Table 1 Characteristics of the 19 gene lists included in this study. Gene lists were divided according to their evaluated condition. Each signature was labelled using the name of first author, followed by the publication year in the case of duplicates. Endometrial staging was based on different variables including urinary LH, histological analysis, ultrasound evaluation, or the number of days since the hCG trigger. Participants included healthy controls and women with infertility-related conditions. Various platforms were used to evaluate gene expression. The thresholds applied for gene refinement and the final number of genes per signature are also presented

Endometrial progression

Altmäe2017

N/A

N/A

N/A

RRA

57

[34]

Borthwick

Urinary LH; Histologically confirmed

PF d9-11 (n = 5) vs R LH + 6–8 (n = 5)

Affymetrix Genechip Hu95A

N/A

116

[18]

Carrascosa

N/A

N/A

Quantitative RT-PCR

Based on literature

187

[35]

Carson

Urinary LH; Histologically confirmed

ESE LH + 2–4 (n = 3) vs MSE LH + 7–9 (n = 3)

Affymetrix Genechip Hu95A

|FC|> 2

695

[17]

Diaz-Gimeno

Urinary LH

PR LH + 1–5 (n = 15) vs R

Agilent custom gene expression microarray

|FC| > 2

234

[36]

Kao

Urinary LH; Histologically confirmed

LPF d8-10 (n = 4) vs MSE LH + 8-10 (n = 7)

Affymetrix Genechip Hu95A

|FC|> 2 and P-value <0.05

340

[37]

Mirkin

Urinary LH; Histological dating

ESE LH + 3 (n = 3) vs MSE LH + 8 (n = 5)

Affymetrix Genechip Hu95A

|FC|>2 and adj-P-value < 0.05

105

[19]

Ponnampalam

Histological dating

EPF (n = 5) MPF (n = 7) LPF (n = 3) ESE (n = 7) MSE (n = 8) LS (n = 7) Mense (n = 6)

Custom

Adj-P-value <0.05

306

[38]

Punyadeera

Histological dating

Mense (n = 2) vs LPF (n=2)

Affymetrix HG-U133A

FC and P-value

50

[39]

Riesewijk

Urinary LH; Histological dating

PR LH + 2 (n = 5) vs R LH + 7 (n = 5)

Affymetrix Genechip Hu95A

|FC|> 3 in at least four out of five women.

196

[40]

Talbi

Histological dating

P (n = 6) vs ESE (n = 3) vs MSE (n = 8) vs LSE (n = 6)

Affymetrix HG-U133 Plus 2.0

|FC|> 1.5 and adj-P-value < 0.05

317

[4]

Implantation failure

Altmäe2010

Urinary LH

UI (n = 4) vs C (n = 5)

Whole Human Genome Oligo Microarray (Agilent Technologies)

|FC|> 2 and PFP < 0.05

184

[21]

Bastu

6-7 days after LH surge

IF (n = 24) vs Fertile women (n = 24)

Agilent-039494

SurePrint G3 Human

GE v2 8x60K

Log2(FC) ≥ 1 and adj-P-value ≤0.05 |FC|> 2 and PFP < 0.05

524

[41]

Bersinger

N/A

IF (n = 3) vs M (n = 3) vs OP (n = 3)

Affymetrix Human Genome U133A 2.0 Chips

Not specified

93

[42]

Bhagwat

N/A

PR vs R

Multiple platforms

Based on literature

177

[43]

Koot

Urinary LH

RIF (n = 43) vs C (n = 72)

Human whole genome gene expression microarrays V2 (Agilent, Belgium)

Machine learning predictor

310

[44]

Lédée

Ultrasound evaluation

IF (n = 30) vs Fertile women (n = 15)

Affymetrix Human

Genome U133 Plus 2.0 Array

Adj-P-value <0.01 and Δ > 1.35

322

[45]

Pathare

6-7 days after hCG administration

IF (n = 10) vs Healthy oocyte donors (n = 8)

Illumina HumanHT-12 V4.0 expression beadchip

|FC|> 2

818

[46]

Shi

Urinary LH; Ultrasound evaluation

RIF (n = 12) vs C (n = 10)

Agilent-052909

CBC lncRNAmRNA V3

|FC|≥ 2 and adj-P-value ≤ 0.05

281

[47]