| 1. |
|
|
| 2. |
|
|
| 3. |
|
|
| 4. |
|
|
| 5. |
|
|
| 6. |
- Jiang, X., et al.
(författare)
-
Shared heritability and functional enrichment across six solid cancers
- 2019
-
Ingår i: Nature Communications. - : Springer Science and Business Media LLC. - 2041-1723. ; 10
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Quantifying the genetic correlation between cancers can provide important insights into the mechanisms driving cancer etiology. Using genome-wide association study summary statistics across six cancer types based on a total of 296,215 cases and 301,319 controls of European ancestry, here we estimate the pair-wise genetic correlations between breast, colorectal, head/neck, lung, ovary and prostate cancer, and between cancers and 38 other diseases. We observed statistically significant genetic correlations between lung and head/neck cancer (r(g) = 0.57, p = 4.6 x 10(-8)), breast and ovarian cancer (r(g) = 0.24, p = 7 x 10(-5)), breast and lung cancer (r(g) = 0.18, p = 1.5 x 10(-6)) and breast and colorectal cancer (r(g) = 0.15, p = 1.1 x 10(-4)). We also found that multiple cancers are genetically correlated with non-cancer traits including smoking, psychiatric diseases and metabolic characteristics. Functional enrichment analysis revealed a significant excess contribution of conserved and regulatory regions to cancer heritability. Our comprehensive analysis of cross-cancer heritability suggests that solid tumors arising across tissues share in part a common germline genetic basis.
|
|
| 7. |
- 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.
|
|
| 8. |
- Vogel, Jacob W., et al.
(författare)
-
Four distinct trajectories of tau deposition identified in Alzheimer’s disease
- 2021
-
Ingår i: Nature Medicine. - : Springer Science and Business Media LLC. - 1078-8956 .- 1546-170X. ; 27:5, s. 871-881
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Alzheimer’s disease (AD) is characterized by the spread of tau pathology throughout the cerebral cortex. This spreading pattern was thought to be fairly consistent across individuals, although recent work has demonstrated substantial variability in the population with AD. Using tau-positron emission tomography scans from 1,612 individuals, we identified 4 distinct spatiotemporal trajectories of tau pathology, ranging in prevalence from 18 to 33%. We replicated previously described limbic-predominant and medial temporal lobe-sparing patterns, while also discovering posterior and lateral temporal patterns resembling atypical clinical variants of AD. These ‘subtypes’ were stable during longitudinal follow-up and were replicated in a separate sample using a different radiotracer. The subtypes presented with distinct demographic and cognitive profiles and differing longitudinal outcomes. Additionally, network diffusion models implied that pathology originates and spreads through distinct corticolimbic networks in the different subtypes. Together, our results suggest that variation in tau pathology is common and systematic, perhaps warranting a re-examination of the notion of ‘typical AD’ and a revisiting of tau pathological staging. © 2021, The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature America, Inc.
|
|
| 9. |
- Gusev, A, et al.
(författare)
-
Atlas of prostate cancer heritability in European and African-American men pinpoints tissue-specific regulation
- 2016
-
Ingår i: Nature communications. - : Springer Science and Business Media LLC. - 2041-1723. ; 7, s. 10979-
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Although genome-wide association studies have identified over 100 risk loci that explain ∼33% of familial risk for prostate cancer (PrCa), their functional effects on risk remain largely unknown. Here we use genotype data from 59,089 men of European and African American ancestries combined with cell-type-specific epigenetic data to build a genomic atlas of single-nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) heritability in PrCa. We find significant differences in heritability between variants in prostate-relevant epigenetic marks defined in normal versus tumour tissue as well as between tissue and cell lines. The majority of SNP heritability lies in regions marked by H3k27 acetylation in prostate adenoc7arcinoma cell line (LNCaP) or by DNaseI hypersensitive sites in cancer cell lines. We find a high degree of similarity between European and African American ancestries suggesting a similar genetic architecture from common variation underlying PrCa risk. Our findings showcase the power of integrating functional annotation with genetic data to understand the genetic basis of PrCa.
|
|
| 10. |
- Kerkhof, H. J. M., et al.
(författare)
-
Recommendations for standardization and phenotype definitions in genetic studies of osteoarthritis: the TREAT-OA consortium
- 2011
-
Ingår i: Osteoarthritis and Cartilage. - : Elsevier BV. - 1063-4584. ; 19:3, s. 254-264
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Objective: To address the need for standardization of osteoarthritis (OA) phenotypes by examining the effect of heterogeneity among symptomatic (SOA) and radiographic osteoarthritis (ROA) phenotypes. Methods: Descriptions of OA phenotypes of the 28 studies involved in the TREAT-OA consortium were collected. We investigated whether different OA definitions result in different association results by creating various hip OA definitions in one large population based cohort (the Rotterdam Study I (RSI)) and testing those for association with gender, age and body mass index using one-way ANOVA. For ROA, we standardized the hip-, knee- and hand ROA definitions and calculated prevalence's of ROA before and after standardization in nine cohort studies. This procedure could only be performed in cohort studies and standardization of SOA definitions was not feasible at this moment. Results: In this consortium, all studies with SOA phenotypes (knee, hip and hand) used a different definition and/or assessment of OA status. For knee-, hip- and hand ROA five, four and seven different definitions were used, respectively. Different hip ROA definitions do lead to different association results. For example, we showed in the RSI that hip OA defined as "at least definite joint space narrowing (JSN) and one definite osteophyte" was not associated with gender (P=0.22), but defined as "at least one definite osteophyte" was significantly associated with gender (P=3 x 10(-9)). Therefore, a standardization process was undertaken for ROA definitions. Before standardization a wide range of ROA prevalence's was observed in the nine cohorts studied. After standardization the range in prevalence of knee- and hip ROA was small. Conclusion: Phenotype definitions influence the prevalence of OA and association with clinical variables. ROA phenotypes within the TREAT-OA consortium were standardized to reduce heterogeneity and improve power in future genetics studies. (C) 2010 Osteoarthritis Research Society International. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
|
|
