{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.010407632263660017, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0026019080659150044, 'mean_word_length': 5.910179640718563, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Evaluation of paternal lymphocyte immunotherapy and potential biomarker mixed lymphocyte reaction‐blocking factor in an Argentinian cohort of women with unexplained recurrent spontaneous abortion and unexplained infertility

It was with great interest that we read and analyzed the publication of Fainboim et al.1 in Am J Reprod Immunol entitled Evaluation of Paternal Lymphocyte Immunotherapy and Potential Biomarker Mixed Lymphocyte Reaction-Blocking Factor in an Argentinian Cohort of Women With Unexplained Recurrent Spontaneous Abortion and Unexplained Infertility. We have been working with unexplained recurrent spontaneous abortion (URSA) patients and also we have been using this treatment as an alternative for them. In the last 40 years, there are many controversies in the literature regarding the efficacy of paternal lymphocyte immunotherapy PLI in URSA. Efforts to point out predictors of success and target population for this type of treatment, in addition to elucidating the biological mechanisms underlying this technique, are extremely important to consolidate and standardize the indication of PLI and other related immunotherapies.