| 1. |
- Klionsky, Daniel J., et al.
(author)
-
Guidelines for the use and interpretation of assays for monitoring autophagy
- 2012
-
In: Autophagy. - : Informa UK Limited. - 1554-8635 .- 1554-8627. ; 8:4, s. 445-544
-
Research review (peer-reviewed)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.
|
|
| 2. |
|
|
| 3. |
- Klionsky, Daniel J., et al.
(author)
-
Guidelines for the use and interpretation of assays for monitoring autophagy in higher eukaryotes
- 2008
-
In: Autophagy. - : Landes Bioscience. - 1554-8627 .- 1554-8635. ; 4:2, s. 151-175
-
Research review (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Research in autophagy continues to accelerate,1 and as a result many new scientists are entering the field. Accordingly, it is important to establish a standard set of criteria for monitoring macroautophagy in different organisms. Recent reviews have described the range of assays that have been used for this purpose.2,3 There are many useful and convenient methods that can be used to monitor macroautophagy in yeast, but relatively few in other model systems, and there is much confusion regarding acceptable methods to measure macroautophagy in higher eukaryotes. A key point that needs to be emphasized is that there is a difference between measurements that monitor the numbers of autophagosomes versus those that measure flux through the autophagy pathway; thus, a block in macroautophagy that results in autophagosome accumulation needs to be differentiated from fully functional autophagy that includes delivery to, and degradation within, lysosomes (in most higher eukaryotes) or the vacuole (in plants and fungi). Here, we present a set of guidelines for the selection and interpretation of the methods that can be used by investigators who are attempting to examine macroautophagy and related processes, as well as by reviewers who need to provide realistic and reasonable critiques of papers that investigate these processes. This set of guidelines is 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 verify an autophagic response.
|
|
| 4. |
|
|
| 5. |
- Duggan, D., et al.
(author)
-
Two genome-wide association studies of aggressive prostate cancer implicate putative prostate tumor suppressor gene DAB2IP
- 2007
-
In: Journal of the National Cancer Institute. - : Oxford University Press (OUP). - 0027-8874 .- 1460-2105. ; 99:24, s. 1836-1844
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Background: The consistent finding of a genetic susceptibility to prostate cancer suggests that there are germline sequence variants predisposing individuals to this disease. These variants could be useful in screening and treatment. Methods: We performed an exploratory genome-wide association scan in 498 men with aggressive prostate cancer and 494 control subjects selected from a population-based case-control study in Sweden. We combined the results of this scan with those for aggressive prostate cancer from the publicly available Cancer Genetic Markers of Susceptibility (CGEMS) Study. Single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) that showed statistically significant associations with the risk of aggressive prostate cancer based on two-sided allele tests were tested for their association with aggressive prostate cancer in two independent study populations composed of individuals of European or African American descent using one-sided tests and the genetic model (dominant or additive) associated with the lowest value in the exploratory study. Results: Among the approximately 60000 SNPs that were common to our study and CGEMS, we identified seven that had a similar (positive or negative) and statistically significant (P<.01) association with the risk of aggressive prostate cancer in both studies. Analysis of the distribution of these SNPs among 1032 prostate cancer patients and 571 control subjects of European descent indicated that one, rs1571801, located in the DAB2IP gene, which encodes a novel Ras GTPase-activating protein and putative prostate tumor suppressor, was associated with aggressive prostate cancer (one-sided P value =. 004). The association was also statistically significant in an African American study population that included 210 prostate cancer patients and 346 control subjects (one-sided P value =. 02). Conclusion: A genetic variant in DAB2IP may be associated with the risk of aggressive prostate cancer and should be evaluated further.
|
|
| 6. |
|
|
| 7. |
- Thors, L, et al.
(author)
-
Biochanin A, a naturally occurring inhibitor of fatty acid amide hydrolase.
