Advertisement

Endometrial human chorionic gonadotropin (hCG) expression is a marker for adequate secretory transformation of the endometrium

  • Sindy SchugEmail author
  • Anja Baunacke
  • Maren Goeckenjan
  • Lars-Christian Horn
  • Gabriele Pretzsch
  • Gerolf Zimmermann
  • Henry AlexanderEmail author
Gynecologic Endocrinology and Reproductive Medicine

Abstract

Purpose

Successful embryo implantation into the endometrium depends on embryonic characteristics and proper endometrial development. Reproductive medicine often focuses on embryo quality, whereas reliable diagnostic tests for endometrial receptivity are still needed. We previously found that human chorionic gonadotropin (hCG), one of the earliest proteins secreted by the embryo, was also expressed by the luteal phase endometrium around the implantation window. Here, we tested our hypothesis of endometrial hCG as an implantation marker.

Methods

Endometrial biopsies and serum samples were taken from patients undergoing routine infertility diagnostics. Correlations of immunohistochemically detected endometrial hCG expression with adequate endometrial secretory transformation, the infiltration of CD45-positive leukocytes, clinical diagnostic parameters, and endometrial thickness were analyzed.

Results

A highly significant correlation between the endometrial score, as a measurement for regular secretory transformation, and the intensity of hCG staining was found. The invasion of CD45-positive leukocytes increased with progressing endometrial secretory transformation and rising endometrial hCG expression. In addition, serum progesterone concentrations correlated with hCG expression by the endometrial glands.

Conclusions

Our results suggest endometrial hCG as a possible diagnostic parameter characterizing the endometrial secretory transformation and, thus, possibly also its implantation capability.

Keywords

Human chorionic gonadotropin hCG Endometrium Implantation marker Reproductive medicine 

Abbreviations

ART

Assisted reproductive technologies

CGB

Human chorionic gonadotropin beta subunit

ET

Embryo transfer

hCG

Human chorionic gonadotropin

HE

Hematoxylin–eosin

LH

Luteinizing hormone

PAS

Periodic acid-schiff

Notes

Acknowledgements

The authors thank Regina Scherling for expert technical assistance.

Author contributions

SS: data analysis and manuscript writing. AB: Protocol/project development, data collection and management, data analysis, and manuscript writing/editing. MG: data analysis. LCH: data analysis and manuscript editing. GP: contribution of endometrial specimens. GZ: protocol/project development, data analysis, and manuscript editing. HA: protocol/project development and manuscript editing.

Funding

S. Schug was supported by the German Research Foundation (DFG, Grant SO 1231/1-1) and a junior research grant awarded by the University of Leipzig Medical School.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

We declare that we have no conflict of interest.

Ethical approval

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards. This article does not contain any studies with animals performed by any of the authors.

Informed consent

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

Supplementary material

404_2019_5130_MOESM1_ESM.pptx (876 kb)
Supplementary material 1 (PPTX 877 kb)

