Skip to main content
NCBI home page
NIHPA Author Manuscripts logoLink to NIHPA Author Manuscripts
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2021 Jul 1.
Published in final edited form as: Reprod Biomed Online. 2020 Apr 19;41(1):11–18. doi: 10.1016/j.rbmo.2020.03.006

Estrogen receptors and hypoxia inducible factor 1 alpha expression in abdominal wall endometriosis

Ling Zhang 1, Wenqian Xiong 1, Tian Fu 1, Xuefeng Long 1, Zhibing Zhang 2, Yi Liu 1, Gang Lv 1
PMCID: PMC7311294  NIHMSID: NIHMS1585941  PMID: 32444257

Abstract

Research question

To investigate protein levels and localization of estrogen receptors (ERs, including ERα, ERβ, and GPER) and hypoxia-inducible factor-1alpha (HIF-1α) in normal control endometrium (CoEM) and ectopic endometrium from abdominal wall endometriosis (AWEM).

Design

AWEM (n=20) were obtained during surgery. CoEM (n=40) were collected by curettage. All tissues were obtained during the proliferative or secretory phase. Immunohistochemical (IHC) study for ERs and HIF-1α proteins was conducted using formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded tissues.

Result(s)

The expression of ERs and HIF-1α in AWEM were different from that in the corresponding period of CoEM. Compared with CoEM, ERα and HIF-1α were decreased while ERβ and GPER were increased in AWEM, with GPER showing the most significant change. In addition to a relative upregulation in the protein expression level, a dramatic change in localization occurred from cytoplasmic expression to nuclear and cytoplasmic expression.

Conclusion(s)

Our data suggest that the expression changes of ERs and HIF-1α, especially GPER, are associated with AWE, which may provide new clues to understanding the etiology of endometriosis.

Keywords: Estrogen receptor alpha (ERα), Estrogen receptor beta (ERβ), G protein-coupled estrogen receptor (GPER), Hypoxia inducible factor 1 alpha (HIF-1α), abdominal wall endometriosis (AWE)

Introduction

Endometriosis is a challenging and complex gynecologic disorder, pathologically defined as the implantation of endometrial foci outside the uterine cavity and clinically associated with chronic pelvic pain, dysmenorrhea, and infertility. At present, the exact etiology of endometriosis has not been fully clarified, even though it was described as early as 1860 (Giudice and Kao, 2004). One of the possible reasons is that endometriosis is a complex multifactorial disease, but most studies focused on pelvic endometriosis (ovary, peritoneum, and deep infiltrative endometriosis)(Tosti et al., 2015), ignoring extrapelvic endometriosis. Extrapelvic endometriosis can be found in almost all areas of the body, but most frequently in the abdominal wall (Bektaş et al., 2010). Abdominal wall endometriosis (AWE) is defined as ectopic endometrium embedded in the subcutaneous fatty tissue and the abdominal wall muscle layers (Savelli et al., 2012), which accounts for 0.03% - 3.5% of reported incidences and is mainly associated with surgical procedures such as cesarean delivery or hysterotomy (Ding and Zhu, 2013). AWE is often delayed in diagnosis due to its rarity. Most studies of AWE are either case series or case report (Khan et al., 2017); thus basic research on the mechanism of AWE is urgently needed.

Iatrogenic direct implantation is the most accepted cause for AWE (Ding and Zhu, 2013). The endometrial cells escape through an incision in the uterus during the surgical procedure and are implanted within the abdominal wound. However, this theory cannot explain why the incidence after cesarean section is only 0.03% −0.04% (Ozel et al., 2012). There must be other factors contributing to the occurrence of AWE. According to the discoveries in recent years, two stimulating signal factors were found to be closely related to endometriosis: one is estrogen and the other is hypoxia environment (Yang and Yang, 2017). Estrogen has been known to play a key role in endometriosis, and its influence on endometrium is complicated by the local expression and distribution of several types of estrogen receptors (ERs), including two isoforms of nuclear estrogen receptor (ERα and ERβ) and one membrane-associated receptor (G protein-coupled estrogen receptor, GPER, formerly known as GPR30 (Huhtinen et al., 2012). ERα is the dominant receptor in the uterus, and it mediates various estrogen actions, including the stimulation of proliferation. In contrast, ERβ modulates the effects of ERα and antagonizes its proliferative effects (Shang, 2006). The effects of ERα and ERβ in pelvic endometriosis have been studied intensively. Recently, the newly discovered GPER has prompted the reexamination of estrogen on endometriosis. However, none of the ERs have been studied in AWE to date. As AWE also responds to hormonal stimuli (Zhu et al., 2017), an investigation into ERs expression patterns and effects in AWE is warranted.

