1. |
|
|
2. |
- 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.
|
|
3. |
- Jansen, Willemijn J, et al.
(author)
-
Prevalence Estimates of Amyloid Abnormality Across the Alzheimer Disease Clinical Spectrum.
- 2022
-
In: JAMA neurology. - : American Medical Association (AMA). - 2168-6157 .- 2168-6149. ; 79:3, s. 228-243
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- One characteristic histopathological event in Alzheimer disease (AD) is cerebral amyloid aggregation, which can be detected by biomarkers in cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) and on positron emission tomography (PET) scans. Prevalence estimates of amyloid pathology are important for health care planning and clinical trial design.To estimate the prevalence of amyloid abnormality in persons with normal cognition, subjective cognitive decline, mild cognitive impairment, or clinical AD dementia and to examine the potential implications of cutoff methods, biomarker modality (CSF or PET), age, sex, APOE genotype, educational level, geographical region, and dementia severity for these estimates.This cross-sectional, individual-participant pooled study included participants from 85 Amyloid Biomarker Study cohorts. Data collection was performed from January 1, 2013, to December 31, 2020. Participants had normal cognition, subjective cognitive decline, mild cognitive impairment, or clinical AD dementia. Normal cognition and subjective cognitive decline were defined by normal scores on cognitive tests, with the presence of cognitive complaints defining subjective cognitive decline. Mild cognitive impairment and clinical AD dementia were diagnosed according to published criteria.Alzheimer disease biomarkers detected on PET or in CSF.Amyloid measurements were dichotomized as normal or abnormal using cohort-provided cutoffs for CSF or PET or by visual reading for PET. Adjusted data-driven cutoffs for abnormal amyloid were calculated using gaussian mixture modeling. Prevalence of amyloid abnormality was estimated according to age, sex, cognitive status, biomarker modality, APOE carrier status, educational level, geographical location, and dementia severity using generalized estimating equations.Among the 19097 participants (mean [SD] age, 69.1 [9.8] years; 10148 women [53.1%]) included, 10139 (53.1%) underwent an amyloid PET scan and 8958 (46.9%) had an amyloid CSF measurement. Using cohort-provided cutoffs, amyloid abnormality prevalences were similar to 2015 estimates for individuals without dementia and were similar across PET- and CSF-based estimates (24%; 95% CI, 21%-28%) in participants with normal cognition, 27% (95% CI, 21%-33%) in participants with subjective cognitive decline, and 51% (95% CI, 46%-56%) in participants with mild cognitive impairment, whereas for clinical AD dementia the estimates were higher for PET than CSF (87% vs 79%; mean difference, 8%; 95% CI, 0%-16%; P=.04). Gaussian mixture modeling-based cutoffs for amyloid measures on PET scans were similar to cohort-provided cutoffs and were not adjusted. Adjusted CSF cutoffs resulted in a 10% higher amyloid abnormality prevalence than PET-based estimates in persons with normal cognition (mean difference, 9%; 95% CI, 3%-15%; P=.004), subjective cognitive decline (9%; 95% CI, 3%-15%; P=.005), and mild cognitive impairment (10%; 95% CI, 3%-17%; P=.004), whereas the estimates were comparable in persons with clinical AD dementia (mean difference, 4%; 95% CI, -2% to 9%; P=.18).This study found that CSF-based estimates using adjusted data-driven cutoffs were up to 10% higher than PET-based estimates in people without dementia, whereas the results were similar among people with dementia. This finding suggests that preclinical and prodromal AD may be more prevalent than previously estimated, which has important implications for clinical trial recruitment strategies and health care planning policies.
|
|
4. |
- Küçükali, Fahri, et al.
