| 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. |
|
|
| 5. |
|
|
| 6. |
|
|
| 7. |
|
|
| 8. |
- Durbeej, N., et al.
(författare)
-
P02-54 - Is outpatient-based substance abuse treatment a predictor of re-offending and other outcomes among Swedish offenders subjected to psychiatric assessment?
- 2010
-
Ingår i: European psychiatry. - : Elsevier. - 0924-9338 .- 1778-3585. ; 25:Supplement 1, s. 674-674
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Introduction: Substance abuse is associated with criminal recidivism. Substance abuse treatment has been found to correlate negatively with re-offending among treatment utilizers. However, for offenders with mental health problems and substance abuse, research on how substance abuse treatment affects re-offending is sparse. Objectives: The study aimed to examine the relationship between self-reported outpatient-based substance abuse treatment and self-reported a) re-offending, b) substance use and c) psychiatric problems among offenders with mental health and substance use problems. Methods: Data were gathered from a naturalistic follow-up study with 208 participants, subjected to a court-ordered psychiatric assessment. This analysis covers 91 individuals who were followed-up after an average study period of 17 months. Among these, 68% had been sentenced to institutional imprisonment or forensic psychiatric care. Results: Offences, substance use and psychiatric problems declined between baseline and follow-up. However, the reduction was not associated with self-reported treatment utilization. Among participants who were sentenced to non-institutional corrections, more individuals had utilized outpatient-based treatment compared to individuals who were sentenced to imprisonment or forensic psychiatric care. Conclusions: A definitive conclusion about the effect of treatment is difficult to draw. For instance, self-reported data may not reflect actual treatment consumption. However, one interpretation is that participants naturally recovered over time. Institutional correction might also have resulted in positive outcomes equivalent to outpatient-based treatment.
|
|
| 9. |
- Durbeej, N., et al.
(författare)
-
Substance abuse treatment as a predictor of criminal recidivism among psychiatrically examined Swedish offenders
- 2010
-
Ingår i: European psychiatry. - : Elsevier. - 0924-9338 .- 1778-3585. ; 25:Supplement 1, s. 32-32
-
Konferensbidrag (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background. Substance abuse is clearly associated with criminal recidivism among offenders with and without mental disorder. Treatment for substance abuse correlates with lower rates of re-offending among participants in outpatient-based as well as institution-based substance abuse treatment programs. However, for offenders with mental disorder, research on the possible preventive effect of substance abuse treatment on criminal recidivism is sparse. This paper reports from on an ongoing naturalistic and prospective interview study on the relationship between post-release outpatient substance abuse treatment and re-offending. Methods. The Stockholm county sample comprises 246 offenders of both genders subjected to a forensic psychiatric assessment, who screened positive for substance abuse problems. Eighty-five percent (n=210) agreed to participate in the study. Baseline data and follow-up interview data, collected immediately on release from incarceration (prison/forensic hospital) and 6 and 12 months later, include self-reported substance abuse, treatment involvement and criminality. By February 2010, data will be available from the first follow-up for 150 participants, from the second follow-up for 80 individuals and from the third follow-up for 10 subjects. Results and conclusions. The focus of the presentation will be recidivism comparisons between substance abuse treatment utilizers and those who decline treatment. Data on ongoing levels of substance abuse, mental health problems and offending will serve as dependent variables. Additional analyses will present perceived benefit from and reasons for accepting or rejecting treatment.
|
|
| 10. |
|
|
