FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W2034759914> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W2034759914 endingPage "2710" @default.
• W2034759914 startingPage "2707" @default.
• W2034759914 abstract "Endometrial biopsies were performed during the luteal phase just before an IVF cycle in 104 infertile women, and immunohistochemical staining was performed to investigate expression patterns of hCG-LH receptor, leukemia-inhibitory factor, macrophage colony-stimulating factor, HOXA-10, vascular endothelial growth factor A, and their relation to subsequent IVF pregnancy. Only glandular expression of vascular endothelial growth factor A in early luteal endometrium was significantly higher in the pregnant group compared with the nonpregnant group (6.0 ± 3.9 vs. 2.9 ± 3.4) and thus could be a predicting marker for subsequent IVF pregnancy. Endometrial biopsies were performed during the luteal phase just before an IVF cycle in 104 infertile women, and immunohistochemical staining was performed to investigate expression patterns of hCG-LH receptor, leukemia-inhibitory factor, macrophage colony-stimulating factor, HOXA-10, vascular endothelial growth factor A, and their relation to subsequent IVF pregnancy. Only glandular expression of vascular endothelial growth factor A in early luteal endometrium was significantly higher in the pregnant group compared with the nonpregnant group (6.0 ± 3.9 vs. 2.9 ± 3.4) and thus could be a predicting marker for subsequent IVF pregnancy. Implantation of an embryo involves a complex sequence of signaling events, consisting of a large number of molecular mediators such as ovarian hormones, cytokines, growth factors, and adhesion molecules (1Revel A. Multitasking human endometrium: a review of endometrial biopsy as a diagnostic tool, therapeutic applications, and a source of adult stem cells.Obstet Gynecol Surv. 2009; 64: 249-257Crossref PubMed Scopus (18) Google Scholar, 2Achache H. Revel A. Endometrial receptivity markers, the journey to successful embryo implantation.Hum Reprod Update. 2006; 12: 731-746Crossref PubMed Scopus (587) Google Scholar). Endometrial samples can be used to identify molecules associated with uterine receptivity to obtain a better insight into human implantation, but there has been no consensus as to what constitutes a marker of receptive endometrium (3Diedrich K. Fauser B.C. Devroey P. The role of the endometrium and embryo in human implantation.Hum Reprod Update. 2007; 13: 365-377Crossref PubMed Scopus (205) Google Scholar). Although several studies have demonstrated the expressions and possible functions of several endometrial protein markers such as leukemia-inhibitory factor (LIF) (3Diedrich K. Fauser B.C. Devroey P. The role of the endometrium and embryo in human implantation.Hum Reprod Update. 2007; 13: 365-377Crossref PubMed Scopus (205) Google Scholar, 4Arici A. Engin O. Attar E. Olive D.L. Modulation of leukemia inhibitory factor gene expression and protein biosynthesis in human endometrium.J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 1995; 80: 1908-1915Crossref PubMed Google Scholar, 5Dimitriadis E. Stoikos C. Stafford-Bell M. Clark I. Paiva P. Kovacs G. et al.Interleukin-11, IL-11 receptor alpha and leukemia inhibitory factor are dysregulated in endometrium of infertile women with endometriosis during the implantation window.J Reprod Immunol. 2006; 69: 53-64Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (145) Google Scholar, 6Aghajanova L. Update on the role of leukemia inhibitory factor in assisted reproduction.Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol. 2010; 22: 213-219Crossref PubMed Scopus (54) Google Scholar), macrophage colony-stimulating factor (M-CSF) (7Hoozemans D.A. Schats R. Lambalk C.B. Homburg R. Hompes P.G. Human embryo implantation: current knowledge and clinical implications in assisted reproductive technology.Reprod Biomed Online. 2004; 9: 692-715Abstract Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (105) Google Scholar), vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) (7Hoozemans D.A. Schats R. Lambalk C.B. Homburg R. Hompes P.G. Human embryo implantation: current knowledge and clinical implications in assisted reproductive technology.Reprod Biomed Online. 2004; 9: 692-715Abstract Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (105) Google Scholar), and HOXA-10 (8Taylor H.S. Arici A. Olive D. Igarashi P. HOXA10 is expressed in response to sex steroids at the time of implantation in the human endometrium.J Clin Invest. 