studies have been conducted so far and candidate gene association studies were limited [7, 11].

Recent genome-wide studies (GWAS) provided more estimates for genetic factors of the diseases. The current National Genome Research Institute's catalog of GWAS (https://www.ebi.ac.uk/gwas/) includes more than 10 studies of EM [e.g., 24-31]. These studies reported more than 20 significant loci associated with EM. Among those, 19 SNPs were estimated to determine 5.19% of the EM variability [30].

Several GWAS of UL were conducted in different ethnic populations, including Japanese, Caucasians of the USA and Australia, and African-American women [e.g., 31-36]. In 2018, two teams presented results of the first GWAS of UL in European populations [33, 34]. Both studies reported somewhat similar results: 21 and 22 GWAS-significant loci for UL, respectively. The contribution of these 21 GWAS-significant SNPs to the UL variability was estimated at 13% [33]. A follow-up GWAS meta-analysis of 35,474 cases and 267,505 controls of European ancestry confirmed 21 previously reported loci and identified eight novel loci for UL [35]. Besides, four loci identified in the meta-analysis were also associated with EM risk: 1p36.12

(WNT4/CDC42), 2p25.1 (GREB1), 6q25.2 (ESR1), 11p14.1 (FSHB). A summary of the candidate genes for UL and EM determined by GWAS is given in Table 1.

An epidemiological meta-analysis of 402,868 women suggested at least a two-fold higher risk for UL in patients with a history of EM [35]. It was hypothesized that both UL and EM were underlain by hormone-related factors [33] and thus might have a shared genetic basis [35]. This assumption was supported by the recent findings of syntropic genes for these diseases [33, 35]. In particular, the GWAS of UL in European populations [33] replicated three (GREB1, CDC42/WNT4, SYNE1/ESR1) of the 19 previously reported candidate loci for EM [30].

Table 1

GWAS-significant loci associated with UL and EM

Locus Genes References

UL and EM

1p36.12 WNT4, CDC42 [25,28,30,31,33,34,35]

2p25.1 GREB1 [26,30,31,33,34,35]

6q25.2 SYNE1, ESR1 [30,33,34,35,36]

11p14.1 FSHB [30,33,35]

EM

2q13 IL1A [24,30]

2p14 ETAA1 [26,30]

6p22.3 ID4 [25,26,28,30]

7p15.2 AC010719.1, AC018706.1 [26,27,28,30]

9p21.3 CDKN2B-AS1 [26,29,30]

12q22 VEZT [25,30]

UL

3q26.2 TERC [34,35]

4q12 LNX1, PDGFRA [33,35]

4q13.3 SULT1B1 [31,33,35]

5p15.33 TERT [31,33,34,35]

5q35.2 ZNF346, UIMC1 [33,35]

9p24.3 ANKRD15 [33,35,36]

10q24.3 OBFC1, SLK [31,32,33,34,35,36]

11p15.5 RIC8A, BET1L [32,33,35]

11p13 WT1 [33,34,35,36]

11p13 PDHX, CD44 [33,34,35]

11q22.3 C11orf65, KDELC2 [33,35]

13q14.11 FOXO1 [33,34,35]

17p13.1 SHBG, TP53 [33,34,35,36]

20p12.3 MCM8, TRMT6 [33,35]

22q13.1 TNRC6B [31,32,33,35,36]

Xp26.2 RAP2C [31,35]

Xq13.1 MED12 [34,35]

Note: the loci reported by two and more GWAS are shown

A comparison of the biological processes for the EM and UL development (gene expression, gene networks, and epigenetic regulation) revealed their similarities thus suggesting mo-

lecular syntropy of both disorders. The PANTHER overrepresentation test of the biological pathways for the syntropic genes provided further support for this assumption (Table 2).

