| 1. |
|
|
| 2. |
- Klionsky, Daniel J., et al.
(författare)
-
Guidelines for the use and interpretation of assays for monitoring autophagy
- 2012
-
Ingår i: Autophagy. - : Informa UK Limited. - 1554-8635 .- 1554-8627. ; 8:4, s. 445-544
-
Forskningsöversikt (refereegranskat)abstract
- In 2008 we published the first set of guidelines for standardizing research in autophagy. Since then, research on this topic has continued to accelerate, and many new scientists have entered the field. Our knowledge base and relevant new technologies have also been expanding. Accordingly, it is important to update these guidelines for monitoring autophagy in different organisms. Various reviews have described the range of assays that have been used for this purpose. Nevertheless, there continues to be confusion regarding acceptable methods to measure autophagy, especially in multicellular eukaryotes. A key point that needs to be emphasized is that there is a difference between measurements that monitor the numbers or volume of autophagic elements (e.g., autophagosomes or autolysosomes) at any stage of the autophagic process vs. those that measure flux through the autophagy pathway (i.e., the complete process); thus, a block in macroautophagy that results in autophagosome accumulation needs to be differentiated from stimuli that result in increased autophagic activity, defined as increased autophagy induction coupled with increased delivery to, and degradation within, lysosomes (in most higher eukaryotes and some protists such as Dictyostelium) or the vacuole (in plants and fungi). In other words, it is especially important that investigators new to the field understand that the appearance of more autophagosomes does not necessarily equate with more autophagy. In fact, in many cases, autophagosomes accumulate because of a block in trafficking to lysosomes without a concomitant change in autophagosome biogenesis, whereas an increase in autolysosomes may reflect a reduction in degradative activity. Here, we present a set of guidelines for the selection and interpretation of methods for use by investigators who aim to examine macroautophagy and related processes, as well as for reviewers who need to provide realistic and reasonable critiques of papers that are focused on these processes. These guidelines are not meant to be a formulaic set of rules, because the appropriate assays depend in part on the question being asked and the system being used. In addition, we emphasize that no individual assay is guaranteed to be the most appropriate one in every situation, and we strongly recommend the use of multiple assays to monitor autophagy. In these guidelines, we consider these various methods of assessing autophagy and what information can, or cannot, be obtained from them. Finally, by discussing the merits and limits of particular autophagy assays, we hope to encourage technical innovation in the field.
|
|
| 3. |
- Beato, Marco, et al.
(författare)
-
Current Guidelines for the Implementation of Flywheel Resistance Training Technology in Sports: A Consensus Statement
- 2024
-
Ingår i: Sports Medicine. - : ADIS INT LTD. - 0112-1642 .- 1179-2035.
-
Forskningsöversikt (refereegranskat)abstract
- BackgroundFlywheel resistance training has become more integrated within resistance training programs in a variety of sports due to the neuromuscular, strength, and task-specific enhancements reported with this training.ObjectiveThis paper aimed to present the consensus reached by internationally recognized experts during a meeting on current definitions and guidelines for the implementation of flywheel resistance training technology in sports.MethodsNineteen experts from different countries took part in the consensus process; 16 of them were present at the consensus meeting (18 May 2023) while three submitted their recommendations by e-mail. Prior to the meeting, evidence summaries were developed relating to areas of priority. This paper discusses the available evidence and consensus process from which recommendations were made regarding the appropriate use of flywheel resistance training technology in sports. The process to gain consensus had five steps: (1) performing a systematic review of systematic reviews, (2) updating the most recent umbrella review published on this topic, (3) first round discussion among a sample of the research group included in this consensus statement, (4) selection of research group members-process of the consensus meeting and formulation of the recommendations, and (5) the consensus process. The systematic analysis of the literature was performed to select the most up-to-date review papers available on the topic, which resulted in nine articles; their methodological quality was assessed according to AMSTAR 2 (Assessing the Methodological Quality of Systematic Review 2) and GRADE (Grading Recommendations Assessment Development and Evaluation). Statements and recommendations scoring 7-9 were considered appropriate.ResultsThe recommendations were based on the evidence summary and researchers' expertise; the consensus statement included three statements and seven recommendations for the use of flywheel resistance training technology. These statements and recommendations were anonymously voted on and qualitatively analyzed. The three statements reported a score ranging from 8.1 to 8.8, and therefore, all statements included in this consensus were considered appropriate. The recommendations (1-7) had a score ranging from 7.7 to 8.6, and therefore, all recommendations were considered appropriate.ConclusionsBecause of the consensus achieved among the experts in this project, it is suggested that practitioners and researchers should adopt the guidelines reported in this consensus statement regarding the use of flywheel resistance technology in sports.
|
|
| 4. |
- Friedlander, Michael, et al.
