| 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. |
- Wallin, Anders, 1950, et al.
(författare)
-
Biochemical markers in vascular cognitive impairment associated with subcortical small vessel disease - A consensus report.
- 2017
-
Ingår i: BMC neurology. - : Springer Science and Business Media LLC. - 1471-2377. ; 17:1
-
Forskningsöversikt (refereegranskat)abstract
- Vascular cognitive impairment (VCI) is a heterogeneous entity with multiple aetiologies, all linked to underlying vascular disease. Among these, VCI related to subcortical small vessel disease (SSVD) is emerging as a major homogeneous subtype. Its progressive course raises the need for biomarker identification and/or development for adequate therapeutic interventions to be tested. In order to shed light in the current status on biochemical markers for VCI-SSVD, experts in field reviewed the recent evidence and literature data.The group conducted a comprehensive search on Medline, PubMed and Embase databases for studies published until 15.01.2017. The proposal on current status of biochemical markers in VCI-SSVD was reviewed by all co-authors and the draft was repeatedly circulated and discussed before it was finalized.This review identifies a large number of biochemical markers derived from CSF and blood. There is a considerable overlap of VCI-SSVD clinical symptoms with those of Alzheimer's disease (AD). Although most of the published studies are small and their findings remain to be replicated in larger cohorts, several biomarkers have shown promise in separating VCI-SSVD from AD. These promising biomarkers are closely linked to underlying SSVD pathophysiology, namely disruption of blood-CSF and blood-brain barriers (BCB-BBB) and breakdown of white matter myelinated fibres and extracellular matrix, as well as blood and brain inflammation. The leading biomarker candidates are: elevated CSF/blood albumin ratio, which reflects BCB/BBB disruption; altered CSF matrix metalloproteinases, reflecting extracellular matrix breakdown; CSF neurofilment as a marker of axonal damage, and possibly blood inflammatory cytokines and adhesion molecules. The suggested SSVD biomarker deviations contrasts the characteristic CSF profile in AD, i.e. depletion of amyloid beta peptide and increased phosphorylated and total tau.Combining SSVD and AD biomarkers may provide a powerful tool to identify with greater precision appropriate patients for clinical trials of more homogeneous dementia populations. Thereby, biomarkers might promote therapeutic progress not only in VCI-SSVD, but also in AD.
|
|
