Study record
Are serum MOTS-c levels and MOTS-c m.1382A>C polymorphism related to polycystic ovary syndrome?
Filibeli BE, Dedemoglu F, Garipçin P et al. · Arch Endocrinol Metab · 2026
Human obs.SeveralEvidence tier B
What this study reported
Measured serum MOTS-c in adolescents with and without polycystic ovary syndrome and found higher mean levels in the PCOS group that did not reach statistical significance. Reported no significant association between MOTS-c levels and anthropometric or metabolic parameters, and all participants carried the wild-type A/A genotype at m.1382A>C.
Limitations
Cross-sectional case-control design; the genotype analysis was uninformative because no variant carriers were found; single-centre adolescent sample.
Study record
| Study model | Human observational |
|---|---|
| Substance studied | SeveralMore than one of these is central to the paper (common for reviews). |
| Species | human |
| System studied | Adolescents aged 12-18 with polycystic ovary syndrome and controls; serum ELISA and m.1382A>C sequencing |
| Population | adolescents with polycystic ovary syndrome and adolescents with regular menstruation |
| Design | Case-control study |
| Sample size as reported | 121 adolescents with PCOS and 125 controls |
| Control group | adolescents with regular menstrual cycles |
| Route (data field only) | Not reported |
| Endpoints measured | serum MOTS-c levels; m.1382A>C genotype; anthropometric measures; metabolic parameters |
| Pathways measured | Insulin & glucose handling |
| Research areas | Metabolic · Reproductive |
| Evidence tier | B — Other human study |
| Publication types | Journal Article |
Appraisal
Each dimension is recorded separately and never combined into a single score. A study can be well controlled and still tell you little about people.
- Relevance to MOTS-c
- Direct
- Model applicability
- Human
- Sample size
- Adequate
- Controls
- Appropriate
- Outcome validity
- Validated biomarker
- Support for its own conclusion
- Moderate
Provenance
- Bibliographic fields retrieved from PubMed E-utilities efetch (title, journal, date, authors, DOI) on 2026-11-11.
- Annotated from the published abstract.
- Editorial review: approved (2026-11-11).
- Classification follows the site methodology; the record describes the study, not what MOTS-c does in people.