According to the implantation theory, the cast-off endometrial tissues immediately encounter hypoxic stress due to the lack of support from vascular network. Hypoxia-inducible factors-1α (HIF-1α) is the most characterized regulator of low oxygen levels via transcriptional regulation (Semenza, 2012a). Recent studies demonstrated that HIF-1α is crucially associated with endometriosis: HIF-1α induces expression of many important downstream genes to regulate the implantation, survival, and maintenance of endometriotic lesions (Hsiao et al., 2015). However, the expression of HIF-1α differs during the stage of implantation and maintenance in the progression of endometriosis (Van Den Berg et al., 2013), as well as in different types of endometriosis (Filippi et al., 2016). The role of HIF-1α in endometriosis requires further investigation, and studies on the expression of HIF-1α in AWE will be a powerful supplement to clarify the relationship between hypoxia and endometriosis.

Interestingly, studies have shown a close relationship between ERs and HIF-1α: ERα has been shown to play a crucial role in decreasing HIF-1α protein levels (Miyauchi et al., 2013; Kim et al., 2014). Further studies demonstrated that ERα increased HIF-1α protein accumulation under E2 stimulation (Sudhagar et al., 2011). Cho J et al demonstrated that HIF-1α activates ERα under hypoxic conditions (Cho et al., 2006). Additionally, Ryu K at el showed that HIF-1α represses the transcription of the ERα gene in human breast cancer cells (Ryu et al., 2011). Even though most studies revealed that ERβ inhibited HIF-1α transactivation (Park and Lee, 2014; Lim et al., 2011; Mak et al., 2010; Lim et al., 2009), it was also reported that ERβ increased HIF-1α expression (Dey et al., 2015). As for GPER, some studies revealed that GPER was up-regulated by HIF-1α (Recchia et al., 2011) while others showed that GPER mediated the activation of HIF-1α signaling (De Francesco et al., 2014). Unfortunately, the findings above are rather controversial, and further studies on the relationship between ERs and HIF-1α are needed.

The objective of the present study is to further elucidate the role of ERs and HIF-1α in AWE. We analyzed the expression of ERα, ERβ, GPER, and HIF-1α in AWEM of 20 patients and compared these levels with those in 40 CoEM during comparable phases of the menstrual cycle. Our results demonstrate that ERs and HIF-1α are important roles in the pathogenesis of AWE.

Materials and Methods

Ethical Approval

Endometrial tissues were obtained in accordance with the guidelines of the Declaration of Helsinki after full and informed patient consent and with the approval by the local Ethics Committee of Union Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science.

Patients and Tissues

Biopsies of normal endometrium were collected from 40 tubal infertility patients (including tubal ligation, tubal blockage, hydrosalpinx and tubal adhesion, 20 in proliferation phase, 20 in secretary phase, age [mean ±SD], 27± 6 years) who had no detectable endometriosis by laparoscopy and no history of pelvic inflammatory disease, chronic pelvic pain, dysmenorrhea, or dyspareunia. Samples of ectopic endometrium from 20 AWE patients (8 in proliferation phase, 12 in secretary phase, age, 29±7 years) were taken from patients with histological confirmation. The characteristics of patients with AWE is seen in Figure 1. All of the endometriotic cysts were more than 3 cm in diameter and contained a glandular epithelium surrounded by stromal tissue. All recruited women had regular menstrual cycles. No history of autoimmune disease, malignant disease, hormonal therapy, or immune therapy was admitted into the patients.

Figure 1.

Figure 1.

Open in a new tab

Expression and localization of ERs and HIF-1α in proliferative phase and secretary phase of normal control endometrium(CoEM). A-D) Immunohistochemical analysis of ERα protein expression and localization in CoEM. E-H) Immunohistochemical analysis of ERβ protein in CoEM. I-L) Immunohistochemical analysis of GPER protein in CoEM. M-P) Immunohistochemical analysis of HIF-1α protein in CoEM. Photographs were taken at magnifications of ×200 (left panels) and ×400 (right panels) respectively.