References

  1. 1.
    Edgell TA, Rombauts LJ, Salamonsen LA (2013) Assessing receptivity in the endometrium: the need for a rapid, non-invasive test. Reprod Biomed Online 27:486–496CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Evans J, Hannan NJ, Hincks C, Rombauts LJ, Salamonsen LA (2012) Defective soil for a fertile seed? Altered endometrial development is detrimental to pregnancy success. PLoS One 7:e53098CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Shapiro BS, Daneshmand ST, Restrepo H, Garner FC, Aguirre M, Hudson C (2013) Matched-cohort comparison of single-embryo transfers in fresh and frozen-thawed embryo transfer cycles. Fertil Steril 99:389–392CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Coutifaris C, Myers ER, Guzick DS, Diamond MP, Carson SA, Legro RS, McGovern PG, Schlaff WD, Carr BR, Steinkampf MP, Silva S, Vogel DL, Leppert PC (2004) Histological dating of timed endometrial biopsy tissue is not related to fertility status. Fertil Steril 82:1264–1272CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Fadare O, Zheng W (2005) Histologic dating of the endometrium: accuracy, reproducibility, and practical value. Adv Anat Pathol 12:39–46CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Murray MJ, Meyer WR, Zaino RJ, Lessey BA, Novotny DB, Ireland K, Zeng D, Fritz MA (2004) A critical analysis of the accuracy, reproducibility, and clinical utility of histologic endometrial dating in fertile women. Fertil Steril 81:1333–1343CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Myers ER, Silva S, Barnhart K, Groben PA, Richardson MS, Robboy SJ, Leppert P, Coutifaris C (2004) Interobserver and intraobserver variability in the histological dating of the endometrium in fertile and infertile women. Fertil Steril 82:1278–1282CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Choi HY, Lee YB, Kim DS (1966) Histochemical studies of human endometrium with special emphasis on secretory activity and ovulation. Yonsei Med J 7:7–12CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Cramer H, Kloss O (1955) [Improvement of the functional diagnostic of the endometrium by routine histochemical representation of polysacchardies]. Arch Gynakol 185:739–758CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Lei ZM, Toth P, Rao CV, Pridham D (1993) Novel coexpression of human chorionic gonadotropin (hCG)/human luteinizing hormone receptors and their ligand hCG in human fallopian tubes. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 77:863–872Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Alexander H, Biesold C, Weber W, Baier D (1997) [Immunohistochemical evidence of immuno-reactive hCG in the secretory endometrium in women]. Zentralbl Gynakol 119(Suppl 1):17–22Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Zimmermann G, Ackermann W, Alexander H (2009) Epithelial human chorionic gonadotropin is expressed and produced in human secretory endometrium during the normal menstrual cycle. Biol Reprod 80:1053–1065CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Zimmermann G, Ackermann W, Alexander H (2012) Expression and production of human chorionic gonadotropin (hCG) in the normal secretory endometrium: evidence of CGB7 and/or CGB6 beta hCG subunit gene expression. Biol Reprod 86:87CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Zimmermann G, Baier D, Majer J, Alexander H (2003) Expression of beta hCG and alpha CG mRNA and hCG hormone in human decidual tissue in patients during tubal pregnancy. Mol Hum Reprod 9:81–89CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Pierce JG, Parsons TF (1981) Glycoprotein hormones: structure and function. Annu Rev Biochem 50:465–495CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Tsampalas M, Gridelet V, Berndt S, Foidart JM, Geenen V, Perrier DS (2010) Human chorionic gonadotropin: a hormone with immunological and angiogenic properties. J Reprod Immunol 85:93–98CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Hallast P, Nagirnaja L, Margus T, Laan M (2005) Segmental duplications and gene conversion: human luteinizing hormone/chorionic gonadotropin beta gene cluster. Genome Res 15:1535–1546CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Policastro PF, Niels-McQueen S, Carle G, Boime I (1986) A map of the hCG beta-LH beta gene cluster. J Biol Chem 261:5907–5916Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Cole LA (2009) New discoveries on