1998; 101: 1379-1384Crossref PubMed Google Scholar, 9Sarno J.L. Kliman H.J. Taylor H.S. HOXA10, Pbx2, and Meis1 protein expression in the human endometrium: formation of multimeric complexes on HOXA10 target genes.J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2005; 90: 522-528Crossref PubMed Scopus (75) Google Scholar, 10Matsuzaki S. Canis M. Darcha C. Pouly J.L. Mage G. HOXA-10 expression in the mid-secretory endometrium of infertile patients with either endometriosis, uterine fibromas or unexplained infertility.Hum Reprod. 2009; 24: 3180-3187Crossref PubMed Scopus (86) Google Scholar), their clinical implications in infertile women are understood poorly. To further elucidate their roles in infertile women, we examined the expressions of LIF, M-CSF, HOXA-10, and VEGF-A in luteal endometrium of patients participating in IVF-ET and assessed whether they could be used to predict subsequent treatment success. In addition, we investigated for the first time the endometrial expression of hCG receptor (hCG–LH-R) as a possible predictor of IVF pregnancy. One hundred four consecutive infertile women with regular menstrual cycles were included during the period of December 2007 to November 2009. The average age of the patients was 34.0 ± 3.3 years, and the mean duration of infertility was 5.7 ± 3.1 years. The indications for IVF were identified as unexplained (n = 38), male factor (n = 25), tubal (n = 15), ovulatory (n = 11), endometriosis (n = 9), and combined (n = 6). Women with irregular menstruation, such as women with polycystic ovary syndrome, and with apparent endometrial pathology were excluded entirely. Informed consent was obtained from all study participants. The study was approved by the Institutional Review Board of Seoul National University Bundang Hospital. All patients underwent a hysteroscopic procedure under mild sedative anesthesia. After careful hysteroscopic inspection, endometrial samplings were performed by silicone elastomer suction curette in the luteal phase in a spontaneous unmedicated cycle just before an IVF cycle. The obtained endometrial samples were sent to one pathologist for routine histologic dating and pathologic examination. The remaining endometrial tissue samples were stored immediately in a paraffin block. All of these patients underwent IVF in a subsequent cycle. When pathologic conditions were found in endometrium at the time of hysteroscopy or after pathologic examination, they were excluded from the final analysis. The patients were grouped according to their histologic endometrial dating by the Noyes criteria: early (cycle day [CD] 16–19) (n = 49), midluteal (CD 20–24) (n = 37), and late luteal phase (CD 25–27) (n = 18). Ovarian stimulation was performed by using GnRH agonist long protocol (n = 75), GnRH agonist ultrashort protocol (n = 24), or GnRH antagonist protocol (n = 5). In all stimulation protocols, recombinant FSH (Gonal-F; Merck Serono, Geneva, Switzerland) combined with hMG (Menopur; Ferring, Saint-Prex, Switzerland) was used. When leading follicle(s) reached 18 mm in diameter, exogenous hCG (Pregnyl 5,000 or 10,000 IU; Organon, Oss, Netherlands) was administered IM, and oocytes were retrieved via the transvaginal route 36 hours later (mean number of oocytes = 10.0 ± 5.7). Up to five embryos were transferred 3 and/or 5 days after oocyte retrieval (mean number of embryos = 3.9 ± 1.5). The luteal phase was supported by P in oil 50 mg/d. A clinical pregnancy was defined by the presence of an intrauterine gestational sac with pulsating fetal heartbeats 3 to 4 weeks after oocyte retrieval. The streptavidin-biotin-peroxidase complex technique was used for immunohistochemical analysis, as described previously (11Jee B.C. Suh C.S. Kim K.C. Lee W.D. Kim H. Kim S.H. Expression of vascular endothelial growth factor-A and its receptor-1 in a luteal endometrium in patients with repeated in vitro fertilization failure.Fertil Steril. 