(author)
-
Whole-exome rare-variant analysis of Alzheimer's disease and related biomarker traits
- 2023
-
In: Alzheimer's & Dementia. - : John Wiley & Sons. - 1552-5260 .- 1552-5279. ; 19:6, s. 2317-2331
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- INTRODUCTION: Despite increasing evidence of a role of rare genetic variation in the risk of Alzheimer's disease (AD), limited attention has been paid to its contribution to AD-related biomarker traits indicative of AD-relevant pathophysiological processes.METHODS: We performed whole-exome gene-based rare-variant association studies (RVASs) of 17 AD-related traits on whole-exome sequencing (WES) data generated in the European Medical Information Framework for Alzheimer's Disease Multimodal Biomarker Discovery (EMIF-AD MBD) study (n = 450) and whole-genome sequencing (WGS) data from ADNI (n = 808).RESULTS: Mutation screening revealed a novel probably pathogenic mutation (PSEN1 p.Leu232Phe). Gene-based RVAS revealed the exome-wide significant contribution of rare coding variation in RBKS and OR7A10 to cognitive performance and protection against left hippocampal atrophy, respectively.DISCUSSION: The identification of these novel gene-trait associations offers new perspectives into the role of rare coding variation in the distinct pathophysiological processes culminating in AD, which may lead to identification of novel therapeutic and diagnostic targets.
|
|
5. |
- Rajwa, Pawel, et al.
(author)
-
Research protocol for an observational health data analysis on the adverse events of systemic treatment in patients with metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer : big data analytics using the PIONEER platform
- 2024
-
In: European Urology Open Science. - : Elsevier. - 2666-1691 .- 2666-1683. ; 63, s. 81-88
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Combination therapies in metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (mHSPC), which include the addition of an androgen receptor signaling inhibitor and/or docetaxel to androgen deprivation therapy, have been a game changer in the management of this disease stage. However, these therapies come with their fair share of toxicities and side effects. The goal of this observational study is to report drug-related adverse events (AEs), which are correlated with systemic combination therapies for mHSPC. Determining the optimal treatment option requires large cohorts to estimate the tolerability and AEs of these combination therapies in “real-life” patients with mHSPC, as provided in this study. We use a network of databases that includes population-based registries, electronic health records, and insurance claims, containing the overall target population and subgroups of patients defined by unique certain characteristics, demographics, and comorbidities, to compute the incidence of common AEs associated with systemic therapies in the setting of mHSPC. These data sources are standardised using the Observational Medical Outcomes Partnership Common Data Model. We perform the descriptive statistics as well as calculate the AE incidence rate separately for each treatment group, stratified by age groups and index year. The time until the first event is estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method within each age group. In the case of episodic events, the anticipated mean cumulative counts of events are calculated. Our study will allow clinicians to tailor optimal therapies for mHSPC patients, and they will serve as a basis for comparative method studies.
|
|
6. |
- Bergström, Sofia, et al.
(author)
-
A panel of CSF proteins separates genetic frontotemporal dementia from presymptomatic mutation carriers : a GENFI study
- 2021
-
In: Molecular Neurodegeneration. - : Springer Nature. - 1750-1326. ; 16:1
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Background A detailed understanding of the pathological processes involved in genetic frontotemporal dementia is critical in order to provide the patients with an optimal future treatment. Protein levels in CSF have the potential to reflect different pathophysiological processes in the brain. We aimed to identify and evaluate panels of CSF proteins with potential to separate symptomatic individuals from individuals without clinical symptoms (unaffected), as well as presymptomatic individuals from mutation non-carriers. Methods A multiplexed antibody-based suspension bead array was used to analyse levels of 111 proteins in CSF samples from 221 individuals from families with genetic frontotemporal dementia. The data was explored using LASSO and Random forest. Results When comparing affected individuals with unaffected individuals, 14 proteins were identified as potentially important for the separation. Among these, four were identified as most important, namely neurofilament medium polypeptide (NEFM), neuronal pentraxin 2 (NPTX2), neurosecretory protein VGF (VGF) and aquaporin 4 (AQP4). The combined profile of these four proteins successfully separated the two groups, with higher levels of NEFM and AQP4 and lower levels of NPTX2 in affected compared to unaffected individuals. VGF contributed to the models, but the levels were not significantly lower in affected individuals. Next, when comparing presymptomatic GRN and C9orf72 mutation carriers in proximity to symptom onset with mutation non-carriers, six proteins were identified with a potential to contribute to a separation, including progranulin (GRN). Conclusion In conclusion, we have identified several proteins with the combined potential to separate affected individuals from unaffected individuals, as well as proteins with potential to contribute to the separation between presymptomatic individuals and mutation non-carriers. Further studies are needed to continue the investigation of these proteins and their potential association to the pathophysiological mechanisms in genetic FTD.
|
|
7. |
|
|
8. |
- Bos, Isabelle, et al.
