Given a passage with a context and an answer, construct a question on the basis of the information present in the passage. Construct the question in such a way that (i) it is unambiguous, (ii) it is answerable from the passage, (iii) its answer is unique (iv) it answer uses text phrases from the passage. Avoid creating questions that (i) can't be answered correctly without actually understanding the passage and (ii) uses the same words or phrases given in the passage.

Q: Context: Reduced fertilization rates in women with minor endometriosis may be the result of direct effects on the ovary or to primary dysfunction within the hypothalamic-pituitary-ovarian axis. This controlled study was designed to examine the steroidogenic potential of luteinized granulosa cells in women with minor endometriosis.', 'Granulosa cells were harvested at oocyte recovery and incubated for 3 hr in increasing concentrations of luteinizing hormone (LH). The dissociation constant for added concentrations of LH was computed (as Km LH) and the results were compared between women with endometriosis and controls.', 'Women with minor endometriosis had a higher dissociation constant than women with tubal damage [Km 0.98 (0.58-9.24) versus 0.33 (0.28-0.72) ng/mL, P = 0.019], indicating reduced sensitivity to LH.
Answer: In women with endometriosis, granulosa cells were less sensitive to LH stimulation. This provides further evidence for primary ovarian dysfunction as a significant contributory cause of the associated subfertility.

A: Are pre-ovulatory granulosa cells of infertile women with endometriosis less sensitive to luteinizing hormone?
****
Q: Context: Serum elevations of interleukin-6 (IL-6) correlate with multiple organ dysfunction syndrome and mortality in critically injured trauma patients. Data from rodent models of controlled hemorrhage suggest that recombinant IL-6 (rIL-6) infusion protects tissue at risk for ischemia-reperfusion injury. Exogenous rIL-6 administered during shock appears to abrogate inflammation, providing a protective rather than a deleterious influence. In an examination of this paradox, the current study aimed to determine whether rIL-6 decreases inflammation in a clinically relevant large animal model of uncontrolled hemorrhagic shock, (UHS), and to investigate the mechanism of protection.', 'Swine were randomized to four groups (8 animals in each): (1) sacrifice, (2) sham (splenectomy followed by hemodilution and cooling to 33 degrees C), (3) rIL-6 infusion (sham plus UHS using grade 5 liver injury with packing and resuscitation plus blinded infusion of rIL-6 [10 mcg/kg]), and (4) placebo (UHS plus blinded vehicle). After 4 hours, blood was sampled, estimated blood loss determined, animals sacrificed, and lung harvested for RNA isolation. Quantitative reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction was used to assess granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF), IL-6, and tumor necrosis factor-alpha (TNFalpha) messenger ribonucleic acid (mRNA) levels. Serum levels of IL-6 and TNFalpha were measured by enzyme-linked immunoassay (ELISA).', 'As compared with placebo, IL-6 infusion in UHS did not increase estimated blood loss or white blood cell counts, nor decrease hematocrit or platelet levels. As compared with the sham condition, lung G-CSF mRNA production in UHS plus placebo increased eightfold (*p < 0.05). In contrast, rIL-6 infusion plus UHS blunted G-CSF mRNA levels, which were not significantly higher than sham levels (p = 0.1). Infusion of rIL-6 did not significantly affect endogenous production of either lung IL-6 or mRNA. As determined by ELISA, rIL-6 infusion did not increase final serum levels of IL-6 or TNFalpha over those of sham and placebo conditions.
Answer: Exogenous rIL-6 blunts lung mRNA levels of the proinflammatory cytokine G-CSF. The administration of rIL-6 does not increase the local expression of IL-6 nor TNFalpha mRNA in the lung. Additionally, rIL-6 infusion does not appear to cause systemic toxicity.

A: Does interleukin-6 infusion blunt proinflammatory cytokine production without causing systematic toxicity in a swine model of uncontrolled hemorrhagic shock?
****
Q: Context: Thyroid-stimulating hormone (TSH) levels within populations do not follow Gaussian distribution, and normal limits are derived after mathematical normalization. The clinical relevance of these limits is unknown. The objective of this study was to compare upper and lower TSH limits by four data normalization methods with non-normalized data and assess their clinical relevance.', 'Results of blood samples taken by community physicians and stored in a computerized database were analysed after removing samples from patients with evidence of thyroid illness. TSH values were normalized by the Hoffmann and Tukey methods and each method with natural log transformation. Non-normalized data for TSH in the uppermost and lowermost percentile were also calculated. Clinical relevance was determined by alterations in thyroid hormone levels at, below and above the limits for each method.', 'The maximal reduction from non-normalized data for the upper normal limit (UNL) was by the Hoffman method 43% = 3·1 mIU/l). The maximal increase for the lower normal limit (LNL) was also by the Hoffman method (708% = 0·81 mIU/l). There was very limited difference in average FT3 and FT4 between patients with TSH within, below or above the normal range for all methods.
Answer: Different normalization methods alter the normal limits greatly. However, in individuals without thyroid illness, thyroid hormone values are stable over a wide range of TSH levels including beyond the UNL for all methods. Indeed, there may be no true universal upper TSH cut-off level and clinical decision-making cannot rely on these calculated limits.

A:
Do normal limits for serum thyrotropin vary greatly depending on method?
****