| 1. |
- Czerw, Tomasz, et al.
(author)
-
High CD3+and CD34+peripheral blood stem cell grafts content is associated with increased risk of graft-versus-host disease without beneficial effect on disease control after reduced-intensity conditioning allogeneic transplantation from matched unrelated donors for acute myeloid leukemia - an analysis from the Acute Leukemia Working Party of the European Society for Blood and Marrow Transplantation
- 2016
-
In: Oncotarget. - : IMPACT JOURNALS LLC. - 1949-2553. ; 7:19, s. 27255-27266
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Inconsistent results have been reported regarding the influence of graft composition on the incidence of graft versus host disease (GVHD), disease control and survival after reduced-intensity conditioning (RIC) allogeneic peripheral blood stem cell transplantation (allo-PBSCT). These discrepancies may be at least in part explained by the differences in disease categories, disease status at transplant, donor type and conditioning. The current retrospective EBMT registry study aimed to analyze the impact of CD3+ and CD34+ cells dose on the outcome of RIC allo-PBSCT in patients with acute myelogenous leukemia (AML) in first complete remission, allografted from HLA-matched unrelated donors (10 of 10 match). We included 203 adults. In univariate analysis, patients transplanted with the highest CD3+ and CD34+ doses (above the third quartile cut-off point values, amp;gt;347 x 10amp;lt;^amp;gt;6/kg and amp;gt;8.25 x 10amp;lt;^amp;gt;6/kg, respectively) had an increased incidence of grade III-IV acute (a) GVHD (20% vs. 6%, P = .003 and 18% vs. 7%, P = .02, respectively). There was no association between cellular composition of grafts and transplant-related mortality, AML relapse, incidence of chronic GVHD and survival. Neither engraftment itself nor the kinetics of engraftment were affected by the cell dose. In multivariate analysis, CD3+ and CD34+ doses were the only adverse predicting factors for grade III-IV aGVHD (HR = 3.6; 95% CI: 1.45-9.96, P = .006 and 2.65 (1.07-6.57), P = .04, respectively). These results suggest that careful assessing the CD3+ and CD34+ graft content and tailoring the cell dose infused may help in reducing severe acute GVHD risk without negative impact on the other transplantation outcomes.
|
|
| 2. |
- 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.
|
|