Immunohistochemistry

Immunohistochemistry staining was performed on paraffin sections using rabbit monoclonal antibodies against ERα (1:50 dilution, Affinity, USA), ERβ (1:50 dilution, Affinity, USA), GPER (1:50 dilution, Abcam, USA), and HIF-1α (1:150 dilution, Affinity, USA). Sections were deparaffinized and rehydrated in graded ethanol, and antigen retrieval was performed in citrate (pH 6.0) for 3 min at full pressure using a pressure cooker. Sections were then treated with 3% hydrogen peroxide for 5 min to inhibit endogenous peroxidase activity. After blocking in solution (0.01 mol/L Tris, 0.3% Triton X-100, and 10% normal goat serum) for 30 min, sections were incubated with primary antibodies at 4°C overnight. After washing with PBS, sections were incubated with peroxidase-labelled anti-rabbit IgG for 30 min. Finally, all slides were incubated with DAB-Substrate (Beyotime, China) and counterstained in hematoxylin before they were dehydrated and mounted.

Quantification of immunostained cells

For each endometrial uterine curetting sample from normal control endometrium, five nonoverlapping fields per biopsy were evaluated under the microscope. For AWE pateints, five nonoverlapping fields including endometrial stromal, endometrial like glands per biopsy were evaluated under the microscope. Two hundred total cells (one hundred epithelial and stromal cells) were counted in a region of interest. The stained slides were evaluated using a light microscope and through digitally scanned images by two independent pathologists who were blinded to the clinicopathological information associated with the samples. The scoring process was performed unaware of patient outcome. The remmele semiquantitative scoring system (immunoreactive score, IRS) was calculated using the positive rate (PR) and staining intensity (SI) of cells reacting to the antibodies. The PR was categorized as 0 (<10% positive cells), 1 (10–25% positive cells), 2 (26 –50% positive cells), 3 (50%−75% positive cells), or 4 (76 – 100% positive cells), and the SI was categorized as 0 (negative), 1 (weak), 2(moderate), or 3 (strong). The scoring pattern for staining was multiplied to give a total IHS and IHS ranged from 0 to 12 for each sample. Scores between 0 – 2 points were considered as negative (0); 3 – 5 points as weak staining (+); 6 – 8 points as intermediate (++); and 9 – 12 points as strong staining (+++).

Statistical analysis

Statistical analysis was performed by GraphPad Prism 5. The comparison of quantitative differences in the expression of ERs and HIF-1α between CoEM and AWEM were made using the nonparametric Mann-Whitney test. Differences with statistical significance was set at a p value of <0.05.

Results

Histological confirmation of endometrioma is based on detecting at least two of the three following features: endometrial stromal, endometrial like glands, and hemosiderin pigment (Dwivedi et al., 2002). Immunostaining intensity for ERs and HIF-1α were characterized in the epithelial and stromal compartments of each specimen. Representative images are shown in Figure 1 and Figure 2, and staining intensities are described in Table 2 and Table 3.

Figure 2.

Figure 2.

Open in a new tab

Expression and localization of ERs and HIF-1α in proliferative phase and secretary phase of abdominal wall endometrium(AWEM). A-D) Immunohistochemical(IHC) analysis of ERα protein expression and localization in AWEM. E-H) IHC analysis of ERβ protein in AWEM. I-L) IHC analysis of GPER protein in AWEM. M-P) IHC analysis of HIF-1α protein in AWEM. Photographs were taken at magnifications of ×200 (left panels) and ×400 (right panels) respectively.

Table2.

Expression ERα, ERβ, and HIF-1α in CoEM and AWEM

Normal (40) AWE (20)
P (20) S (20) P (8) S (12)
Glandulara Stromalb Glandularc Stromald GlandularA StromalB GlandularC StromalD
ERα
Absent 0 0 4 11 1 3 7 10
weak 2 2 6 5 4 2 4 2
Medium 5 5 6 4 2 3 1 0
Strong 13 13 4 0 1 0 0 0
P value 0.002a vs c <0.0001b vs d 0.0137A vs C 0.0267B vs D <0.0001a vs A 0.0002b vs B 0.0052c vs C 0.0302d vs D
ERβ
Absent 2 1 4 6 0 0 0 0
weak 1 2 5 7 0 0 1 2
Medium 10 9 7 5 0 0 6 6
Strong 7 8 4 2 8 8 5 4
P value 0.0435 a vs c 0.0001 b vs d 0.0017 A vs C <0.0001 B vs D 0.0003 a vs A <0.0001 b vs B 0.0154 c vs C 0.0025 d vs D
HIF-1α
Absent 2 5 0 1 3 5 5 8
weak 4 9 1 6 3 2 4 1
Medium 8 4 6 8 1 1 2 3
Strong 6 2 13 5 1 0 1 0
P value 0.0070 a vs c 0.0239 b vs d 0.8971 A vs C 0.9481 B vs D 0.0036 a vs A 0.0156 b vs B 0.0085 c vs C 0.0002 d vs D
Open in a new tab

P<0.05 was considered to be statistically significant

ERα: Estrogen Receptor α; ERβ: Estrogen Receptor β; HIF-1 α: Hypoxia-inducible factor-1 α

CoEM: normal control endometrium; AWEM: abdominal wall endometriosis

P: proliferative phase; S: secretory phase

Table3.