Table 2

Hierarchical PANTHER Overrepresentation Test results of the syntropic genes for UL _and EM (http://geneontology.org) __

GO biological process complete Genes Fold Enrichment +/- raw P value FDR

Mammary gland branching involved in pregnancy WNT4, ESR1 > 100 + 1.93E-06 1.53E-02

Multicellular organismal reproductive process WNT4, ESR1, SYNE1, FSHB 16.55 + 3.74E-05 3.13E-02

Multicellular organism reproduction WNT4, ESR1, SYNE1, FSHB 16.20 + 4.07E-05 2.94E-02

Female pregnancy WNT4, ESR1, FSHB 55.45 + 1.48E-05 2.14E-02

Multi-organism reproductive process WNT4, ESR1, SYNE1, FSHB 13.63 + 8.00E-05 4.71E-02

Multi-multicellular organism process WNT4, ESR1, FSHB 47.61 + 2.32E-05 2.31E-02

Branching involved in mammary gland duct morphogenesis WNT4, ESR1 > 100 + 2.06E-05 2.34E-02

Mammary gland duct morphogenesis WNT4, ESR1 > 100 + 3.85E-05 3.06E-02

Mammary gland morphogenesis WNT4, ESR1 > 100 + 7.10E-05 4.51E-02

Gland morphogenesis WNT4, ESR1, FSHB > 100 + 2.52E-06 1.00E-02

Developmental process involved in reproduction WNT4, ESR1, SYNE1, FSHB 14.17 + 6.87E-05 4.55E-02

Positive regulation of steroid biosynthetic process WNT4, ESR1 > 100 + 1.59E-05 2.11E-02

Positive regulation of steroid metabolic process WNT4, ESR1 > 100 + 3.63E-05 3.20E-02

Positive regulation of lipid metabolic process WNT4, ESR1, FSHB 65.57 + 9.04E-06 1.80E-02

Ovulation cycle process WNT4, ESR1 > 100 + 7.10E-05 4.34E-02

Female gonad development WNT4, ESR1, FSHB > 100 + 1.81E-06 2.88E-02

Development of primary female sexual characteristics WNT4, ESR1, FSHB > 100 + 2.12E-06 1.12E-02

Female sex differentiation WNT4, ESR1, FSHB 93.92 + 3.14E-06 9.99E-03

Sex differentiation WNT4, ESR1, FSHB 38.19 + 4.45E-05 3.08E-02

Development of primary sexual characteristics WNT4, ESR1, FSHB 46.54 + 2.48E-05 2.32E-02

Gonad development WNT4, ESR1, FSHB 47.82 + 2.29E-05 2.43E-02

Regulation of morphogenesis of an epithelium WNT4, ESR1, FSHB 57.28 + 1.35E-05 2.14E-02

Hormone metabolic process WNT4, ESR1, FSHB 53.19 + 1.68E-05 2.05E-02

Regulation of animal organ morphogenesis WNT4, ESR1, FSHB 40.10 + 3.85E-05 2.92E-02

No GWAS on EH has been conducted so far. Candidate gene studies reported associations of tumor necrosis factors and their receptors (TNFa, Lta, TNFR1, TNFR2), chemokines (MIP1P, MCP1, SDF1), growth factors (TGFb1, IGF1, VEGF, FGFR2), interleukins (IL-6, IL-10, IL-5), folate metabolizing and detoxifying enzymes (TYMS, ApoE, GSTPI, CYPIAI, CYP1A2, SULT1A1, GP-IIIa), candidate genes for age at menarche, and others [7, 11]. Some of these genes were also associated with EM and UL [3, 37, 38].

The available body of evidence suggests that FSHB can be one of the syntropic genes for UL, EH, and EM. The meta-analysis of 11 GWAS reported the region on chromosome 11 (11p14.1, rs74485684) harboring the FSHB gene as that associated with EM [30]. This variant was replicated by GWAS of UL in European populations [33]. Several loci associated with EM, including rs11031006 located in 11p14.1 harboring the FSHB gene, were reported as candidates for UL in the recent GWAS [35]. Polymorphisms of the FSHB gene (rs555621, rs11031010, rs1782507) were also documented for their association with EH [11, 12]. Importantly, rs11031010 FSHB associated with EH is located just 1.9 kb from rs74485684 (associated with EM) and linked to rs11031006 (r2 = 0.64) (associated with EM [30] and UL [35] respectively).

