| 1. |
- 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.
|
|
| 2. |
|
|
| 3. |
|
|
| 4. |
- Al-Khatib, Sana M., et al.
(författare)
-
Outcomes of apixaban vs. warfarin by type and duration of atrial fibrillation : results from the ARISTOTLE trial
- 2013
-
Ingår i: European Heart Journal. - : Oxford University Press (OUP). - 0195-668X .- 1522-9645. ; 34:31, s. 2464-2471
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- It is uncertain whether the benefit from apixaban varies by type and duration of atrial fibrillation (AF). A total of 18 201 patients with AF [2786 (15.3) with paroxysmal and 15 412 (84.7) with persistent or permanent] were randomized to apixaban or warfarin. In this pre-specified secondary analysis, we compared outcomes and treatment effect of apixaban vs. warfarin by AF type and duration. The primary efficacy endpoint was a composite of ischaemic or haemorrhagic stroke or systemic embolism. The secondary efficacy endpoint was all-cause mortality. There was a consistent reduction in stroke or systemic embolism (P for interaction 0.71), all-cause mortality (P for interaction 0.75), and major bleeding (P for interaction 0.50) with apixaban compared with warfarin for both AF types. Apixaban was superior to warfarin in all studied endpoints, regardless of AF duration at study entry (P for all interactions 0.13). The rate of stroke or systemic embolism was significantly higher in patients with persistent or permanent AF than patients with paroxysmal AF (1.52 vs. 0.98; P 0.003, adjusted P 0.015). There was also a trend towards higher mortality in patients with persistent or permanent AF (3.90 vs. 2.81; P 0.0002, adjusted P 0.066). The risks of stroke, mortality, and major bleeding were lower with apixaban than warfarin regardless of AF type and duration. Although the risk of stroke or systemic embolism was lower in paroxysmal than persistent or permanent AF, apixaban is an attractive alternative to warfarin in patients with AF and at least one other risk factor for stroke, regardless of the type or duration of AF.
|
|
| 5. |
|
|
