| 1. |
- Aad, G., et al.
(författare)
-
- 2014
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)
|
|
| 2. |
- Niemi, MEK, et al.
(författare)
-
- 2021
-
swepub:Mat__t
|
|
| 3. |
- Kanai, M, et al.
(författare)
-
- 2023
-
swepub:Mat__t
|
|
| 4. |
|
|
| 5. |
|
|
| 6. |
- 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.
|
|
| 7. |
|
|
| 8. |
|
|
| 9. |
|
|
| 10. |
- Molina-Montes, E, et al.
(författare)
-
Deciphering the complex interplay between pancreatic cancer, diabetes mellitus subtypes and obesity/BMI through causal inference and mediation analyses
- 2021
-
Ingår i: Gut. - : BMJ. - 1468-3288 .- 0017-5749. ; 70:2, s. 319-329
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- To characterise the association between type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) subtypes (new-onset T2DM (NODM) or long-standing T2DM (LSDM)) and pancreatic cancer (PC) risk, to explore the direction of causation through Mendelian randomisation (MR) analysis and to assess the mediation role of body mass index (BMI).DesignInformation about T2DM and related factors was collected from 2018 PC cases and 1540 controls from the PanGenEU (European Study into Digestive Illnesses and Genetics) study. A subset of PC cases and controls had glycated haemoglobin, C-peptide and genotype data. Multivariate logistic regression models were applied to derive ORs and 95% CIs. T2DM and PC-related single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) were used as instrumental variables (IVs) in bidirectional MR analysis to test for two-way causal associations between PC, NODM and LSDM. Indirect and direct effects of the BMI-T2DM-PC association were further explored using mediation analysis.ResultsT2DM was associated with an increased PC risk when compared with non-T2DM (OR=2.50; 95% CI: 2.05 to 3.05), the risk being greater for NODM (OR=6.39; 95% CI: 4.18 to 9.78) and insulin users (OR=3.69; 95% CI: 2.80 to 4.86). The causal association between T2DM (57-SNP IV) and PC was not statistically significant (ORLSDM=1.08, 95% CI: 0.86 to 1.29, ORNODM=1.06, 95% CI: 0.95 to 1.17). In contrast, there was a causal association between PC (40-SNP IV) and NODM (OR=2.85; 95% CI: 2.04 to 3.98), although genetic pleiotropy was present (MR-Egger: p value=0.03). Potential mediating effects of BMI (125-SNPs as IV), particularly in terms of weight loss, were evidenced on the NODM-PC association (indirect effect for BMI in previous years=0.55).ConclusionFindings of this study do not support a causal effect of LSDM on PC, but suggest that PC causes NODM. The interplay between obesity, PC and T2DM is complex.
|
|
