| 1. |
- Simard, JF, et al.
(author)
-
Early life factors and adult-onset rheumatoid arthritis
- 2010
-
In: The Journal of rheumatology. - : The Journal of Rheumatology. - 0315-162X .- 1499-2752. ; 37:1, s. 32-37
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Early life factors have been associated with risk of developing autoimmune disease in adulthood. We investigated the association of preterm birth and being breastfed with the incidence of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) in 2 large prospective cohorts.Methods.We studied participants from the Nurses’ Health Study (NHS) and the Nurses’ Health Study II (NHSII) who provided information on perinatal factors. The NHS (n = 121,701) and NHSII (n = 116,608) are large prospective cohorts of women followed since 1976 and 1989, respectively. Incident RA was confirmed using the American College of Rheumatology criteria and a medical record review. Cox models were used to estimate the hazard ratio of RA associated with being born preterm and being breastfed and its duration, adjusting for potential confounders. Random effects metaanalytic methods were used to compute combined estimates from the 2 cohorts.Results.We found no statistically significant association between preterm birth and incident RA [relative risk (RR) = 1.1, 95% CI 0.8, 1.5]. Being breastfed was not associated with increased incidence of RA (RR = 1.0, 95% CI 0.7, 1.4), regardless of the duration of breastfeeding.Conclusion.In these cohorts of women, neither being preterm birth nor being breastfed was associated with the onset of RA.
|
|
| 2. |
|
|
| 3. |
|
|
| 4. |
|
|
| 5. |
|
|
| 6. |
- Fang, F, et al.
(author)
-
Smoking, snuff dipping and the risk of amyotrophic lateral sclerosis--a prospective cohort study
- 2006
-
In: Neuroepidemiology. - : S. Karger AG. - 0251-5350 .- 1423-0208. ; 27:4, s. 217-221
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- <i>Background:</i> Little is known about the etiology of amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS). The association between cigarette smoking, but not other types of smoking and snuff dipping, and the risk of ALS has been evaluated in several epidemiologic studies. The findings were inconclusive. <i>Methods:</i> We studied the association of smoking and snuff dipping with the risk of ALS in the Swedish Construction Workers Cohort, which includes 280,558 male construction workers enrolled between 1978 and 1993 with detailed information on tobacco use. Incident cases of ALS were identified through cross-linkage to the Swedish Inpatient Register. Relative risks and their corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were estimated using the Cox proportional hazards regression model. <i>Results:</i> After a mean follow-up duration of 19.6 years, we identified 160 incident cases of ALS through 2004. Compared with non-tobacco use, the relative risk of ALS was 0.8 (95% CI 0.6–1.1) for tobacco smoking and 0.6 (95% CI 0.3–1.5) for snuff dipping, respectively. For tobacco smoking, further stratified analyses of smoking status or types of tobacco smoking did not reveal any excess risks in any strata. <i>Conclusions:</i> Our study provides no evidence that smoking or snuff dipping is associated with an increased ALS risk among men.
|
|
| 7. |
|
|
| 8. |
- 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.
|
|
| 9. |
|
|
| 10. |
|
|
| 11. |
|
|
