| 1. |
|
|
| 2. |
|
|
| 3. |
- 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. |
|
|
| 5. |
|
|
| 6. |
|
|
| 7. |
|
|
| 8. |
|
|
| 9. |
- Huang, Hongyun, et al.
(författare)
-
Clinical Cell Therapy Guidelines for Neurorestoration (IANR/CANR 2017)
- 2018
-
Ingår i: Cell Transplantation. - : SAGE Publications. - 0963-6897 .- 1555-3892. ; 27:2, s. 310-324
-
Forskningsöversikt (refereegranskat)abstract
- Cell therapy has been shown to be a key clinical therapeutic option for central nervous system diseases or damage. Standardization of clinical cell therapy procedures is an important task for professional associations devoted to cell therapy. The Chinese Branch of the International Association of Neurorestoratology (IANR) completed the first set of guidelines governing the clinical application of neurorestoration in 2011. The IANR and the Chinese Association of Neurorestoratology (CANR) collaborated to propose the current version "Clinical Cell Therapy Guidelines for Neurorestoration (IANR/CANR 2017)". The IANR council board members and CANR committee members approved this proposal on September 1, 2016, and recommend it to clinical practitioners of cellular therapy. These guidelines include items of cell type nomenclature, cell quality control, minimal suggested cell doses, patient-informed consent, indications for undergoing cell therapy, contraindications for undergoing cell therapy, documentation of procedure and therapy, safety evaluation, efficacy evaluation, policy of repeated treatments, do not charge patients for unproven therapies, basic principles of cell therapy, and publishing responsibility.
|
|
| 10. |
- Huang, Zi-Nan, et al.
(författare)
-
Analysis of the stress field in the reactor vessel of the China Initiative Accelerator Driven System during postulated ULOF and UTOP transients
- 2023
-
Ingår i: Annals of Nuclear Energy. - : Elsevier BV. - 0306-4549 .- 1873-2100. ; 194
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- The China Initiative Accelerator Driven System (CiADS) was proposed by China Academy of Science since 2015. The subcritical reactor in CiADS is a liquid Lead Bismuth Eutectic (LBE) cooled fast reactor. When the reactor core is in operation, the LBE coolant will directly contact and corrode the inner surface of reactor vessel. Due to the high temperature, the corrosion will be more severe. If the stress on the reactor vessel exceeds the limit, the plastic deformation will occur, leading to the generation and expansion of defects and cracks, and the safety of the reactor will be affected. Therefore, evaluating the stress field of the reactor vessel under different operating conditions is a very important research project. In this paper, the finite element analysis software ADINA was applied to analyze the reactor vessel in CiADS, and the ASME Code was used as stress assessment standards. We can preliminarily prove that the stress assessments of the vessel during the postulated Unprotected Loss of Flow (ULOF) accidents satisfy the requirements of ASME Code. The limit reactivity insertion to protect the vessel from plastic deformation is 0.58$ in the postulated Unprotected Transient over Power (UTOP) accidents based on our current results. Therefore, we can preliminarily conclude that the current material selection and structural design of the reactor vessel in CiADS could survive most of the postulated transient accidents considering the stress effect.
|
|