There is evidence that some tightly linked polymorphisms of the FSHB gene may contribute to various reproductive characters, including the serum level of the follicle-stimulating and luteinizing hormones [39], ages at menarche [40] and menopause [41], BMI of adults [19]. Several SNPs in the 5'-region of FSHB were suggested to play a key role in various reproductive processes [42]. Importantly, three alleles of the FSHB gene (G of rs555621, A of rs11031010, and A of rs1782507) were associated with later menarche [40] and were suggested as a protective factor for EH [11]. That means the age at menarche and the EH risk may have a shared genetic basis.

The FSHB gene encodes a beta-subunit of the follicle-stimulating hormone. This hormone has multiple functions in the female reproductive system, including stimulation of the

follicular granulosa cells proliferation, the rescue of follicles from apoptosis, synthesis of the luteinizing hormone receptors on these cells before ovulation, control of the synthesis of aromatases that convert androgens into estrogens (estradiol), etc. (http://www.en-sembl.org/).

It seems quite reasonable to hypothesize that, in addition to FSHB and other candidate genes for the age at menarche, a syntropic effect for UL, EH, and EM may be manifested by genes contributing to those anthropometric traits, which were shown to increase risks for these diseases (e.g., height, BMI, and the others). For example, an increased BMI was reported to elevate a risk for EH [2, 7, 8] and UL [1, 14, 15], while a lower BMI might increase a risk for EM [5, 17]. Several genetic variants within or near genes CAB39L, GRB14, KIFAP3, and WNT4 were associated with both EM and the ratio of waist and hip circumference [43]. Several genes (e.g., FANCL, FTO, GPRC5B, LIN28B, MAP2K5, TNNI3K, and the others) were suggested to contribute to some of the above-mentioned phenotypes, such as the age at menarche, height, BMI, and the others [44, etc]. Some of these genes (e.g., LIN28B) were also associated with EH and EM [11, 12, 19].

Another syntropic candidate gene contributing to both anthropometric traits (age at menarche, BMI, and height) and the above-mentioned diseases (UL, EM, and EH) can be COMT. COMT (catechol-O-methyltransfer-ase) is an enzyme involved in the estrogen metabolism. The rs4633 polymorphism of these gene was associated with AAM, height, and BMI [19]. This polymorphism and related rs4680 were associated with the expression level of COMT in peripheral blood [19]. The activity of the COMT enzyme is elevated in the human leiomyoma tissue as compared with the normal myometrium; since this enzyme plays a key role in estrogen metabolism, the observed association suggests a possible causal role of COMT in the UL formation [4]. In addition, the rs4680 polymorphism encodes a Val158Met substitution in COMT: the Met variant has a 40% lower activity as compared to Val [45]. Further support of the possible

contribution of rs4680 to UL comes from the meta-analysis by Feng et al. [46], which reported its association with UL. This locus was also associated with EM [47], while rs4633 COMT - with EH [11].

The above results suggest that plei-otropic loci apparently account for a major contribution to the analyzed phenotypes (age at menarche, anthropometric characteristics, UL, EH, EM). In turn, this ample evidence suggests a shared genetic basis for these phenotypes. The estimates of genetic correlations (rg) between various phenotypes and EM based on the GWAS results provide a support for this assumption [30]. Indeed, the significant genetic correlations (p<0.05) were determined between EM and the age at menarche, height, and obesity. Furthermore, significant genetic correlations were obtained between the age at menarche and two anthropometric characteristics, BMI (rg= -0.35, p=1.4x10-91) and height (rg =0.13, p=2.5x10-10) [48]. The analysis of the data of 250,037 women from the UK Biobank yielded a strong association between the age at menarche and obesity (p<1*10-21), UL (p<1x10-21), and EM (p<7.48x10-5) [49]. A significant genetic correlation was determined between UL and EM (p = 0.003) by Rafnar et al. [33]. The existence of syntropic genes and probable shared genetic basis can be important factors of UL, EH, and EM comorbidity.