(författare)
-
Clinical trials in recurrent ovarian cancer.
- 2011
-
Ingår i: International Journal of Gynecological Cancer. - : Lippincott Williams & Wilkins. - 1048-891X .- 1525-1438. ; 21:4, s. 771-775
-
Forskningsöversikt (refereegranskat)abstract
- The 4th Ovarian Cancer Consensus Conference of the Gynecologic Cancer InterGroup was held in Vancouver, Canada, in June 2010. Representatives of 23 cooperative research groups studying gynecologic cancers gathered to establish international consensus on issues critical to the conduct of large randomized trials. Group C, 1 of the 3 discussion groups, examined recurrent ovarian cancer, and we report the consensus reached regarding 4 questions. These included the following: (1) What is the role of cytoreductive surgery for recurrent ovarian cancer? (2) How do we define distinct patient populations in need of specific therapeutic approaches? (3) Should end points for trials with recurrent disease vary from those of first-line trials? (4) Is CA-125 progression alone sufficient for entry/eligibility into clinical trials?
|
|
| 5. |
- Glasspool, Rosalind M, et al.
(författare)
-
Gynecologic Cancer InterGroup (GCIG) consensus review for squamous cell carcinoma of the ovary.
- 2014
-
Ingår i: International Journal of Gynecological Cancer. - : Lippincott Williams & Wilkins. - 1048-891X .- 1525-1438. ; 24:9, s. S26-
-
Forskningsöversikt (refereegranskat)abstract
- Squamous cell carcinoma of the ovary is a rare complication of mature cystic teratoma. The epidemiology, pathology, diagnosis, and management of this rare tumor are reviewed. Clinical characteristics, preoperative imaging, and tumor markers may help to predict malignancy preoperatively. Complete cytoreduction should be the aim of surgery. The prognosis for stage 1A disease is good, but for women with advanced or recurrent disease, it is very poor and has not improved in recent years. At present, there are insufficient data to provide clear guidance on the optimal management strategy for advanced disease, and there is a need to gain an understanding of the biology and to develop novel effective therapies. This will require coordinated international collaboration.
|
|
| 6. |
- Mirza, Mansoor Raza, et al.
(författare)
-
Ad hoc Analysis of the Phase III ENGOT-OV16/NOVA Study: Niraparib Efficacy in Germline BRCA Wild-type Recurrent Ovarian Cancer with Homologous Recombination Repair Defects
- 2022
-
Ingår i: Cancer Research Communications. - : AMER ASSOC CANCER RESEARCH. - 2767-9764. ; 2:11, s. 1436-1444
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- In this analysis, we examined the relationship between progression-free survival (PFS) and mutation status of 18 homologous recombination repair (HRR) genes in patients in the non-germline BRCA-mutated (non-gBRCAm) cohort of the ENGOT-OV16/NOVA trial (NCT01847274), which evaluated niraparib maintenance therapy for patients with recurrent ovarian cancer. This post hoc exploratory biomarker analysis was performed using tumor samples collected from 331 patients enrolled in the phase III ENGOT-OV16/NOVA trial's non-gBRCAm cohort. Niraparib demonstrated PFS benefit in patients with either somatic BRCA-mutated (sBRCAm; HR, 0.27; 95% confidence interval, CI, 0.08–0.88) or BRCA wild-type (BRCAwt; HR, 0.47; 95% CI, 0.34–0.64) tumors. Patients with BRCAwt tumors with other non-BRCA HRR mutations also derived benefit from niraparib (HR, 0.31; 95% CI, 0.13–0.77), as did patients with BRCAwt/HRRwt (HRR wild-type) tumors (HR, 0.49; 95% CI, 0.35–0.70). When patients with BRCAwt/HRRwt tumors were further categorized by genomic instability score (GIS), clinical benefit was observed in patients with homologous recombination–deficient (GIS ≥ 42; HR, 0.33; 95% CI, 0.18–0.61) and in patients with homologous recombination–proficient (HRp; GIS < 42; HR, 0.60; 95% CI, 0.36–0.99) disease. Although patients with sBRCAm, other non-BRCA HRR mutations, or GIS ≥ 42 benefited the most from niraparib treatment, PFS benefit was also seen in HRp (GIS < 42) patients without HRR mutations. These results support the use of niraparib in patients with recurrent ovarian cancer regardless of BRCA/HRR mutation status or myChoice CDx GIS.Significance:We retrospectively evaluated the mutational profile of HRR genes in tumor samples from 331 patients from the non-germline BRCA-mutated cohort of the phase III NOVA trial of patients with platinum-sensitive high-grade serous ovarian cancer. Patients with non-BRCA HRR mutations generally benefited from second-line maintenance treatment with niraparib compared with placebo.
|
|