2009; 91: 528-534Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (11) Google Scholar). The sections were processed according to standard procedures and then incubated with primary antibodies overnight at 4°C: hCG–LH-R (3.3 μg/mL, rabbit polyclonal, SP4593P; Acris Antibodies, Herford, Germany), LIF (2 μg/mL, goat polyclonal, AF-250-NA; R&D Systems, Oxford, United Kingdom), M-CSF (1 μg/mL, rabbit polyclonal, ab9693; Abcam, Cambridge, United Kingdom), VEGF-A (1 μg/mL, mouse monoclonal, sc-7269; Santa Cruz Biotechnology, Santa Cruz, CA), and HOXA-10 (10 μg/mL, rabbit polyclonal, sc-17159; Santa Cruz Biotechnology). The sections then were incubated with the appropriate biotinylated secondary antibody. The antigen-antibody reaction was visualized with 3,3′-diaminobenzidine as chromogen (DAB, S-300010; DakoCytomation, Glostrup, Denmark). After washing, the sections were counterstained with Mayer’s hematoxylin and mounted in mounting medium (Pertex; Histolab Products AB, Göteborg, Sweden). Positive controls were performed for all antibodies by staining human placenta tissues with known expression of the corresponding epitopes. Negative controls were performed by replacing the primary antibodies with normal goat serum (X0907; DakoCytomation). Interassay variability in immunoreactivity was assessed by staining a section from the same paraffin block in every assay. The immunohistochemical staining was estimated by one pathologist in stained areas of the epithelial cells and stromal compartment, separately. A signal intensity was assigned semiquantitatively on a 4-point scale from 0 to 3, where 0 = no staining, 1 = weak, 2 = moderate, and 3 = strong. An area was considered as strong when the staining intensity was similar to the corresponding positive control. Then, each intensity score was multiplied by its distribution score from 1 to 4, where 1 = <5% of the area stained, 2 = 5% to 25%, 3 = 25% to 50%, and 4 = >50%. At least five randomly chosen areas of the endometrium were evaluated and then averaged for each compartment. Statistical analysis was performed with MedCalc 4.15 (MedCalc Software, Mariakerke, Belgium). To compare the median scores between the pregnant and nonpregnant groups, the Wilcoxon test was used. However, data are presented as mean ± SD. Sensitivity and specificity were calculated, and the receiver operating characteristic curve was plotted by changing criteria of sensitivity and specificity. A P value of <.05 (two-tailed) was considered statistically significant. The clinical pregnancy rate (PR) was 26.0% (27/104). In the women whose endometrial sampling was performed at the early luteal, midluteal, and late luteal phase, the PR was 20.4% (10/49), 35.1% (13/37), and 22.2% (4/18), respectively (P>.05). Clinical characteristics and IVF outcomes of the study subjects did not differ between the pregnant and nonpregnant groups, except number of oocytes retrieved (12.3 ± 5.6 vs. 9.2 ± 5.5, P=.016). Only glandular expression of VEGF-A in the early luteal phase was significantly higher in the pregnant group (Table 1). Stromal and endothelial hCG–LH-R expression in the late luteal phase tended to be lower in the pregnant group but was not statistically significant. Analysis of the receiver operating characteristic curve revealed that glandular VEGF-A expression in the early luteal phase could predict a successful pregnancy in the subsequent IVF trial with a statistical significance (cutoff >6, area under the curve 0.728, 95% confidence interval 0.582–0.845, sensitivity 60, specificity 87.2, positive likelihood ratio 4.68, negative likelihood ratio 0.46, positive predictive value 54.5, negative predictive value 89.5). Indeed, in the subjects with early luteal glandular VEGF-A score >6, the PR was 54.5% (6/11); in contrast, the PR was 10.5% (4/38) when early luteal glandular VEGF-A score was ≤6 (P=.006).Table 1Immunoreactivities for five endometrial protein markers according to subsequent IVF pregnancy.MarkerLuteal phasePregnantNonpregnantHCG–LH-R at glandsEarly6.4 ± 4.36.6 ± 3.4Mid5.2 ± 3.45.3 ± 4.8Late2.0 ± 4.05.7 ± 4.4HCG–LH-R at stromaEarly6.4 ± 4.37.2 ± 3.6Mid7.1 ± 3.77.0 ± 4.6Late5.0 ± 5.010.6 ± 2.5HCG–LH-R at endotheliumEarly6.8 ± 4.27.7 ± 3.5Mid6.8 ± 3.87.7 ± 4.6Late5.0 ± 3.89.4 ± 3.4LIF at glandsEarly1.1 ± 1.92.2 ± 2.7Mid1.8 ± 3.01.2 ± 2.0Late2.3 ± 4.52.0 ± 2.9M-CSF at glandsEarly6.0 ± 2.16.8 ± 2.1Mid5.5 ± 3.16.0 ± 2.6Late2.0 ± 2.37.1 ± 1.7M-CSF at stromaEarly4.4 ± 1.35.0 ± 2.2Mid4.3 ± 2.65.0 ± 2.9Late2.0 ± 2.36.6 ± 1.9HOXA-10 at glandsEarly4.8 ± 2.54.7 ± 2.2Mid4.0 ± 2.84.0 ± 2.6Late2.0 ± 2.34.5 ± 1.5HOXA-10 at stromaEarly4.0 ± 2.73.9 ± 2.3Mid2.5 ± 2.02.8 ± 2.2Late2.0 ± 2.34.3 ± 1.1VEGF-A at glandsEarly6.0 ± 3.92.9 ± 3.4aP<.027, nonpregnant compared with pregnant.Mid4.4 ± 4.53.0 ± 3.1Late3.0 ± 3.62.7 ± 3.7VEGF-A at stromaEarly4.6 ± 3.54.0 ± 3.4Mid5.8 ± 3.94.2 ± 3.1Late2.5 ± 3.76.4 ± 3.2VEGF-A at endotheliumEarly5.3 ± 3.13.7 ± 3.3Mid4.7 ± 3.64.2 ± 3.2Late2.5 ± 3.75.4 ± 3.1Note: Values not significantly different except where indicated. In the early luteal samples, n = 10 for pregnant and n = 39 for nonpregnant group (Wilcoxon test). In the midluteal samples, n = 13 for pregnant and n = 24 for nonpregnant group (Wilcoxon test). In the late luteal samples, n = 4 for pregnant and n = 14 for nonpregnant group (Wilcoxon test).a P<.027, nonpregnant compared with pregnant. Open table in a new tab Note: Values not significantly different except where indicated. In the early luteal samples, n = 10 for pregnant and n = 39 for nonpregnant group (Wilcoxon test). In the midluteal samples, n = 13 for pregnant and n = 24 for nonpregnant group (Wilcoxon test). In the late luteal samples, n = 4 for pregnant and n = 14 for nonpregnant group (Wilcoxon test). In the present study, we demonstrated that glandular expression of VEGF-A in the early luteal phase in a spontaneous cycle is a significant predictor for subsequent IVF pregnancy. A previous study also suggested that higher expression of VEGF-A in endometrial samples in a previous natural cycle 4 to 6 days after ovulation is discriminative in subsequent IVF pregnancy (12Jinno M. Ozaki T. Iwashita M. Nakamura Y. Kudo A. Hirano H. Measurement of endometrial tissue blood flow: a novel way to assess uterine receptivity for implantation.Fertil Steril. 2001; 76: 1168-1174Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (69) Google Scholar). In the present study, we could generate a specific cutoff value for the VEGF-A score to predict subsequent IVF success. Vascular endothelial growth factor is an important angiogenic factor; thus, VEGF and its receptor system are believed to play an important role in the process of implantation (13Smith S.K. Angiogenesis and implantation.Hum Reprod. 2000; 15: 59-66PubMed Google Scholar). However, the clinical implications of endometrial VEGF expression are not yet understood fully (7Hoozemans D.A. Schats R. Lambalk C.B. Homburg R. Hompes P.G. Human embryo implantation: current knowledge and clinical implications in assisted reproductive technology.Reprod Biomed Online. 2004; 9: 692-715Abstract Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (105) Google Scholar). Although in the present study early luteal glandular expression of VEGF-A could predict a subsequent IVF pregnancy, it is unclear why stromal or endothelial expression or midluteal expression would not be discriminative. In the pregnant group, glandular expression of VEGF-A tended to be decreased through the entire luteal phase; however, this peculiar pattern was not observed in the nonpregnant group. Apparently, this finding was not in agreement with the previous belief that expression of VEGF is highest in the midluteal phase (14Sugino N. Kashida S. Karube-Harada A. Takiguchi S. Kato H. Expression of vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) and its receptors in human endometrium throughout the menstrual cycle and in early pregnancy.Reproduction. 2002; 123: 379-387Crossref PubMed Scopus (147) Google Scholar, 15Ancelin M. Buteau-Lozano H. Meduri G. Osborne-Pellegrin M. Sordello S. Plouet J. et al.A dynamic shift of VEGF isoforms with a transient and selective progesterone-induced expression of VEGF189 regulates angiogenesis and vascular permeability in human uterus.Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2002; 99: 6023-6028Crossref PubMed Scopus (108) Google Scholar). Thus, this peculiar pattern of glandular VEGF-A expression (i.e., early high and late low) might be a prerequisite for a successful implantation. Because an adequate degree of vascularization is a major process for successful implantation, earlier high expression of VEGF-A seems accordingly to promote a receptive endometrium. Human chorionic gonadotropin is one of the most specific molecules produced by the embryo, even before its implantation. Recently, the specific interaction of blastocyst-derived hCG and its endometrial receptor has emerged to be a fundamental component of the molecular dialogue at the maternofetal interface (16Perrier d’Hauterive S. Berndt S. Tsampalas M. Charlet-Renard C. Dubois M. Bourgain C. et al.Dialogue between blastocyst hCG and endometrial LH/hCG receptor: which role in implantation?.Gynecol Obstet Invest. 