Another reason for the comorbidity of benign proliferative diseases of the female reproductive system (UL, EH, and EM) may be the involvement of common regulatory non-coding RNAs and, in particular, micro-RNAs (miRNAs) in their development [50]. MiRNAs modulate various biological processes occurring in the endo- and myometrium, such as cell proliferation, apoptosis, cell differentiation, and inflammatory response. These RNAs are involved in the regulation of the effect of steroid hormones on the endo- and myometrium. In the normal endometrium, the highest expression levels were reported for miR-21, miR-125b, miR-145, miR-23b, miR-26a, miR-29a, and miR-99a [50]. Thirty-two miRNAs were found to be differentially expressed in glandular epithelial and endometrial stromal cells. Steroid hormones had the strongest effect on

the expression of miR-20a, miR-21 и miR-26a. In the endometrium, the elevated expression was observed for miR-29c and miR-145, and lower expression - for miR-196b, miR-199a, miR-23a/b. The differential expression of miRNAs resulted in the altered expression of the respective targeted proteins playing an important role in the pathogenesis of EM. For example, the elevated expression of miR-29c and miR-145 lowered the expression of COL7A1, UPK1B, TFAP2C и FASCIN1, JAM-A, PAI-1, while the lower expression of miR-196b и miR-199a increased transcription of BCL2, C-MYC, HOXA10, IKK/NFKB, and IL-8 [50].

The comparative analysis of the expression level of micro-RNA in the normal myom-etrium and cells of myomatous nodes demonstrated that, in the normal myometrium, the expression of miR-141, miR-200a, miR-200b, miR-200c, and miR-429 was elevated that determined the lower production of targeted proteins ZEB1, ZEB2, STAT5b, while the expression of miR-199a-3p/214 was lowered that resulted in the higher expression of the COX2 protein. The myomatous tissue was characterized by the higher expression of let-7 and the lower expression of miR-200a, miR-200b, and some other miRNAs that significantly altered the expression of targeted proteins HMGA2, ZEB1, ZEB2, CYP1B1, VEGFA, CDH1, and others [50].

It appears that the benign proliferative diseases of the female reproductive system share the same epigenetic mechanisms involving miRNAs (let-7, miR-200, miR-199, miR-145, and others) and their targeted proteins (HMGA2, COX2, and others). These miRNAs exert their biological effects through the control of the transcription of some genes (including the syntropic ones) and respective targeted proteins. On the other hand, the differences in the epigenetic landscape may explain the existence of different clinical forms of the disorders as well as their unique clinical manifestation.

Conclusion. In summary, the commonly observed comorbidity of the benign prolifera-tive diseases of the female reproductive system (uterine leiomyoma, endometriosis, endometrial hyperplasia) is based on the shared risk factors and mechanisms of the pathogenesis;

the latter include, among the others, epigenetic factors and syntropic genes. Identification of the shared factors for these diseases helps to determine therapeutic targets and develop an efficient treatment strategy against comorbid-ity of the disorders.

Financial support

No financial support has been providedfor this work.

Conflict of interests

The authors have no conflict of interest to declare.

References

1. Wise LA, Laughlin-Tommaso SK. Epidemiology of uterine fibroids: from menarche to menopause. Clinical Obstetrics and Gynecology. 2016;59(1):2-24. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/GRF.0000000000000164

2. Sanderson PA, Critchley HOD, Williams ARW, et al. New concepts for an old problem: the diagnosis of endometrial hyperplasia. Human Reproduction Update. 2017;23(2):232-254. DOI: https://doi .org/10.1093/humupd/dmw042

3. Lagana AS, Garzon S, Gotte M, et al. The pathogenesis of endometriosis: molecular and cell biology insights. International Journal of Molecular Sciences. 2019;20(22):5615. DOI: https://doi.org/ 10.3390/ijms20225615

4. Commandeu AE, Styer AK, Teixeira JM. Epidemiological and genetic clues for molecular mechanisms involved in uterine leiomyoma development and growth. Human Reproduction Update. 2015;21(5):593-615. DOI: https://doi.org/ 10.1093/humupd/dmv030

5. Backonja U, Louis GMB, Lauver DR. Overall adiposity, adipose tissue distribution, and endometriosis: a systematic review. Nursing Research. 2016;65(2): 151-166. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/NNR.0000000000000146

6. Treloar SA, O'Connor DT, O'Connor VM, et al. Genetic influences on endometriosis in an Australian twin sample. Fertility and Sterility. 1999;71(4): 701-710. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0015-0282(98)00540-8

iНе можете найти то, что вам нужно? Попробуйте сервис подбора литературы.

