The extent and causes of natural variation in menstrual cycles: Integrating empirically-based models of ovarian cycling into research on women’s health

Q3 Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics
Amanda A. Shea , Virginia J. Vitzthum
{"title":"The extent and causes of natural variation in menstrual cycles: Integrating empirically-based models of ovarian cycling into research on women’s health","authors":"Amanda A. Shea ,&nbsp;Virginia J. Vitzthum","doi":"10.1016/j.ddmod.2020.11.002","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Purpose</h3><p>Menstrual cycle<span> variability has been extensively documented, yet this basic physiological fact has not been well integrated into studies of women’s health. We examine the extent, causes, and implications for clinical research of non-pathological variation in ovarian cycling, and propose guidelines for evaluating the potential contribution of cycle variability to study outcomes.</span></p></div><div><h3>Major sources of information</h3><p>This review relied on clinical data accessed through literature searches.</p></div><div><h3>Data synthesis in the model context</h3><p>Cycle length, occurrence and timing of ovulation, and hormone profiles vary considerably between cycles, women, and populations. The reproductive system is highly responsive to internal and external signals, a consequence of tradeoffs in resource allocation to reproduction versus other bodily functions. Temporary pauses in reproductive effort<span>, which can yield greater lifetime reproductive success, are not necessarily pathological and should, instead, be recognized as a feature of normal reproductive functioning.</span></p></div><div><h3>Incorporating the new understanding into clinical and/or research relevance</h3><p><span>Research on women’s health should incorporate empirically verified biomarkers of cycle physiology and avoid narrow participant inclusion criteria. Cycle length is not an adequate biomarker of either ovulation or progesterone production. Potential cycle-related </span>confounders<span> (cycle phase, hormone concentrations, ovulation status, early pregnancy loss) should be included in research on women’s health.</span></p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>We can improve our understanding of sex-related differences in the prevalence, severity, diagnosis, and outcomes of disease states, and thereby improve health outcomes for women, through more accurate characterization of menstrual cycle variability and inclusion of relevant empirically grounded cycle biomarkers in research and clinical studies.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":39774,"journal":{"name":"Drug Discovery Today: Disease Models","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1016/j.ddmod.2020.11.002","citationCount":"13","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Drug Discovery Today: Disease Models","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1740675720300104","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 13

Abstract

Purpose

Menstrual cycle variability has been extensively documented, yet this basic physiological fact has not been well integrated into studies of women’s health. We examine the extent, causes, and implications for clinical research of non-pathological variation in ovarian cycling, and propose guidelines for evaluating the potential contribution of cycle variability to study outcomes.

Major sources of information

This review relied on clinical data accessed through literature searches.

Data synthesis in the model context

Cycle length, occurrence and timing of ovulation, and hormone profiles vary considerably between cycles, women, and populations. The reproductive system is highly responsive to internal and external signals, a consequence of tradeoffs in resource allocation to reproduction versus other bodily functions. Temporary pauses in reproductive effort, which can yield greater lifetime reproductive success, are not necessarily pathological and should, instead, be recognized as a feature of normal reproductive functioning.

Incorporating the new understanding into clinical and/or research relevance

Research on women’s health should incorporate empirically verified biomarkers of cycle physiology and avoid narrow participant inclusion criteria. Cycle length is not an adequate biomarker of either ovulation or progesterone production. Potential cycle-related confounders (cycle phase, hormone concentrations, ovulation status, early pregnancy loss) should be included in research on women’s health.

Conclusions

We can improve our understanding of sex-related differences in the prevalence, severity, diagnosis, and outcomes of disease states, and thereby improve health outcomes for women, through more accurate characterization of menstrual cycle variability and inclusion of relevant empirically grounded cycle biomarkers in research and clinical studies.

月经周期自然变化的程度和原因:将基于经验的卵巢周期模型纳入妇女健康研究
月经周期的可变性已被广泛记载,但这一基本生理事实尚未很好地纳入妇女健康研究。我们研究了卵巢周期非病理性变异的范围、原因和临床研究的意义,并提出了评估卵巢周期变异对研究结果的潜在贡献的指导方针。主要信息来源本综述依赖于通过文献检索获得的临床数据。周期长度、排卵的发生和时间以及激素谱在周期、女性和人群之间有很大差异。生殖系统对内部和外部信号高度敏感,这是生殖资源分配与其他身体功能权衡的结果。生殖努力的暂时停顿可以带来更大的终生生殖成功,但这并不一定是病态的,相反,应被认为是正常生殖功能的一个特征。将新认识纳入临床和/或研究相关性妇女健康研究应纳入经经验验证的生理周期生物标志物,避免狭窄的受试者纳入标准。周期长度不是排卵或黄体酮产生的适当生物标志物。对妇女健康的研究应包括潜在的与周期有关的混杂因素(周期阶段、激素浓度、排卵状况、早孕丢失)。结论通过在研究和临床研究中更准确地描述月经周期变异性,并纳入相关的基于经验的月经周期生物标志物,我们可以提高对疾病状态的患病率、严重程度、诊断和结局的性别相关差异的理解,从而改善女性的健康结局。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Drug Discovery Today: Disease Models
Drug Discovery Today: Disease Models Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics-Drug Discovery
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊介绍: Drug Discovery Today: Disease Models discusses the non-human experimental models through which inference is drawn regarding the molecular aetiology and pathogenesis of human disease. It provides critical analysis and evaluation of which models can genuinely inform the research community about the direct process of human disease, those which may have value in basic toxicology, and those which are simply designed for effective expression and raw characterisation.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信