| 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. |
- Karalexi, M. A., et al.
(författare)
-
Maternal fetal loss history and increased acute leukemia subtype risk in subsequent offspring : a systematic review and meta-analysis
- 2017
-
Ingår i: Cancer Causes and Control. - : SPRINGER. - 0957-5243 .- 1573-7225. ; 28:6, s. 599-624
-
Forskningsöversikt (refereegranskat)abstract
- Purpose History of fetal loss including miscarriage and stillbirth has been inconsistently associated with childhood (0-14 years) leukemia in subsequent offspring. A quantitative synthesis of the inconclusive literature by leukemia subtype was therefore conducted. Methods Eligible studies (N = 32) were identified through the screening of over 3500 publications. Random-effects meta-analyses were conducted on the association of miscarriage/stillbirth history with overall (AL; 18,868 cases/35,685 controls), acute lymphoblastic (ALL; 16,150 cases/38,655 controls), and myeloid (AML; 3042 cases/32,997 controls) leukemia. Sensitivity and subgroup analyses by age and ALL subtype, as well as meta-regression were undertaken. Results Fetal loss history was associated with increased AL risk [Odds Ratio (OR) 1.10, 95% Confidence Intervals (CI) 1.04-1.18]. The positive association was seen for ALL (OR 1.12, 95%CI 1.05-1.19) and for AML (OR 1.13, 95%CI 0.91-1.41); for the latter the OR increased in sensitivity analyses. Notably, stillbirth history was significantly linked to ALL risk (OR 1.33, 95%CI 1.02-1.74), but not AML. By contrast, the association of ALL and AML with previous miscarriage reached marginal significance. The association of miscarriage history was strongest in infant ALL (OR 2.34, 95%CI 1.19-4.60). Conclusions In this meta-analysis involving > 50,000 children, we found noteworthy associations by indices of fetal loss, age at diagnosis, and leukemia type; namely, of stillbirth with ALL and miscarriage history with infant ALL. Elucidation of plausible underlying mechanisms may provide insight into leukemia pathogenesis and indicate monitoring interventions prior to and during pregnancy.
|
|