7. Chandra V, Kim JJ, Benbrook DM, et al. Therapeutic options for management of endometrial hyperplasia. Journal of Gynecologic Oncology. 2016;27(1):e8. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3802/jgo.2016.27.e8

8. Epplein M, Reed SD, Voigt LF, et al. Risk of complex and atypical endometrial hyperplasia in relation to anthropometric measures and reproductive history. American Journal of Epidemiology. 2008;168(6):563-576. DOI: https://doi.org/ 10.1093/aj e/kwn168

9. Nezhat C, Li A, Abed S, et al. Strong association between endometriosis and symptomatic leiomyomas. Journal of the Society of Laparoendo-scopic Surgeons. 2016;20(3):e2016.00053. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4293/JSLS.2016.00053

10.Geethamala K, Murthy VS, Vani BR, et al. Uterine Leiomyomas: An ENIGMA. Journal of Mid-Life Health. 2016;7(1):22-27. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4103/0976-7800.179170

11. Ponomarenko I, Reshetnikov E, Poloni-kov A, et al. Candidate genes for age at menarche are associated with endometrial hyperplasia. Gene. 2020;757:144933. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016Zj.gene.2020.144933

12. Ponomarenko I, Reshetnikov E, Poloni-kov A, et al. Candidate genes for age at menarche are associated with endometriosis. Reproductive BioMedicine Online. 2020;41(5):943-956. DOI: https://doi.org/ 10.1016/j .rbmo.2020.04.016

13. Song L, Shen L, Mandiwa C, et al. Induced and spontaneous abortion and risk of uterine fibroids. Journal of Women's Health. 2017;26(1):76-82. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1089/jwh.2016.5913

14.Ross RK, Pike MC, Vessey MP, et al. Risk factors for uterine fibroids: reduced risk associated with oral contraceptives. British Medical Journal (Clinical research ed.). 1986;293:359-362. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.293.6543.359

15.Luoto R Kaprio J, Rutanen EM, et al. Heritability and risk factors of uterine fibroids--the Finnish Twin Cohort study. Maturitas. 2000;37(1): 15-26. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/s0378-5122(00)00160-2

16.Moini A, Malekzadeh F, Amirchaghmaghi E, et al. Risk factors associated with endometriosis among infertile Iranian women. Archives of Medical Science. 2013;9(3):506-514. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5114/aoms.2013.35420

17. Liu Y, Zhang W. Association between body mass index and endometriosis risk: a metaanalysis. Oncotarget. 2017;8(29):46928-46936. DOI: https://doi.org/10.18632/oncotarget.14916

18.Nnoaham KE, Webster P, Kumbang J, et al. Is early age at menarche a risk factor for endometriosis? A systematic review and meta-analysis of case-control studies. Fertility and Sterility.

2012;98(3):702-712.e6. DOI:

https://doi.Org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2012.05.035

19.Ponomarenko I, Reshetnikov E, Altu-chova O, et al. Association of genetic polymorphisms with age at menarche in Russian women. Gene. 2019;686:228-236. DOI: https: //doi .org/10.1016/j .gene.2018.11.042

20.Alsudairi HN, Alrasheed AT, Dvornyk V. Estrogens and uterine fibroids: an integrated view. Research Results in Biomedicine. 2021;7(2): 156-163. DOI: https://doi.org/10.18413/2658-6533-2021-7-2-0-6

21. Douglas NI, Pavlova TU, Burtseva TE, et al. Women's reproductive health in the Sakha Republic (Yakutia). International Journal of Circumpolar Health. 2014;73(1):25872. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3402/ijch.v73.25872

22. Schneider AP, 2nd Zainer CM, Kubat CK, et al. The breast cancer epidemic: 10 facts. The Linacre quarterly. 2014;81(3):244-277. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1179/2050854914Y.000000002 7