2007; 64: 156-160Crossref PubMed Scopus (69) Google Scholar). The profile pattern of hCG–LH-R expression by endometrial epithelium correlates with the theoretical timing of the implantation window (17Licht P. von Wolff M. Berkholz A. Wildt L. Evidence for cycle-dependent expression of full-length human chorionic gonadotropin/luteinizing hormone receptor mRNA in human endometrium and decidua.Fertil Steril. 2003; 79: 718-723Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (79) Google Scholar). A subsequent study demonstrated an increased expression of hCG–LH-R messenger RNA in the midluteal phase, thus suggesting that it could constitute a possible marker of endometrial receptivity (18Perrier d’Hauterive S. Charlet-Renard C. Berndt S. Dubois M. Munaut C. Goffin F. et al.Human chorionic gonadotropin and growth factors at the embryonic-endometrial interface control leukemia inhibitory factor (LIF) and interleukin 6 (IL-6) secretion by human endometrial epithelium.Hum Reprod. 2004; 19: 2633-2643Crossref PubMed Scopus (88) Google Scholar). Until now, there have been no studies with regard to the clinical significance of hCG–LH-R expression as a new biomarker of uterine receptivity for embryo implantation (16Perrier d’Hauterive S. Berndt S. Tsampalas M. Charlet-Renard C. Dubois M. Bourgain C. et al.Dialogue between blastocyst hCG and endometrial LH/hCG receptor: which role in implantation?.Gynecol Obstet Invest. 2007; 64: 156-160Crossref PubMed Scopus (69) Google Scholar). In the present study, hCG–LH-R expression in early luteal or midluteal phase was not a predictive marker for subsequent IVF pregnancy. We also found that hCG–LH-R is consistently expressed through the entire luteal phase, and its expression is not highest in the midluteal phase. In addition, hCG–LH-R and VEGF-A expression was tightly correlated at stromal and endothelial cells, but this relation was observed only in the midluteal phase. The latter finding seems to be sound because hCG can trigger VEGF-A production via hCG–LH-R. Taken together with similar expression patterns of hCG–LH-R and VEGF-A (i.e., decreased at glandular epithelium, increased at stroma and endothelium through the luteal phase), our findings support a role for hCG in the control of endometrial vascularization (19Simón C. Martín J.C. Pellicer A. Paracrine regulators of implantation.Baillieres Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol. 2000; 14: 815-826Abstract Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (166) Google Scholar). In general, studies using human endometrium have a limitation because endometrium cannot be obtained from the treatment cycle. The basic assumption is that endometrial condition is similar between treatment and natural cycle. However, the assumption is cautious because ovarian stimulation for IVF may modify the endometrial condition differently from the natural cycle (20Devroey P. Bourgain C. Macklon N.S. Fauser B.C. Reproductive biology and IVF: ovarian stimulation and endometrial receptivity.Trends Endocrinol Metab. 2004; 15: 84-90Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (185) Google Scholar, 21Bourgain C. Devroey P. The endometrium in stimulated cycles for IVF.Hum Reprod Update. 2003; 9: 515-522Crossref PubMed Scopus (253) Google Scholar). In conclusion, we demonstrated the temporal and sequential expressions of five endometrial protein markers in infertile women and also found that higher glandular expression of VEGF-A in the early luteal phase could predict the subsequent IVF pregnancy. Further studies are needed to clarify whether the expressions of endometrial protein markers differ according to infertility factors. Future research should include investigation of a direct relationship between VEGF expression with degree of endometrial vascularization and even implantation of embryo in the treatment cycle." @default.
• W2034759914 created "2016-06-24" @default.
• W2034759914 creator A5020283237 @default.
• W2034759914 creator A5033702657 @default.
• W2034759914 creator A5077171057 @default.
• W2034759914 date "2011-06-01" @default.
• W2034759914 modified "2023-10-14" @default.
• W2034759914 title "Expression of endometrial protein markers in infertile women and the association with subsequent in vitro fertilization outcome" @default.
• W2034759914 cites W1983980559 @default.
• W2034759914 cites W1985233208 @default.
• W2034759914 cites W2003738260 @default.
• W2034759914 cites W2011784168 @default.
• W2034759914 cites W2053220683 @default.
• W2034759914 cites W2055213870 @default.