the biology and detection of human chorionic gonadotropin. Reprod Biol Endocrinol 7:8CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    McFarland KC, Sprengel R, Phillips HS, Kohler M, Rosemblit N, Nikolics K, Segaloff DL, Seeburg PH (1989) Lutropin-choriogonadotropin receptor: an unusual member of the G protein-coupled receptor family. Science 245:494–499CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Talmadge K, Vamvakopoulos NC, Fiddes JC (1984) Evolution of the genes for the beta subunits of human chorionic gonadotropin and luteinizing hormone. Nature 307:37–40CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Choi J, Smitz J (2014) Luteinizing hormone and human chorionic gonadotropin: origins of difference. Mol Cell Endocrinol 383:203–213CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Choi J, Smitz J (2014) Luteinizing hormone and human chorionic gonadotropin: distinguishing unique physiologic roles. Gynecol Endocrinol 30:174–181CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Riccetti L, Yvinec R, Klett D, Gallay N, Combarnous Y, Reiter E, Simoni M, Casarini L, Ayoub MA (2017) Human luteinizing hormone and chorionic gonadotropin display biased agonism at the LH and LH/CG receptors. Sci Rep 7:940CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Grzesik P, Kreuchwig A, Rutz C, Furkert J, Wiesner B, Schuelein R, Kleinau G, Gromoll J, Krause G (2015) Differences in signal activation by LH and hCG are mediated by the LH/CG receptor's extracellular hinge region. Front Endocrinol (Lausanne) 6:140CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Hearn MT, Gomme PT (2000) Molecular architecture and biorecognition processes of the cystine knot protein superfamily: part I. The glycoprotein hormones. J Mol Recognit 13:223–278CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Alexander H, Zimmermann G, Lehmann M, Pfeiffer R, Schone E, Leiblein S, Ziegert M (1998) HCG secretion by peripheral mononuclear cells during pregnancy. Domest Anim Endocrinol 15:377–387CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Bansal AS, Bora SA, Saso S, Smith JR, Johnson MR, Thum MY (2012) Mechanism of human chorionic gonadotrophin-mediated immunomodulation in pregnancy. Expert Rev Clin Immunol 8:747–753CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Kane N, Kelly R, Saunders PT, Critchley HO (2009) Proliferation of uterine natural killer cells is induced by human chorionic gonadotropin and mediated via the mannose receptor. Endocrinology 150:2882–2888CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Koldehoff M, Katzorke T, Wisbrun NC, Propping D, Wohlers S, Bielfeld P, Steckel NK, Beelen DW, Elmaagacli AH (2011) Modulating impact of human chorionic gonadotropin hormone on the maturation and function of hematopoietic cells. J Leukoc Biol 90:1017–1026CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Licht P, Losch A, Dittrich R, Neuwinger J, Siebzehnrubl E, Wildt L (1998) Novel insights into human endometrial paracrinology and embryo-maternal communication by intrauterine microdialysis. Hum Reprod Update 4:532–538CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Paiva P, Hannan NJ, Hincks C, Meehan KL, Pruysers E, Dimitriadis E, Salamonsen LA (2011) Human chorionic gonadotrophin regulates FGF2 and other cytokines produced by human endometrial epithelial cells, providing a mechanism for enhancing endometrial receptivity. Hum Reprod 26:1153–1162CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Schumacher A, Brachwitz N, Sohr S, Engeland K, Langwisch S, Dolaptchieva M, Alexander T, Taran A, Malfertheiner SF, Costa SD, Zimmermann G, Nitschke C, Volk HD, Alexander H, Gunzer M, Zenclussen AC (2009) Human chorionic gonadotropin attracts regulatory T cells into the fetal-maternal interface during early human pregnancy. J Immunol 182:5488–5497CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Schumacher A, Heinze K, Witte J, Poloski E, Linzke N, Woidacki K, Zenclussen AC (2013) Human chorionic gonadotropin as a central regulator of pregnancy immune tolerance. J Immunol 190:2650–2658CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Berndt S, Perrier DS, Blacher S, Pequeux C, Lorquet S, Munaut C, Applanat M, Herve MA, Lamande N, Corvol P, van den BF, Frankenne F, Poutanen M, Huhtaniemi I, Geenen V, Noel A, Foidart JM (2006) Angiogenic activity of human chorionic gonadotropin through LH receptor activation on endothelial