23.Vikhlyaeva EM, Khodzhaeva ZS, Fantschenko ND. Familial predisposition to uterine leiomyomas. International Journal of Gynecology and Obstetrics. 1995;51(2):127-131. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/0020-7292(95)02533-I

24. Adachi S, Tajima A, Quan J, et al. Metaanalysis of genome-wide association scans for genetic susceptibility to endometriosis in Japanese population. Journal of Human Genetics. 2010;55:816-821. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/jhg.2010.118

25.Albertsen HM, Chettier R, Farrington P, et al. Genome-wide association study link novel loci to endometriosis. PLoS ONE. 2013;8(3):e58257. DOI: https://doi.org/ 10.1371/j ournal.pone.005 8257

26.Nyholt DR, Low SK, Anderson CA, et al. Genome-wide association meta-analysis identifies new endometriosis risk loci. Nature Genetics. 2012;44:1355-1359. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/ng.2445

27. Painter JN, Anderson CA, Nyholt DR, et al. Genome-wide association study identifies a locus at 7p15.2 associated with endometriosis. Nature Genetics. 2011;43:51-54. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/ng.731

28.Uimari O, Rahmioglu N, Nyholt DR, et al. Genome-wide genetic analyses highlight mito-gen-activated protein kinase (MAPK) signaling in the pathogenesis of endometriosis. Human Reproduction. 2017;32(4):780-793. DOI: https: //doi .org/10.1093/humrep/dex024

29. Uno S, Zembutsu H, Hirasawa A, et al. A genome-wide association study identifies genetic variants in the CDKN2BAS locus associated with endometriosis in Japanese. Nature Genetics. 2010;42:707-710. DOI: https://doi.org/ 10.1038/ng.612

30. Sapkota Y, Steinthorsdottir V, Morris AP, et al. Meta-analysis identifies five novel loci associated with endometriosis highlighting key genes involved in hormone metabolism. Nature Communications. 2017;8:15539. DOI: https://doi.org/10.103 8/ncomms15539

31.Masuda T, Low SK, Akiyama M, et al. GWAS of five gynecologic diseases and cross-trait analysis in Japanese. European Journal of Human Genetics. 2020;28:95-107. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41431-019-0495-1

32. Cha PC, Takahashi A, Hosono N, et al. A genome-wide association study identifies three loci associated with susceptibility to uterine fibroids. Nature Genetics. 2011;43:447-450. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/ng.805

33.Rafnar T, Gunnarsson B, Stefansson OA, et al. Variants associating with uterine leiomyoma highlight genetic background shared by various cancers and hormone-related traits. Nature Communications. 2018;9:3636. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-018-05428-6

34. Välimäki N, Kuisma H, Pasanen A, et al. Genetic predisposition to uterine leiomyoma is determined by loci for genitourinary development and genome stability. eLife. 2018;7:e37110. DOI: https://doi.org/ 10.7554/eLife.37110

35.Gallagher CS, Mäkinen N, Harris HR, et al. Genome-wide association and epidemiological analyses reveal common genetic origins between uterine leiomyomata and endometriosis. Nature Communications. 2019;10:4857. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-019-12536-4

36. Edwards TL, Giri A, Hellwege JN, et al. A Trans-Ethnic Genome-Wide Association Study of Uterine Fibroids. Frontiers in Genetics. 2019; 10:511. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fgene.2019.00511

37.Radzinsky VE, Altuchova OB. Molecular-genetic determinants of infertility in genital en-dometryosis. Research Results in Biomedicine. 2018;4(3):28-37. Russian. DOI: https://doi.org/10.18413/2313-8955-2018-4-3-0-3

38.Golovchenko IO. Genetic determinants of sex hormone levels in endometriosis patients. Research Results in Biomedicine. 2023;9(1):5-21. Russian. DOI: https://doi.org/10.18413/2658-6533-2023-9-1-0-1

39.Ruth KS, Campbell PJ, Chew S, et al. Genome-wide association study with 1000 genomes imputation identifies signals for nine sex hormone-related phenotypes. European Journal of Human Genetics. 2016;24:284-290. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/ejhg.2015.102