(author)
-
The frequency and influence of dementia risk factors in prodromal Alzheimer's disease
- 2017
-
In: Neurobiology of Aging. - : Elsevier. - 0197-4580 .- 1558-1497. ; 56, s. 33-40
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- We investigated whether dementia risk factors were associated with prodromal Alzheimer's disease (AD) according to the International Working Group-2 and National Institute of Aging-Alzheimer's Association criteria, and with cognitive decline. A total of 1394 subjects with mild cognitive impairment from 14 different studies were classified according to these research criteria, based on cognitive performance and biomarkers. We compared the frequency of 10 risk factors between the subgroups, and used Cox-regression to examine the effect of risk factors on cognitive decline. Depression, obesity, and hypercholesterolemia occurred more often in individuals with low-AD-likelihood, compared with those with a high-AD-likelihood. Only alcohol use increased the risk of cognitive decline, regardless of AD pathology. These results suggest that traditional risk factors for AD are not associated with prodromal AD or with progression to dementia, among subjects with mild cognitive impairment. Future studies should validate these findings and determine whether risk factors might be of influence at an earlier stage (i.e., preclinical) of AD.
|
|
9. |
|
|
10. |
- Ducharme, Simon, et al.
(author)
-
Recommendations to distinguish behavioural variant frontotemporal dementia from psychiatric disorders
- 2020
-
In: Brain. - : Oxford University Press (OUP). - 0006-8950 .- 1460-2156. ; 143:6, s. 1632-1650
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- The behavioural variant of frontotemporal dementia (bvFTD) is a frequent cause of early-onset dementia. The diagnosis of bvFTD remains challenging because of the limited accuracy of neuroimaging in the early disease stages and the absence of molecular biomarkers, and therefore relies predominantly on clinical assessment. BvFTD shows significant symptomatic overlap with non-degenerative primary psychiatric disorders including major depressive disorder, bipolar disorder, schizophrenia, obsessive-compulsive disorder, autism spectrum disorders and even personality disorders. To date, ∼50% of patients with bvFTD receive a prior psychiatric diagnosis, and average diagnostic delay is up to 5-6 years from symptom onset. It is also not uncommon for patients with primary psychiatric disorders to be wrongly diagnosed with bvFTD. The Neuropsychiatric International Consortium for Frontotemporal Dementia was recently established to determine the current best clinical practice and set up an international collaboration to share a common dataset for future research. The goal of the present paper was to review the existing literature on the diagnosis of bvFTD and its differential diagnosis with primary psychiatric disorders to provide consensus recommendations on the clinical assessment. A systematic literature search with a narrative review was performed to determine all bvFTD-related diagnostic evidence for the following topics: bvFTD history taking, psychiatric assessment, clinical scales, physical and neurological examination, bedside cognitive tests, neuropsychological assessment, social cognition, structural neuroimaging, functional neuroimaging, CSF and genetic testing. For each topic, responsible team members proposed a set of minimal requirements, optimal clinical recommendations, and tools requiring further research or those that should be developed. Recommendations were listed if they reached a ≥ 85% expert consensus based on an online survey among all consortium participants. New recommendations include performing at least one formal social cognition test in the standard neuropsychological battery for bvFTD. We emphasize the importance of 3D-T1 brain MRI with a standardized review protocol including validated visual atrophy rating scales, and to consider volumetric analyses if available. We clarify the role of 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose PET for the exclusion of bvFTD when normal, whereas non-specific regional metabolism abnormalities should not be over-interpreted in the case of a psychiatric differential diagnosis. We highlight the potential role of serum or CSF neurofilament light chain to differentiate bvFTD from primary psychiatric disorders. Finally, based on the increasing literature and clinical experience, the consortium determined that screening for C9orf72 mutation should be performed in all possible/probable bvFTD cases or suspected cases with strong psychiatric features.
|
|