| 1. |
|
|
| 2. |
- Beal, Jacob, et al.
(author)
-
Robust estimation of bacterial cell count from optical density
- 2020
-
In: Communications Biology. - : Springer Science and Business Media LLC. - 2399-3642. ; 3:1
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Optical density (OD) is widely used to estimate the density of cells in liquid culture, but cannot be compared between instruments without a standardized calibration protocol and is challenging to relate to actual cell count. We address this with an interlaboratory study comparing three simple, low-cost, and highly accessible OD calibration protocols across 244 laboratories, applied to eight strains of constitutive GFP-expressing E. coli. Based on our results, we recommend calibrating OD to estimated cell count using serial dilution of silica microspheres, which produces highly precise calibration (95.5% of residuals <1.2-fold), is easily assessed for quality control, also assesses instrument effective linear range, and can be combined with fluorescence calibration to obtain units of Molecules of Equivalent Fluorescein (MEFL) per cell, allowing direct comparison and data fusion with flow cytometry measurements: in our study, fluorescence per cell measurements showed only a 1.07-fold mean difference between plate reader and flow cytometry data.
|
|
| 3. |
- Klionsky, Daniel J., et al.
(author)
-
Guidelines for the use and interpretation of assays for monitoring autophagy
- 2012
-
In: Autophagy. - : Informa UK Limited. - 1554-8635 .- 1554-8627. ; 8:4, s. 445-544
-
Research review (peer-reviewed)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.
|
|
| 4. |
|
|
| 5. |
|
|
| 6. |
- Kim, Joon Tae, et al.
(author)
-
Dual antiplatelet Use for extended period taRgeted to AcuTe ischemic stroke with presumed atherosclerotic OrigiN (DURATION) trial : Rationale and design
- 2023
-
In: International Journal of Stroke. - : SAGE Publications. - 1747-4930 .- 1747-4949. ; 18:8, s. 1015-1020
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Rationale: The optimal duration of dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) with clopidogrel-aspirin for the large artery atherosclerotic (LAA) stroke subtype has been debated. Aims: To determine whether the 1-year risk of recurrent vascular events could be reduced by a longer duration of DAPT in patients with the LAA stroke subtype. Methods and study design: A total of 4806 participants will be recruited to detect a statistically significant relative risk reduction of 22% with 80% power and a two-sided alpha error of 0.05, including a 10% loss to follow-up. This is a registry-based, multicenter, prospective, randomized, open-label, blinded end point study designed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of a 12-month duration of DAPT compared with a 3-month duration of DAPT in the LAA stroke subtype. Patients will be randomized (1:1) to either DAPT for 12 months or DAPT for 3 months, followed by monotherapy (either aspirin or clopidogrel) for the remaining 9 months. Study outcomes: The primary efficacy outcome of the study is a composite of stroke (ischemic or hemorrhagic), myocardial infarction, and all-cause mortality for 1 year after the index stroke. The secondary efficacy outcomes are (1) stroke, (2) ischemic stroke or transient ischemic attack, (3) hemorrhagic stroke, and (4) all-cause mortality. The primary safety outcome is major bleeding. Discussion: This study will help stroke physicians determine the appropriate duration of dual therapy with clopidogrel-aspirin for patients with the LAA stroke subtype. Trial registration: URL: https://cris.nih.go.kr/cris. CRIS Registration Number: KCT0004407.
|
|
| 7. |
|
|
| 8. |
|
|
| 9. |
- Ruilope, LM, et al.
(author)
-
Design and Baseline Characteristics of the Finerenone in Reducing Cardiovascular Mortality and Morbidity in Diabetic Kidney Disease Trial
- 2019
-
In: American journal of nephrology. - : S. Karger AG. - 1421-9670 .- 0250-8095. ; 50:5, s. 345-356
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- <b><i>Background:</i></b> Among people with diabetes, those with kidney disease have exceptionally high rates of cardiovascular (CV) morbidity and mortality and progression of their underlying kidney disease. Finerenone is a novel, nonsteroidal, selective mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist that has shown to reduce albuminuria in type 2 diabetes (T2D) patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) while revealing only a low risk of hyperkalemia. However, the effect of finerenone on CV and renal outcomes has not yet been investigated in long-term trials. <b><i>Patients and</i></b> <b><i>Methods:</i></b> The Finerenone in Reducing CV Mortality and Morbidity in Diabetic Kidney Disease (FIGARO-DKD) trial aims to assess the efficacy and safety of finerenone compared to placebo at reducing clinically important CV and renal outcomes in T2D patients with CKD. FIGARO-DKD is a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group, event-driven trial running in 47 countries with an expected duration of approximately 6 years. FIGARO-DKD randomized 7,437 patients with an estimated glomerular filtration rate ≥25 mL/min/1.73 m<sup>2</sup> and albuminuria (urinary albumin-to-creatinine ratio ≥30 to ≤5,000 mg/g). The study has at least 90% power to detect a 20% reduction in the risk of the primary outcome (overall two-sided significance level α = 0.05), the composite of time to first occurrence of CV death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, nonfatal stroke, or hospitalization for heart failure. <b><i>Conclusions:</i></b> FIGARO-DKD will determine whether an optimally treated cohort of T2D patients with CKD at high risk of CV and renal events will experience cardiorenal benefits with the addition of finerenone to their treatment regimen. Trial Registration: EudraCT number: 2015-000950-39; ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02545049.
|
|
| 10. |
|
|