40. He C, Kraft P, Chasman DI, Buring JE, et al. A large-scale candidate gene association study of age at menarche and age at natural menopause. Human Genetics. 2010;128:515-527. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00439-010-0878-4

41. Stolk L, Perry JRB, Chasman DI, et al. Meta-analyses identify 13 loci associated with age at menopause and highlight DNA repair and immune pathways. Nature Genetics. 2012;44:260-268. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/ng.1051

42.Gajbhiye R, Fung JN, Montgomery GW. Complex genetics of female fertility. npj Genomic Medicine. 2018;3:29. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41525-018-0068-1

43.Rahmioglu N, Macgregor S, Drong AW, et al. Genome-wide enrichment analysis between endometriosis and obesity-related traits reveals novel susceptibility loci. Human Molecular Genetics. 2015;24(4): 1185-1199. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/hmg/ddu516

44.Fernandez-Rhodes L, Demerath EW, Cousminer DL, et al. Association of adiposity genetic variants with menarche timing in 92,105 women of European descent. American Journal of Epidemiology. 2013;178(3):451-460. DOI: https://doi.org/ 10.1093/aj e/kws473

45. Chen J, Lipska BK, Halim N, et al. Functional analysis of genetic variation in catechol-O-methyltransferase (COMT): effects on mRNA, protein, and enzyme activity in postmortem human brain. American Journal of Human Genetics. 2004;75:807-821. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1086/425589

46. Feng Y, Zha X, Zhou C, et al. The associations between the Val158Met in the catechol-O-methyltransferase (COMT) gene and the risk of uterine leiomyoma (ULM). Gene. 2013;529(2):296-299. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gene.2013.07.019

47.Zhai J, Jiang L, Wen A, et al. Analysis of the relationship between COMT polymorphisms and endometriosis susceptibility. Medicine. 2019;98(1):e13933. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/MD.0000000000013933

48. Day FR Bulik-Sullivan B, Hinds DA, et al. Shared genetic aetiology of puberty timing be-

tween sexes and with health-related outcomes. Nature Communications. 2015;6:8842. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/ncomms9842

49. Day FR Elks CE, Murray A, et al. Puberty timing associated with diabetes, cardiovascular disease and also diverse health outcomes in men and women: the UK Biobank study. Scientific Reports. 2015;5:11208. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/srep11208

50.Nothnick WB. Non-coding RNAs in Uterine Development, Function and Disease. Advances in experimental medicine and biology. 2016;886:171-189. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-7417-8_9

Received 3 May 2023 Revised 2 July 2023 Accepted 19 September 2023

Information about the authors

Marina S. Ponomarenko, Post-graduate Student in Scientific Specialty 1.5.7 - Genetics, Belgorod State National Research University, Belgorod, Russia, E-mail: [email protected], OR-CID: https://orcid.org/0009-0009-0312-0829. Evgeny A. Reshetnikov, Doct. Sci. (Biology), Associate Professor, Professor at the Department of Biomedical Disciplines, Belgorod State National Research University, Belgorod, Russia, E-mail: [email protected], ORCID: https://or-cid.org/0000-0002-5429-6666. Maria M. Churnosova, Student, Belgorod State National Research University, Belgorod, Russia, E-mail: [email protected], ORCID: https://or-cid.org/0000-0001-6444-8806. Yuliya N. Reshetnikova, Post-graduate Student in Scientific Specialty 1.5.7 - Genetics, Belgorod State National Research University, Belgorod, Russia, E-mail: [email protected], ORCID: https://orcid.org/0009-0004-6123-4086. Vladimir I. Churnosov, Post-graduate Student in Scientific Specialty 1.5.7 - Genetics, Belgorod State National Research University, Belgorod, Russia, E-mail: [email protected], ORCID: https://orcid.org/0009-0007-8519-4594. Irina V. Ponomarenko, Doct. Sci. (Medicine), Associate Professor, Professor at the Department of Biomedical Disciplines, Belgorod State National Research University, Belgorod, Russia, E-mail: [email protected], ORCID: https://or-cid.org/0000-0002-5652-0166.

i Надоели баннеры? Вы всегда можете отключить рекламу.