| 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.
|
|
| 4. |
- Gholami, S, et al.
(författare)
-
Standardizing resistive indices in healthy pediatric transplant recipients of adult-sized kidneys
- 2010
-
Ingår i: Pediatric Transplantation. - Denmark : Wiley-Blackwell Munksgaard. - 1397-3142 .- 1399-3046. ; 14:1, s. 126-131
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Small pediatric recipients of an adult-sized kidney have insufficient renal blood flow early after transplantation, with secondary chronic hypoperfusion and irreversible histological damage of the tubulo-interstitial compartment. It is unknown whether this is reflected by renal resistive indices. We measured renal graft resistive indices and volumes of 47 healthy pediatric kidney transplant recipients of an adult-sized kidney in a prospective study for six months post-transplant. A total of 205 measurements were performed. The smallest recipients (BSA /= 1.5 m(2) (p < 0.0001). Resistive indices increased during the first six months in the smallest recipients (p = 0.02), but not in the two larger recipient groups (BSA 0.75-1.5 m(2) and >/=1.5 m(2)). All three BSA groups showed a reduction in renal volume after transplantation, with the greatest reduction occurring in the smallest recipients. In conclusion, renal transplant resistive indices reflect pediatric recipient BSA dependency. The higher resistance to intra-renal vascular flow and significant decrease in renal volume in the smallest group likely reflect accommodation of the size discrepant transplanted adult-sized kidney to the smaller pediatric recipient vasculature with associated lower renal artery flow.
|
|