Expression of GPER in CoEM and AWEM

Normal (40) AWE (20)
P (20) S (20) P (8) S (12)
cytoplasma nucleusb cytoplasmc nucleusd cytoplasmA nucleusB cytoplasmC nucleusD
Glandular
Absent 4 20 13 20 0 0 3 4
Weak 7 0 7 0 0 1 3 3
Medium 8 0 0 0 2 4 4 3
Strong 1 0 0 0 6 3 1 2
P value 0.0023a vs c 0.9999b vs d 0.0012A vs C 0.1964 vs D <0.0001a vs A <0.0001b vs B 0.0207c vs C <0.0001d vs D
Stromal
Absent 6 20 19 20 1 1 9 5
weak 5 0 1 0 2 2 1 2
Medium 7 0 0 0 4 3 2 4
Strong 2 0 0 0 1 2 0 1
P value 0.0003 a vs c 0.9999 b vs d 0.0047 A vs C 0.3729 B vs D 0.0421 a vs A <0.0001 b vs B 0.0262 c vs C <0.0001 d vs D
Open in a new tab

P<0.05 was considered to be statistically significant

GPER: G protein-coupled estrogen receptor; P: proliferative phase; S: secretory phase

CoEM: normal control endometrium; AWEM: abdominal wall endometriosis

ERα Protein Expressions in CoEM and AWEM

Generally, ERα is the dominant receptor in normal uteri. Positive ERα staining was detected in the nuclei of both endometrial epithelial cells (EECs) and endometrial stromal cells (ESCs). In CoEM, a significant decrease in ERα expression level was noted in the secretory phase endometrium (p=0.002 in EECs and p<0.0001 in ESCs) compared to in the proliferative phase. In AWEM, ERα distribution did not differ from the CoEM. Similarly, the positive rate for ERα in both EECs and ESCs were higher in the proliferative phase compared with those of the secretory phase during the menstrual cycle (p=0.0137 in EECs and p=0.0267 in ESCs). However, ERα expression levels in EECs and ESCs were lower in AWEM compared with the CoEM of the corresponding cycle (proliferative phase: p<0.0001 in EECs and p=0.0002 in ESCs; secretory phase: p=0.0052 in EECs and p=0.0302 in ESCs).

ERβ Protein Expressions in CoEM and AWEM

Similarly to ERα, the expression pattern of ERβ was also found in the nuclei, and in both CoEM and AWEM, the expression level of ERβ was always higher in the proliferative phase than in the secretory phase (CoEM: p=0.0435 in EECs and p=0.0001 in ESCs; AWEM: p=0.0017 in EECs and p<0.0001 in ESCs). Unlike ERα, expression of ERβ in AWEM was significantly higher than that in CoEM in both EECs and ESCs in the corresponding menstrual cycle (proliferative phase: p=0.0003 in EECs and p<0.0001 in ESCs; secretory phase: p=0.0154 in EECsand p=0.0025).

GPER Protein Expressions in CoEM and AWEM

A low level of GPER expression was detected in CoEM, mainly in the cytoplasm of EECs. Expression of GPER, one of the estrogen receptors regulated by ovarian hormone, increased in the proliferative phase while decreased in secretory phase in both CoEM and AWEM (CoEM: p=0.0023 in EECs and p=0.0003in ESCs; AWEM: p=0.0012 in EECs and p=0.0047 in ESCs). Surprisingly, we observed a completely different GPER expression pattern in AWEM shown in two aspects, the first of which is its expression site. In AWEM, GPER accumulated in the nuclei of EECs and ESCs, although the cytoplasm was still expressed. The second is the expression level: expression of GPER was significantly higher in AWEM than that in CoEM (proliferative phase: p<0.0001 in EECs and p=0.421 in ESCs; secretory phase: p=0.0207 in EECs and p= 0.0262).

