| 1. |
- Kanai, M, et al.
(författare)
-
- 2023
-
swepub:Mat__t
|
|
| 2. |
- Niemi, MEK, et al.
(författare)
-
- 2021
-
swepub:Mat__t
|
|
| 3. |
|
|
| 4. |
- Aaltonen, T., et al.
(författare)
-
Tevatron Combination of Single-Top-Quark Cross Sections and Determination of the Magnitude of the Cabibbo-Kobayashi-Maskawa Matrix Element V-tb
- 2015
-
Ingår i: Physical Review Letters. - 0031-9007 .- 1079-7114. ; 115:15
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- We present the final combination of CDF and D0 measurements of cross sections for single-top-quark production in proton-antiproton collisions at a center-of-mass energy of 1.96 TeV. The data correspond to total integrated luminosities of up to 9.7 fb(-1) per experiment. The t-channel cross section is measured to be sigma(t) = 2.25(-0.31)(+0.29) pb. We also present the combinations of the two-dimensional measurements of the s- vs t-channel cross section. In addition, we give the combination of the s + t channel cross section measurement resulting in sigma(s+t) = 3.30(-0.40)(+0.52) pb, without assuming the standard model value for the ratio sigma(s)/sigma(t). The resulting value of the magnitude of the top-to-bottom quark coupling is vertical bar V-tb vertical bar = 1.02(-0.05)(+0.06), corresponding to vertical bar V-tb vertical bar > 0.92 at the 95% C. L.
|
|
| 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.
|
|
| 6. |
- Östling, Jörgen, et al.
(författare)
-
IL-17-high asthma with features of a psoriasis immunophenotype
- 2019
-
Ingår i: Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology. - : Elsevier. - 0091-6749 .- 1097-6825. ; 144:5, s. 1198-1213
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background: The role of IL-17 immunity is well established in patients with inflammatory diseases, such as psoriasis and inflammatory bowel disease, but not in asthmatic patients, in whom further study is required.Objective: We sought to undertake a deep phenotyping study of asthmatic patients with upregulated IL-17 immunity.Methods: Whole-genome transcriptomic analysis was performed by using epithelial brushings, bronchial biopsy specimens (91 asthmatic patients and 46 healthy control subjects), and whole blood samples (n = 498) from the Unbiased Biomarkers for the Prediction of Respiratory Disease Outcomes (U-BIOPRED) cohort. Gene signatures induced in vitro by IL-17 and IL-13 in bronchial epithelial cells were used to identify patients with IL-17–high and IL-13–high asthma phenotypes.Results: Twenty-two of 91 patients were identified with IL-17, and 9 patients were identified with IL-13 gene signatures. The patients with IL-17–high asthma were characterized by risk of frequent exacerbations, airway (sputum and mucosal) neutrophilia, decreased lung microbiota diversity, and urinary biomarker evidence of activation of the thromboxane B2 pathway. In pathway analysis the differentially expressed genes in patients with IL-17-high asthma were shared with those reported as altered in psoriasis lesions and included genes regulating epithelial barrier function and defense mechanisms, such as IL1B, IL6, IL8, and β-defensin.Conclusion: The IL-17–high asthma phenotype, characterized by bronchial epithelial dysfunction and upregulated antimicrobial and inflammatory response, resembles the immunophenotype of psoriasis, including activation of the thromboxane B2 pathway, which should be considered a biomarker for this phenotype in further studies, including clinical trials targeting IL-17.
|
|
| 7. |
|
|
| 8. |
|
|
| 9. |
- Abbafati, Cristiana, et al.
(författare)
-
- 2020
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)
|
|
| 10. |
- Pennells, Lisa, et al.
(författare)
-
Equalization of four cardiovascular risk algorithms after systematic recalibration : individual-participant meta-analysis of 86 prospective studies
- 2019
-
Ingår i: European Heart Journal. - : Oxford University Press (OUP). - 0195-668X .- 1522-9645. ; 40:7, s. 621-
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Aims: There is debate about the optimum algorithm for cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk estimation. We conducted head-to-head comparisons of four algorithms recommended by primary prevention guidelines, before and after ‘recalibration’, a method that adapts risk algorithms to take account of differences in the risk characteristics of the populations being studied.Methods and results: Using individual-participant data on 360 737 participants without CVD at baseline in 86 prospective studies from 22 countries, we compared the Framingham risk score (FRS), Systematic COronary Risk Evaluation (SCORE), pooled cohort equations (PCE), and Reynolds risk score (RRS). We calculated measures of risk discrimination and calibration, and modelled clinical implications of initiating statin therapy in people judged to be at ‘high’ 10 year CVD risk. Original risk algorithms were recalibrated using the risk factor profile and CVD incidence of target populations. The four algorithms had similar risk discrimination. Before recalibration, FRS, SCORE, and PCE over-predicted CVD risk on average by 10%, 52%, and 41%, respectively, whereas RRS under-predicted by 10%. Original versions of algorithms classified 29–39% of individuals aged ≥40 years as high risk. By contrast, recalibration reduced this proportion to 22–24% for every algorithm. We estimated that to prevent one CVD event, it would be necessary to initiate statin therapy in 44–51 such individuals using original algorithms, in contrast to 37–39 individuals with recalibrated algorithms.Conclusion: Before recalibration, the clinical performance of four widely used CVD risk algorithms varied substantially. By contrast, simple recalibration nearly equalized their performance and improved modelled targeting of preventive action to clinical need.
|
|
