| Abstract: | The non‐surgical diagnosis of endometriosis is still challenging for the clinician. Ultrasonography and magnetic resonance imaging can be used to diagnose ovarian endometriotic cysts and deep infiltrating endometriosis; but their performance is poor in the diagnosis of initial stages of endometriosis. CA‐125 and other serum markers (such as CA 19‐9, serum protein PP14, interleukins, and angiogenetic factors) have been measured in women with endometriosis but they are not reliable for the diagnosis of the disease. Although several studies used proteomics technologies to identify plasmatic markers of endometriosis, the non‐invasive diagnosis of endometriosis is far from being achieved. In this issue, Manousopoulou et al. compare the integrated quantitative proteomic profile of eutopic endometrium and serum of women with endometriosis and controls. 1214 proteins are differentially expressed in the eutopic endometrium and 404 proteins in the serum of the two study groups. 21 proteins are aberrantly expressed in both eutopic endometrium and serum of women with endometriosis. More work is needed to assess if the differentially expressed proteins identified in this study can be used as clinical markers of endometriosis. |