HIF-1α Protein Expressions in CoEM and AWEM

Staining of endometrium with HIF-1α antibody showed distinctive expression patterns in CoEM and AWEM. HIF-1α was predominantly detected in the nuclei of both the stromal and epithelial compartments of endometrium. In CoEM, expression of HIF-1α was significantly higher during the secretory phase than that during the proliferative phase (p=0.0070 in EECs and p =0.0239 in ESCs). In addition, in AWEM, there was no difference in HIF-1α expression during the menstrual cycle (p=0.8971 in EECs and p=0.9481 in ESCs), which suggests that hormonal changes do not significantly affect HIF-1α expression in abdominal endometriotic cysts. Expression of HIF-1α in AWEM was also significantly lower than in CoEM than in AWEM (proliferative phase: p=0.0036 in EECs and p=0.0156 in ESCs; secretory phase: p=0.0085 in EECs and p=0.0002 in ESCs).

Discussion

Endometriosis is a complex disease characterized by multifactorial etiology and a variety of clinical manifestations. Most studies typically investigate only one or two types of pelvic endometriosis and generalize conclusions to all types of endometriosis, despite the fact that endometriotic lesions at various sites are strikingly different. AWE is a rare but unique form of endometriosis. Few studies on AWE were reported, and most of them are case reports focusing on the clinical presentation, diagnostic and therapeutic methods. The current therapeutic success is unsatisfactory because of limited insight into mechanisms of the disease. No studies have been reported about pathogenesis research on AWE so far, and this is the first study to profile the distribution and expression of ERs and HIF-1α in AWE.

Endometriosis, including AWE, is known to be estrogen dependent. As we all know that aromatase is a key enzyme for estrogen biosynthesis and Estrogen action is mediated primarily via nuclear estrogen receptors (ERs). but hormone therapy on AWE is not as effective as other types of endometriosis(Bektaş et al., 2010). Therefore, it is necessary to carry out estrogen related research in AWE. Using IHC technique, we successfully demonstrated cycle-regulated expression of ERs in AWEM, with maximal expression in proliferative phase, which indicates that AWEM is regulated by the ovary hormone. However, the expression of ERs in AWEM was not parallel to that in CoEM. ERα expression in AWEM is slightly decreased than that in the corresponding period of CoEM, while ERβ and GPER increased significantly, especially for GPER. GPER expression in the cytoplasm was significantly higher in AWEM compared to CoEM. Furthermore, an even distribution of GPER in the nuclei was found in AWEM. Results from above suggested that GPER was involved both in the non-genomic estrogen response (rapid) and in genomic (transcriptional) regulation in AWE. Previous studies in ovarian endometriosis showed that deficient methylation of the ERβ promoter results in pathological overexpression of ERβ in endometriotic stromal cells (Xue et al., 2007), and high levels of ERβ suppresses ERα promoter activity and mRNA and protein expression in endometriotic cells. This seems to be consistent with the change of ERα and ERβ expression in AWEM (Trukhacheva et al., 2009). However, research also demonstrated that estrogen, acting through ERα but not ERβ or GPER, stimulates GPER expression (Plante et al., 2012), which is inconsistent to our findings. So far, the underlying mechanism leading to abnormal expression of ERs and the functions of abnormal ERs in AWE remain unclear. Whether the nuclear GPER was co-expressed with canonical estrogen receptors (ERα and ERβ) or ERs have synergic, antagonistic or independent nature need more investigation.

HIF-1α is a master transcription factor that mediates hypoxic effects such as angiogenesis, metastasis, cell survival, and proliferation (Semenza, 2012b). In previous studies, hypoxia appears to play an important role in the pathogenesis of endometriosis, and elevated levels of HIF-1α induces leptin production, COX-2 expression, VEGF expression, enhances autophagy and so on, indicating that hypoxia promotes the development of endometriosis through various mechanisms (Lee and Tsai, 2017). In our present study, we found that HIF-1α expression was decreased in AWEM and there was no difference between proliferative phase and secretary phase. Which was consistent with the expression of HIF-1α in deep infiltrating endometriosis, but significant difference within ovarian endometriosis (Filippi et al., 2016). What caused the difference? Indeed, the AWEM we collected were rich in blood supply. A mouse model shown that hypoxia is an early phenomenon in the establishment of endometriosis-like lesions, while diminishes once new blood vessels start to invade into the tissue (Becker et al., 2008), which suggests that hypoxia does not have an active role in the maintenance of AWE. The HIF-1α expression in our study suggests that the pathogenesis of AWE may be different from other types of endometriosis and some unique mechanisms including gene expression and regulation may be involved in the development of AWE.

