Browsing by Author "Sojat, Antoan Stefan (57214798387)"

Obesity is an epidemic that has led to a rise in the incidence of many comorbidities: among others, reduced fertility is often under-evaluated in clinical practice. The mechanisms underlying the link between reduced fertility and obesity are numerous, with insulin resistance, hyperglycaemia and the frequent coexistence of polycystic ovary syndrome being the most acknowledged. However, several other factors concur, such as gut microbiome alterations, low-grade chronic inflammation and oxidative stress. Not only do women with obesity take longer to conceive, but in vitro fertilization (IVF) is also less likely to succeed. We herein provide an updated state-of-the-art regarding the molecular bases of what we could define as dysmetabolic infertility, focusing on the clinical aspects, as well as possible treatment. © 2022 The Authors. Clinical Endocrinology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Obesity is an epidemic that has led to a rise in the incidence of many comorbidities: among others, reduced fertility is often under-evaluated in clinical practice. The mechanisms underlying the link between reduced fertility and obesity are numerous, with insulin resistance, hyperglycaemia and the frequent coexistence of polycystic ovary syndrome being the most acknowledged. However, several other factors concur, such as gut microbiome alterations, low-grade chronic inflammation and oxidative stress. Not only do women with obesity take longer to conceive, but in vitro fertilization (IVF) is also less likely to succeed. We herein provide an updated state-of-the-art regarding the molecular bases of what we could define as dysmetabolic infertility, focusing on the clinical aspects, as well as possible treatment. © 2022 The Authors. Clinical Endocrinology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Objective: Individual patients' data sharing requires interoperability, security, ethical, and legal compliance. The aim was to assess the landscape and sharing capacities between endocrine researchers. Design: A standardized survey (SurveyMonkey®) with 67 questions was sent to European Network for the Study of Adrenal Tumors centers. Methods: Answers were counted as absolute numbers and percentages. Comparisons between inclusiveness target countries (ITC) and non-ITC (defined by Cooperation in Science & Technology Action) were performed using Fisher's exact test. Results: Seventy-three centers from 34 countries answered the survey. Electronic health record (EHR) systems are now the main source of data (90%). However, significant variability was reported, entailing >35 EHR providers, and variable data collected. Variable stakeholders' implication for enabling data sharing was reported, with more lawyers (P = .023), patient representatives (P < .001), ethicists (P = .002), methodologists (P = .023), and information technology experts (P < .001) in non-ITC centers. Implication of information technologies experts for data collection and sharing was underwhelming (33%). Funding for clinical research was higher in non-ITC than in ITC for clinical trials (P = .01) and for registry-based and cohort studies (P = .05). However, for retrospective studies addressing a specific clinical question, the funding was either very low (<10%) or nonexistent for both ITC and non-ITC (37% and 46%, respectively), with no dedicated funding for information technology (86%) and ethical and regulatory aspects (88%). Conclusions: In the absence of dedicated funding for retrospective research, current requirements for data sharing are obstacles. © The Author(s) 2025. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of European Society of Endocrinology.

Objective: Individual patients' data sharing requires interoperability, security, ethical, and legal compliance. The aim was to assess the landscape and sharing capacities between endocrine researchers. Design: A standardized survey (SurveyMonkey®) with 67 questions was sent to European Network for the Study of Adrenal Tumors centers. Methods: Answers were counted as absolute numbers and percentages. Comparisons between inclusiveness target countries (ITC) and non-ITC (defined by Cooperation in Science & Technology Action) were performed using Fisher's exact test. Results: Seventy-three centers from 34 countries answered the survey. Electronic health record (EHR) systems are now the main source of data (90%). However, significant variability was reported, entailing >35 EHR providers, and variable data collected. Variable stakeholders' implication for enabling data sharing was reported, with more lawyers (P = .023), patient representatives (P < .001), ethicists (P = .002), methodologists (P = .023), and information technology experts (P < .001) in non-ITC centers. Implication of information technologies experts for data collection and sharing was underwhelming (33%). Funding for clinical research was higher in non-ITC than in ITC for clinical trials (P = .01) and for registry-based and cohort studies (P = .05). However, for retrospective studies addressing a specific clinical question, the funding was either very low (<10%) or nonexistent for both ITC and non-ITC (37% and 46%, respectively), with no dedicated funding for information technology (86%) and ethical and regulatory aspects (88%). Conclusions: In the absence of dedicated funding for retrospective research, current requirements for data sharing are obstacles. © The Author(s) 2025. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of European Society of Endocrinology.