• W2034759914 cites W2065649944 @default.
• W2034759914 cites W2066966501 @default.
• W2034759914 cites W2118664446 @default.
• W2034759914 cites W2129702378 @default.
• W2034759914 cites W2130463115 @default.
• W2034759914 cites W2140384196 @default.
• W2034759914 cites W2141792275 @default.
• W2034759914 cites W2153282882 @default.
• W2034759914 cites W2157598013 @default.
• W2034759914 cites W2160005770 @default.
• W2034759914 cites W2166355223 @default.
• W2034759914 cites W2171166999 @default.
• W2034759914 cites W4295689030 @default.
• W2034759914 doi "https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2011.01.009" @default.
• W2034759914 hasPubMedId "https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/21315342" @default.
• W2034759914 hasPublicationYear "2011" @default.
• W2034759914 type Work @default.
• W2034759914 sameAs 2034759914 @default.
• W2034759914 citedByCount "15" @default.
• W2034759914 countsByYear W20347599142013 @default.
• W2034759914 countsByYear W20347599142014 @default.
• W2034759914 countsByYear W20347599142015 @default.
• W2034759914 countsByYear W20347599142016 @default.
• W2034759914 countsByYear W20347599142018 @default.
• W2034759914 countsByYear W20347599142019 @default.
• W2034759914 countsByYear W20347599142020 @default.
• W2034759914 countsByYear W20347599142021 @default.
• W2034759914 countsByYear W20347599142022 @default.
• W2034759914 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W2034759914 hasAuthorship W2034759914A5020283237 @default.
• W2034759914 hasAuthorship W2034759914A5033702657 @default.
• W2034759914 hasAuthorship W2034759914A5077171057 @default.
• W2034759914 hasBestOaLocation W20347599141 @default.
• W2034759914 hasConcept C104317684 @default.
• W2034759914 hasConcept C142853389 @default.
• W2034759914 hasConcept C15744967 @default.
• W2034759914 hasConcept C16685009 @default.
• W2034759914 hasConcept C2779234561 @default.
• W2034759914 hasConcept C29456083 @default.
• W2034759914 hasConcept C512716672 @default.
• W2034759914 hasConcept C542102704 @default.
• W2034759914 hasConcept C54355233 @default.
• W2034759914 hasConcept C6856738 @default.
• W2034759914 hasConcept C71924100 @default.
• W2034759914 hasConcept C86803240 @default.
• W2034759914 hasConcept C88972607 @default.
• W2034759914 hasConceptScore W2034759914C104317684 @default.
• W2034759914 hasConceptScore W2034759914C142853389 @default.
• W2034759914 hasConceptScore W2034759914C15744967 @default.
• W2034759914 hasConceptScore W2034759914C16685009 @default.
• W2034759914 hasConceptScore W2034759914C2779234561 @default.
• W2034759914 hasConceptScore W2034759914C29456083 @default.
• W2034759914 hasConceptScore W2034759914C512716672 @default.
• W2034759914 hasConceptScore W2034759914C542102704 @default.
• W2034759914 hasConceptScore W2034759914C54355233 @default.
• W2034759914 hasConceptScore W2034759914C6856738 @default.
• W2034759914 hasConceptScore W2034759914C71924100 @default.
• W2034759914 hasConceptScore W2034759914C86803240 @default.
• W2034759914 hasConceptScore W2034759914C88972607 @default.
• W2034759914 hasIssue "8" @default.
• W2034759914 hasLocation W20347599141 @default.
• W2034759914 hasLocation W20347599142 @default.
• W2034759914 hasOpenAccess W2034759914 @default.
• W2034759914 hasPrimaryLocation W20347599141 @default.
• W2034759914 hasRelatedWork W1992317193 @default.
• W2034759914 hasRelatedWork W2049413555 @default.
• W2034759914 hasRelatedWork W2344792268 @default.
• W2034759914 hasRelatedWork W2365583887 @default.
• W2034759914 hasRelatedWork W2368397394 @default.
• W2034759914 hasRelatedWork W2372324892 @default.
• W2034759914 hasRelatedWork W2402288359 @default.
• W2034759914 hasRelatedWork W2407850744 @default.
• W2034759914 hasRelatedWork W2412326355 @default.
• W2034759914 hasRelatedWork W2797115843 @default.
• W2034759914 hasVolume "95" @default.
• W2034759914 isParatext "false" @default.
• W2034759914 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W2034759914 magId "2034759914" @default.
• W2034759914 workType "article" @default.