The relationship between estrogen and hypoxia are widely studied in endocrine-related cancer, such as breast cancer, thyroid cancer, prostate cancer and so on. However, very few studies were conducted in endometriosis: in our previous study, we found that estrogen stabilizes HIF-1α through GPER in eutopic endometrium of endometriosis (Zhang et al., 2017) and Meng-Hsing Wu found that increased ERβ expression in ESCs may be regulated by HIF-1α (Wu et al., 2012). The interaction of ERs and HIF-1α is still controversial. Our findings about ERs and HIF-1α in AWE may provide the possible candidate of pathophysiologic mediation in endometriosis.

However, there were some limits in our present study. Due to the rarity of AWE, the sample size analyzed was small, and we did not collected eutopic endometrium of AWE patients in this study. In addition, the experimental design was simple, with only the protein expression and distribution of ERs and HIF-1α in CoEM and AWEM being analyzed. Further investigation with larger numbers is required, and molecular analysis would be expected.

In conclusion, our results suggest that aberrant expression of ERs and HIF-1α in both glandular epithelial and stromal cells may be essential for the development and growth of AWE. The striking difference in GPER expression and distribution in AWE indicates GPER as a potential diagnosis and therapeutic target. These new findings shed lights on future investigations of delineating the etiology of AWE and further studies are required to delineate the precise roles of ERs and HIF-1α isoforms in endometriosis.

Table 1.

Characteristics of patients with AWE in the study.

N n % Range Mean±SD
Age 22–29 25.45±2.83
Parity 1–4 1.95±0.99
Surgeries other than CS
Myomectomy 2 10
Hysterectomy 0 0
Appendectomy 1 5
Presenting system
Abdominal mass 20 100
Cyclic pain 14 70
Noncyclic pain 4 20
Dyspareunia 3 15
Dysmenorrhea 2 10
Bleeding 0 0
Number of mass
Single 13 65
Multiple 7 35
Duration of symptom(m) 4–62
Asymptomatic period(m) 3–53
Diagnosing tool
Ultrasonography 18 90
CT 4 20
MRI 2 10
Location of the mass
In the scar 12 60
Far from the scar 8 40
Diameter of the mass 3–6 4.355±0.92
History of pelvic EMs 0 0
Open in a new tab

CT: computerized tomography; MRI: magnetic resonance imaging

EMs: endometriosis; m: months

Key Message.

This study revealed decreased expression of ERα and HIF-1α while increased expression of ERβ and GPER in AWEM, which suggest that expression changes of ERs and HIF-1α, especially GPER, are associated with AWE, which may provide new clues to understand the etiology of endometriosis.

Acknowledgments

This project was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (grant No.81471439 Y.L.) and by a National Institutes of Health award (NIH HD 076257)

Author Biography

graphic file with name nihms-1585941-b0001.gif

Yi Liu, Professor of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Union Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology. He received his PhD at Tongji Medical University, Wuhan, China in 1996, His research interests are gynaecology and gynaecological oncology, His major interests are endometriosis, endometrial biology, and polycystic ovary syndrome.

Footnotes

Disclosure statement: the authors have nothing to disclose.

Publisher's Disclaimer: This is a PDF file of an unedited manuscript that has been accepted for publication. As a service to our customers we are providing this early version of the manuscript. The manuscript will undergo copyediting, typesetting, and review of the resulting proof before it is published in its final form. Please note that during the production process errors may be discovered which could affect the content, and all legal disclaimers that apply to the journal pertain.