and epithelial cells of the endometrium. FASEB J 20:2630–2632CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Brouillet S, Hoffmann P, Chauvet S, Salomon A, Chamboredon S, Sergent F, Benharouga M, Feige JJ, Alfaidy N (2012) Revisiting the role of hCG: new regulation of the angiogenic factor EG-VEGF and its receptors. Cell Mol Life Sci 69:1537–1550CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Licht P, Russu V, Wildt L (2001) On the role of human chorionic gonadotropin (hCG) in the embryo-endometrial microenvironment: implications for differentiation and implantation. Semin Reprod Med 19:37–47CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Zygmunt M, Herr F, Keller-Schoenwetter S, Kunzi-Rapp K, Munstedt K, Rao CV, Lang U, Preissner KT (2002) Characterization of human chorionic gonadotropin as a novel angiogenic factor. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 87:5290–5296CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Fluhr H, Bischof-Islami D, Krenzer S, Licht P, Bischof P, Zygmunt M (2008) Human chorionic gonadotropin stimulates matrix metalloproteinases-2 and -9 in cytotrophoblastic cells and decreases tissue inhibitor of metalloproteinases-1, -2, and -3 in decidualized endometrial stromal cells. Fertil Steril 90:1390–1395CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Hagglund AC, Ny A, Leonardsson G, Ny T (1999) Regulation and localization of matrix metalloproteinases and tissue inhibitors of metalloproteinases in the mouse ovary during gonadotropin-induced ovulation. Endocrinology 140:4351–4358CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Licht P, Fluhr H, Neuwinger J, Wallwiener D, Wildt L (2007) Is human chorionic gonadotropin directly involved in the regulation of human implantation? Mol Cell Endocrinol 269:85–92CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Sherwin JR, Sharkey AM, Cameo P, Mavrogianis PM, Catalano RD, Edassery S, Fazleabas AT (2007) Identification of novel genes regulated by chorionic gonadotropin in baboon endometrium during the window of implantation. Endocrinology 148:618–626CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Sugihara K, Kabir-Salmani M, Byrne J, Wolf DP, Lessey B, Iwashita M, Aoki D, Nakayama J, Fukuda MN (2008) Induction of trophinin in human endometrial surface epithelia by CGbeta and IL-1beta. FEBS Lett 582:197–202CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Shoupe D, Mishell DR Jr, Lacarra M, Lobo RA, Horenstein J, d’Ablaing G, Moyer D (1989) Correlation of endometrial maturation with four methods of estimating day of ovulation. Obstet Gynecol 73:88–92Google Scholar
  45. 45.
    Ghosh D, Sengupta J (2014) Delineating the prime mover action of progesterone for endometrial receptivity in primates. Indian J Med Res 140(Suppl):S130–S136Google Scholar
  46. 46.
    Evans J, Salamonsen LA (2013) Too much of a good thing? Experimental evidence suggests prolonged exposure to hCG is detrimental to endometrial receptivity. Hum Reprod 28:1610–1619CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Perrier DS, Berndt S, Tsampalas M, Charlet-Renard C, Dubois M, Bourgain C, Hazout A, Foidart JM, Geenen V (2007) Dialogue between blastocyst hCG and endometrial LH/hCG receptor: which role in implantation? Gynecol Obstet Invest 64:156–160CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Reshef E, Lei ZM, Rao CV, Pridham DD, Chegini N, Luborsky JL (1990) The presence of gonadotropin receptors in nonpregnant human uterus, human placenta, fetal membranes, and decidua. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 70:421–430CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Ziecik AJ, Recka-Reszka K, Rzucidlo SJ (1992) Extragonadal gonadotropin receptors, their distribution and function. J Physiol Pharmacol 43:33–49Google Scholar
  50. 50.
