| 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. |
- Gurbel, Paul A., et al.
(författare)
-
The effect of CYP2C19 gene polymorphisms on the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of prasugrel 5-mg, prasugrel 10-mg and clopidogrel 75-mg in patients with coronary artery disease
- 2014
-
Ingår i: Thrombosis and Haemostasis. - : Schattauer. - 0340-6245 .- 2567-689X. ; 112:3, s. 589-597
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- CYP2C19 genotype has been shown to impact response to clopidogrel 75-mg but not prasugrel 10-mg. Here, we assessed effects of CYP2C19 metaboliser status on pharmacokinetics (PK) and pharmacodynamic (PD) responses to prasugrel 5-mg and 10-mg and clopidogrel 75-mg using data from two PK/PD studies in stable coronary artery disease (CAD) patients (GENERATIONS and FEATHER). Active metabolite concentrations (area under the curve, AUC([0-tlast])), maximum platelet aggregation (MPA) measured by light transmission aggregometry, vasodilator-stimulated phosphoprotein platelet reactivity index, and VerifyNow P2Y12-platelet reaction units (VN-PRU) were analysed by CYP2C19-predicted phenotype (extensive metaboliser [EM; N=154], *2-*8 non-carriers, vs reduced metaboliser [RM; N=41],*2-*8 carriers/*17 non-carriers). AUC((0-tlast)) was unaffected by metaboliser status for prasugrel 5-mg and 10-mg (geometric mean EM/RM ratios 1.00, 95% confidence interval [Cl]: 0.86,1.17, p>0.99; and 0.97, 95% CI:0.85,1.12, p=0.71, respectively), but was lower among RMs receiving clopidogrel 75-mg (1.37, 95% CI:1.14,1.65, p<0.001). Platelet reactivity was not significantly affected by CYP2C19 metaboliser status for prasugrel 5-mg, or for prasugrel 10-mg by MPA and VN-PRU, but for clopidogrel 75-mg was significantly higher in reduced metabolisers (all measures p<0.01). Prasugrel 10-mg showed greater antiplatelet effects vs clopidogrel 75-mg (all comparisons p<0.001). Prasugrel 5-mg showed greater antiplatelet effects vs clopidogrel 75-mg in RMs (all p<0.001), and comparable effects in EMs (all p >= 0.37). In contrast to clopidogrel, prasugrel active metabolite PK was not influenced by CYP2C19 genotype. Antiplatelet effect for prasugrel 10-mg was greater irrespective of metaboliser status and for prasugrel 5-mg was greater for RMs and comparable for EMs as compared to clopidogrel 75-mg.
|
|
