| 1. |
|
|
| 2. |
- Bousquet, Jean, et al.
(författare)
-
Allergic Rhinitis and its Impact on Asthma (ARIA) Phase 4 (2018) : Change management in allergic rhinitis and asthma multimorbidity using mobile technology
- 2019
-
Ingår i: Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology. - : Elsevier. - 0091-6749 .- 1097-6825. ; 143:3, s. 864-879
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Allergic Rhinitis and its Impact on Asthma (ARIA) has evolved from a guideline by using the best approach to integrated care pathways using mobile technology in patients with allergic rhinitis (AR) and asthma multimorbidity. The proposed next phase of ARIA is change management, with the aim of providing an active and healthy life to patients with rhinitis and to those with asthma multimorbidity across the lifecycle irrespective of their sex or socioeconomic status to reduce health and social inequities incurred by the disease. ARIA has followed the 8-step model of Kotter to assess and implement the effect of rhinitis on asthma multimorbidity and to propose multimorbid guidelines. A second change management strategy is proposed by ARIA Phase 4 to increase self-medication and shared decision making in rhinitis and asthma multimorbidity. An innovation of ARIA has been the development and validation of information technology evidence-based tools (Mobile Airways Sentinel Network [MASK]) that can inform patient decisions on the basis of a self-care plan proposed by the health care professional.
|
|
| 3. |
- Bernal, Ximena E., et al.
(författare)
-
Empowering Latina scientists
- 2019
-
Ingår i: Science. - : American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS). - 0036-8075 .- 1095-9203. ; 363:6429, s. 825-826
-
Tidskriftsartikel (övrigt vetenskapligt/konstnärligt)
|
|
| 4. |
- Cameli, Matteo, et al.
(författare)
-
ACUTE HF score, a multiparametric prognostic tool for acute heart failure : A real-life study
- 2019
-
Ingår i: International Journal of Cardiology. - : Elsevier BV. - 0167-5273 .- 1874-1754. ; 296, s. 103-108
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background: Acute heart failure (AHF) is the first cause of hospitalization for over-65 individuals, associated with high mortality and readmission rate. The aim of this study was to assess the prognostic value of a multiparametric score combining clinical, biochemical and echocardiographic indexes in AHF for clinical practice.Methods: 830 patients hospitalized for AHF were enrolled. Exclusion criteria were: active neoplasms; previous heart transplantation or left ventricular assist device implantation. Different variables were analyzed: etiology of AHF, clinical and biochemical data, lung congestion on chest-X ray, echocardiographic parameters and administered therapy. The endpoints were: all-cause mortality at 30 days, 6 months and 5 years and the duration of hospitalization.Results: 771 patients met eligibility criteria. Using the univariate and multivariate analysis the indexes with the best correlation with outcome were discretized and used to create the ACUTE HF score, computed as: 1.4*[serum creatinine>2 mg/dl] + 0.8*[ejection fraction<30] + 0.7*[age > 76] + 0.7*[prior hospitalization for AHF] + 0.9*[prior stroke/transient ischemic attack] + 0.5*[more than moderate mitral regurgitation] + 0.8*[use of non-invasive ventilation] and used to divide patients into 3 groups according to the risk of 6-months mortality. With the receiver operating curves and Kaplan-Meier analysis, this score proved to have a high predictive power for mortality at 30 days, 6 months and 5 years from hospitalization, and for event-free survival rates, providing a risk stratification capability superior to that of single variables.Conclusions: The ACUTE HF score could be a complete and useful tool for assessing prognosis of AHF patients. It could represent a step in the long standardization pathway of prognostic protocols for AHF.
|
|
| 5. |
- 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.
|
|