- 2010
-
In: British Journal of Pharmacology. - : Wiley. - 0007-1188 .- 1476-5381. ; 160:3, s. 549-560
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Inhibitors of fatty acid amide hydrolase (FAAH), the enzyme responsible for the metabolism of the endogenous cannabinoid (CB) receptor ligand anandamide (AEA), are effective in a number of animal models of pain. Here, we investigated a series of isoflavones with respect to their abilities to inhibit FAAH. EXPERIMENTAL APPROACH: In vitro assays of FAAH activity and affinity for CB receptors were used to characterize key compounds. In vivo assays used were biochemical responses to formalin in anaesthetized mice and the 'tetrad' test for central CB receptor activation. KEY RESULTS: Of the compounds tested, biochanin A was adjudged to be the most promising. Biochanin A inhibited the hydrolysis of 0.5 microM AEA by mouse, rat and human FAAH with IC(50) values of 1.8, 1.4 and 2.4 microM respectively. The compound did not interact to any major extent with CB(1) or CB(2) receptors, nor with FAAH-2. In anaesthetized mice, URB597 (30 microg i.pl.) and biochanin A (100 microg i.pl.) both inhibited the spinal phosphorylation of extracellular signal-regulated kinase produced by the intraplantar injection of formalin. The effects of both compounds were significantly reduced by the CB(1) receptor antagonist/inverse agonist AM251 (30 microg i.pl.). Biochanin A (15 mg.kg(-1) i.v.) did not increase brain AEA concentrations, but produced a modest potentiation of the effects of 10 mg.kg(-1) i.v. AEA in the tetrad test. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS: It is concluded that biochanin A, in addition to its other biochemical properties, inhibits FAAH both in vitro and peripherally in vivo.
|
|
| 8. |
- Yeager, Meredith, et al.
(author)
-
Identification of a new prostate cancer susceptibility locus on chromosome 8q24.
- 2009
-
In: Nature genetics. - : Springer Science and Business Media LLC. - 1546-1718 .- 1061-4036. ; 41:10, s. 1055-7
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- We report a genome-wide association study in 10,286 cases and 9,135 controls of European ancestry in the Cancer Genetic Markers of Susceptibility (CGEMS) initiative. We identify a new association with prostate cancer risk on chromosome 8q24 (rs620861, P = 1.3 x 10(-10), heterozygote OR = 1.17, 95% CI 1.10-1.24; homozygote OR = 1.33, 95% CI 1.21-1.45). This defines a new locus associated with prostate cancer susceptibility on 8q24.
|
|
| 9. |
- Berndt, Sonja I, et al.
(author)
-
Large-scale fine mapping of the HNF1B locus and prostate cancer risk
- 2011
-
In: Human Molecular Genetics. - : Oxford University Press (OUP). - 0964-6906 .- 1460-2083. ; 20:16, s. 3322-3329
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Previous genome-wide association studies have identified two independent variants in HNF1B as susceptibility loci for prostate cancer risk. To fine-map common genetic variation in this region, we genotyped 79 single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) in the 17q12 region harboring HNF1B in 10 272 prostate cancer cases and 9123 controls of European ancestry from 10 case-control studies as part of the Cancer Genetic Markers of Susceptibility (CGEMS) initiative. Ten SNPs were significantly related to prostate cancer risk at a genome-wide significance level of P < 5 × 10(-8) with the most significant association with rs4430796 (P = 1.62 × 10(-24)). However, risk within this first locus was not entirely explained by rs4430796. Although modestly correlated (r(2)= 0.64), rs7405696 was also associated with risk (P = 9.35 × 10(-23)) even after adjustment for rs4430769 (P = 0.007). As expected, rs11649743 was related to prostate cancer risk (P = 3.54 × 10(-8)); however, the association within this second locus was stronger for rs4794758 (P = 4.95 × 10(-10)), which explained all of the risk observed with rs11649743 when both SNPs were included in the same model (P = 0.32 for rs11649743; P = 0.002 for rs4794758). Sequential conditional analyses indicated that five SNPs (rs4430796, rs7405696, rs4794758, rs1016990 and rs3094509) together comprise the best model for risk in this region. This study demonstrates a complex relationship between variants in the HNF1B region and prostate cancer risk. Further studies are needed to investigate the biological basis of the association of variants in 17q12 with prostate cancer.
|
|
| 10. |
|
|