    Friedler S, Schenker JG, Herman A, Lewin A (1996) The role of ultrasonography in the evaluation of endometrial receptivity following assisted reproductive treatments: a critical review. Hum Reprod Update 2:323–335CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Glissant A, de MJ, Frydman R (1985) Ultrasound study of the endometrium during in vitro fertilization cycles. Fertil Steril 44:786–790CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Remohi J, Ardiles G, Garcia-Velasco JA, Gaitan P, Simon C, Pellicer A (1997) Endometrial thickness and serum oestradiol concentrations as predictors of outcome in oocyte donation. Hum Reprod 12:2271–2276CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Detti L, Yelian FD, Kruger ML, Diamond MP, Rode A, Mitwally MF, Puscheck EE (2008) Endometrial thickness is related to miscarriage rate, but not to the estradiol concentration, in cycles down-regulated with gonadotropin-releasing hormone antagonist. Fertil Steril 89:998–1001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Lurie M, Elmalach I, Weill S (1988) The pattern of epithelial mucin secretion in normal, hyperplastic, and adenocarcinomatous endometrium. Gynecol Oncol 30:274–284CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Li TC, Rogers AW, Lenton EA, Dockery P, Cooke I (1987) A comparison between two methods of chronological dating of human endometrial biopsies during the luteal phase, and their correlation with histologic dating. Fertil Steril 48:928–932CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    Li TC, Dockery P, Rogers AW, Cooke ID (1989) How precise is histologic dating of endometrium using the standard dating criteria? Fertil Steril 51:759–763CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. 57.
    Smith S (1992) Determining the time of the urinary luteinizing hormone surge. Does it facilitate the interpretation of endometrial biopsy results? J Reprod Med 37:785–788Google Scholar
  58. 58.
    Diaz-Gimeno P, Ruiz-Alonso M, Blesa D, Bosch N, Martinez-Conejero JA, Alama P, Garrido N, Pellicer A, Simon C (2013) The accuracy and reproducibility of the endometrial receptivity array is superior to histology as a diagnostic method for endometrial receptivity. Fertil Steril 99:508–517CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. 59.
    Garrido-Gomez T, Ruiz-Alonso M, Blesa D, Diaz-Gimeno P, Vilella F, Simon C (2013) Profiling the gene signature of endometrial receptivity: clinical results. Fertil Steril 99:1078–1085CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. 60.
    Miravet-Valenciano JA, Rincon-Bertolin A, Vilella F, Simon C (2015) Understanding and improving endometrial receptivity. Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol 27:187–192CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. 61.
    Shapiro BS, Daneshmand ST, Garner FC, Aguirre M, Hudson C, Thomas S (2011) Evidence of impaired endometrial receptivity after ovarian stimulation for in vitro fertilization: a prospective randomized trial comparing fresh and frozen-thawed embryo transfer in normal responders. Fertil Steril 96:344–348CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. 62.
    Dukic-Stefanovic S, Walther J, Wosch S, Zimmermann G, Wiedemann P, Alexander H, Claudepierre T (2012) Chorionic gonadotropin and its receptor are both expressed in human retina, possible implications in normal and pathological conditions. PLoS One 7:e52567CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. 63.
    Schwalenberg T, Neuhaus J, Horn LC, Alexander H, Zimmermann G, Ho TP, Mallock T, Stolzenburg JU (2010) New insights in the differential diagnosis of bladder pain syndrome. Aktuelle Urol 41:107–118CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. 64.
    Schwalenberg T, Stolzenburg JU, Ho TP, Mallock T, Hartenstein S, Alexander H, Zimmermann G, Hohenfellner R, Denzinger S, Burger M, Horn LC, Neuhaus J (2011) Enhanced urothelial expression of human chorionic gonadotropin beta (hCGβ) in bladder pain syndrome/interstitial cystitis (BPS/IC). World J Urol 30:411–417CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. 65.
    Sohr S, Engeland K (2011) The tumor suppressor p53 induces expression of the pregnancy-supporting human chorionic gonadotropin (hCG) CGB7 gene. Cell Cycle 10:3758–3767CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. 66.
    Dallenbach-Hellweg G, Schmidt D, Dallenbach F (2010) Atlas of endometrial histopathology. Springer-Verlag, HeidelbergCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Research Laboratory of the Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Division of Human Reproduction and Endocrinology, Medical SchoolUniversity of LeipzigLeipzigGermany
  2. 2.Department of Gynecology and ObstetricsUniversity of DresdenDresdenGermany
  3. 3.Institute of Pathology, Department of Breast, Gynecological and Perinatal PathologyUniversity Hospital of LeipzigLeipzigGermany
  4. 4.Women’s HospitalUniversity Hospital of LeipzigLeipzigGermany

Personalised recommendations