References

  1. Becker CM, Rohwer N, Funakoshi T, Cramer T, Bernhardt W, Birsner A, Folkman J, D’Amato RJ, 2008. 2-Methoxyestradiol inhibits hypoxia-inducible factor-1α and suppresses growth of lesions in a mouse model of endometriosis. Am. J. Pathol 10.2353/ajpath.2008.061244 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Bektaş H, Bilsel Y, Sar YS, Ersöz F, Koç O, Deniz M, Boran B, Huq GE, 2010. Abdominal wall endometrioma; A 10-year experience and brief review of the literature. J. Surg. Res 10.1016/j.jss.2010.07.043 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Cho J, Bahn JJ, Park M, Ahn WS, Lee YJ, 2006. Hypoxic activation of unoccupied estrogen-receptor-alpha is mediated by hypoxia-inducible factor-1 alpha. J. Steroid Biochem. Mol. Biol 10.1016/j.jsbmb.2006.03.002 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. De Francesco EM, Pellegrino M, Santolla MF, Lappano R, Ricchio E, Abonante S, Maggiolini M, 2014. GPER mediates activation of HIF1α/VEGF signaling by estrogens. Cancer Res 10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-13-3590 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Dey P, Velazquez-Villegas LA, Faria M, Turner A, Jonsson P, Webb P, Williams C, Gustafsson JÅ, Ström AM, 2015. Estrogen receptor β2 induces hypoxia signature of gene expression by stabilizing HIF-1α in prostate cancer. PLoS One. 10.1371/journal.pone.0128239 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Ding Y, Zhu J, 2013. A retrospective review of abdominal wall endometriosis in Shanghai, China. Int. J. Gynecol. Obstet. 121, 41–44. 10.1016/j.ijgo.2012.11.011 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Dwivedi AJ, Agrawal SN, Silva YJ, 2002. Abdominal wall endometriomas. Dig. Dis. Sci. 10.1023/A:1013711314870 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Filippi I, Carrarelli P, Luisi S, Batteux F, Chapron C, Naldini A, Petraglia F, 2016. Different Expression of Hypoxic and Angiogenic Factors in Human Endometriotic Lesions. Reprod. Sci 10.1177/1933719115607978 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. Giudice LC, Kao LC, 2004. Endometriosis. TL - 364. Lancet (London, England). 10.1016/S0140-6736(04)17403-5 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. Hsiao KY, Lin SC, Wu MH, Tsai SJ, 2015. Pathological functions of hypoxia in endometriosis. Front. Biosci. (Elite Ed). [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. Huhtinen K, Ståhle M, Perheentupa A, Poutanen M, 2012. Estrogen biosynthesis and signaling in endometriosis. Mol. Cell. Endocrinol. 10.1016/j.mce.2011.08.022 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. Khan Z, Zanfagnin V, El-Nashar SA, Famuyide AO, Daftary GS, Hopkins MR, 2017. Risk Factors, Clinical Presentation, and Outcomes for Abdominal Wall Endometriosis. J. Minim. Invasive Gynecol. 10.1016/j.jmig.2017.01.005 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  13. Kim M, Neinast MD, Frank AP, Sun K, Park J, Zehr JA, Vishvanath L, Morselli E, Amelotte M, Palmer BF, Gupta RK, Scherer PE, Clegg DJ, 2014. ERα upregulates Phd3 to ameliorate HIF-1 induced fibrosis and inflammation in adipose tissue. Mol. Metab 10.1016/j.molmet.2014.05.007 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  14. Lee HC, Tsai SJ, 2017. Endocrine targets of hypoxia-inducible factors. J. Endocrinol 10.1530/JOE-16-0653 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  15. Lim W, Cho J, Kwon H. yi, Park, Rhyu MR, Lee YJ, 2009. Hypoxia-inducible factor 1α activates and is inhibited by unoccupied estrogen receptor β. FEBS Lett. 10.1016/j.febslet.2009.03.028 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  16. Lim W, Park Y, Cho J, Park C, Park J, Park YK, Park H, Lee YJ, 2011. Estrogen receptor beta inhibits transcriptional activity of hypoxia inducible factor-1 through the downregulation of arylhydrocarbon receptor nuclear translocator. Breast Cancer Res. 10.1186/bcr2854 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  17. Mak P, Leav I, Pursell B, Bae D, Yang X, Taglienti CA, Gouvin LM, Sharma VM, Mercurio AM, 2010. ERβ Impedes Prostate Cancer EMT by Destabilizing HIF-1α and Inhibiting VEGF-Mediated Snail Nuclear Localization: Implications for Gleason Grading. Cancer Cell. 10.1016/j.ccr.2010.02.030 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  18. Miyauchi Y, Sato Y, Kobayashi T, Yoshida S, Mori T, Kanagawa H, Katsuyama E, Fujie A, Hao W, Miyamoto K, Tando T, Morioka H, Matsumoto M, Chambon P, Johnson RS, Kato S, Toyama Y, Miyamoto T, 2013. HIF1? is required for osteoclast activation by estrogen deficiency in postmenopausal osteoporosis. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A 10.1073/pnas.1308755110 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  19. Ozel L, Sagiroglu J, Unal A, Unal E, Gunes P, Baskent E, Aka N, Titiz MI, Tufekci EC, 2012. Abdominal wall endometriosis in the cesarean section surgical scar: A potential diagnostic pitfall. J. Obstet. Gynaecol. Res 10.1111/j.1447-0756.2011.01739.x [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  20. Park C, Lee Y, 2014. Overexpression of ERβ is sufficient to inhibit hypoxia-inducible factor-1 transactivation. Biochem. Biophys. Res. Commun. 10.1016/j.bbrc.2014.05.107 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  21. Plante BJ, Lessey BA, Taylor RN, Wang W, Bagchi MK, Yuan L, Scotchie J, Fritz MA, Young SL, 2012. G protein-coupled estrogen receptor (GPER) expression in normal and abnormal endometrium. Reprod. Sci. 10.1177/1933719111431000 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  22. Recchia AG, De Francesco EM, Vivacqua A, Sisci D, Panno ML, Ando S, Maggiolini M, 2011. The G protein-coupled receptor 30 is up-regulated by hypoxia-inducible factor-1α (HIF-1α) in breast cancer cells and cardiomyocytes. J. Biol. Chem 10.1074/jbc.M110.172247 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  23. Ryu K, Park C, Lee Y, 2011. Hypoxia-inducible factor 1 alpha represses the transcription of the estrogen receptor alpha gene in human breast cancer cells. Biochem. Biophys. Res. Commun 10.1016/j.bbrc.2011.03.119 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  24. Savelli L, Manuzzi L, Di Donato N, Salfi N, Trivella G, Ceccaroni M, Seracchioli R, 2012. Endometriosis of the abdominal wall: Ultrasonographic and Doppler characteristics. Ultrasound Obstet. Gynecol 10.1002/uog.10052 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  25. Semenza GL, 2012a. Hypoxia-inducible factors in physiology and medicine. Cell 10.1016/j.cell.2012.01.021 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  26. Semenza GL, 2012b. Hypoxia-inducible factors in physiology and medicine. Cell 10.1016/j.cell.2012.01.021 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  27. Shang Y, 2006. Molecular mechanisms of oestrogen and SERMs in endometrial carcinogenesis. Nat. Rev. Cancer 10.1038/nrc1879 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  28. Sudhagar S, Sathya S, Lakshmi BS, 2011. Rapid non-genomic signalling by 17Β-oestradiol through c-Src involves mTOR-dependent expression of HIF-1α in breast cancer cells. Br. J. Cancer 10.1038/bjc.2011.349 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  29. Tosti C, Pinzauti S, Santulli P, Chapron C, Petraglia F, 2015. Pathogenetic Mechanisms of Deep Infiltrating Endometriosis. Reprod. Sci 10.1177/1933719115592713 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  30. Trukhacheva E, Lin Z, Reierstad S, Cheng YH, Milad M, Bulun SE, 2009. Estrogen receptor (ER) β regulates ERα expression in stromal cells derived from ovarian endometriosis. J. Clin. Endocrinol. Metab 10.1210/jc.2008-1466 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  31. Van Den Berg LL, Crane LMA, Van Oosten M, Van Dam GM, Simons AHM, Hofker HS, Bart J, 2013. Analysis of biomarker expression in severe endometriosis and determination of possibilities for targeted intraoperative imaging. Int. J. Gynecol. Obstet 10.1016/j.ijgo.2012.10.025 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  32. Wu MH, Lu CW, Chang FM, Tsai SJ, 2012. Estrogen receptor expression affected by hypoxia inducible factor-1α in stromal cells from patients with endometriosis. Taiwan. J. Obstet. Gynecol 10.1016/j.tjog.2012.01.010 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  33. Xue Q, Lin Z, Cheng Y-H, Huang C-C, Marsh E, Yin P, Milad MP, Confino E, Reierstad S, Innes J, Bulun SE, 2007. Promoter Methylation Regulates Estrogen Receptor 2 in Human Endometrium and Endometriosis1. Biol. Reprod 10.1095/biolreprod.107.061804 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  34. Yang YM, Yang WX, 2017. Epithelial-to-mesenchymal transition in the development of endometriosis. Oncotarget 10.18632/oncotarget.16472 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  35. Zhang L, Xiong W, Li N, Liu H, He H, Du Y, Zhang Z, Liu Y, 2017. Estrogen stabilizes hypoxia-inducible factor 1α through G protein-coupled estrogen receptor 1 in eutopic endometrium of endometriosis. Fertil. Steril 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2016.11.008 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  36. Zhu X, Chen L, Deng X, Xiao S, Ye M, Xue M, 2017. A comparison between high-intensity focused ultrasound and surgical treatment for the management of abdominal wall endometriosis. BJOG An Int. J. Obstet. Gynaecol 10.1111/1471-0528.14737 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

RESOURCES