| 1. |
- Niemi, MEK, et al.
(author)
-
- 2021
-
swepub:Mat__t
|
|
| 2. |
- Kanai, M, et al.
(author)
-
- 2023
-
swepub:Mat__t
|
|
| 3. |
|
|
| 4. |
|
|
| 5. |
|
|
| 6. |
|
|
| 7. |
|
|
| 8. |
- Glasbey, JC, et al.
(author)
-
- 2021
-
swepub:Mat__t
|
|
| 9. |
|
|
| 10. |
- 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.
|
|
| 11. |
- Mahajan, Anubha, et al.
(author)
-
Multi-ancestry genetic study of type 2 diabetes highlights the power of diverse populations for discovery and translation
- 2022
-
In: Nature Genetics. - : Springer Nature. - 1061-4036 .- 1546-1718. ; 54:5, s. 560-572
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- We assembled an ancestrally diverse collection of genome-wide association studies (GWAS) of type 2 diabetes (T2D) in 180,834 affected individuals and 1,159,055 controls (48.9% non-European descent) through the Diabetes Meta-Analysis of Trans-Ethnic association studies (DIAMANTE) Consortium. Multi-ancestry GWAS meta-analysis identified 237 loci attaining stringent genome-wide significance (P < 5 x 10(-9)), which were delineated to 338 distinct association signals. Fine-mapping of these signals was enhanced by the increased sample size and expanded population diversity of the multi-ancestry meta-analysis, which localized 54.4% of T2D associations to a single variant with >50% posterior probability. This improved fine-mapping enabled systematic assessment of candidate causal genes and molecular mechanisms through which T2D associations are mediated, laying the foundations for functional investigations. Multi-ancestry genetic risk scores enhanced transferability of T2D prediction across diverse populations. Our study provides a step toward more effective clinical translation of T2D GWAS to improve global health for all, irrespective of genetic background. Genome-wide association and fine-mapping analyses in ancestrally diverse populations implicate candidate causal genes and mechanisms underlying type 2 diabetes. Trans-ancestry genetic risk scores enhance transferability across populations.
|
|
| 12. |
- Bolton, Kelly L., et al.
(author)
-
Association Between BRCA1 and BRCA2 Mutations and Survival in Women With Invasive Epithelial Ovarian Cancer
- 2012
-
In: JAMA: The Journal of the American Medical Association. - : American Medical Association (AMA). - 1538-3598. ; 307:4, s. 382-390
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Context Approximately 10% of women with invasive epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) carry deleterious germline mutations in BRCA1 or BRCA2. A recent article suggested that BRCA2-related EOC was associated with an improved prognosis, but the effect of BRCA1 remains unclear. Objective To characterize the survival of BRCA carriers with EOC compared with noncarriers and to determine whether BRCA1 and BRCA2 carriers show similar survival patterns. Design, Setting, and Participants A pooled analysis of 26 observational studies on the survival of women with ovarian cancer, which included data from 1213 EOC cases with pathogenic germline mutations in BRCA1 (n=909) or BRCA2 (n=304) and from 2666 noncarriers recruited and followed up at variable times between 1987 and 2010 (the median year of diagnosis was 1998). Main Outcome Measure Five-year overall mortality. Results The 5-year overall survival was 36% (95% CI, 34%-38%) for noncarriers, 44% (95% CI, 40%-48%) for BRCA1 carriers, and 52% (95% CI, 46%-58%) for BRCA2 carriers. After adjusting for study and year of diagnosis, BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers showed a more favorable survival than noncarriers (for BRCA1: hazard ratio [HR], 0.78; 95% CI, 0.68-0.89; P<.001; and for BRCA2: HR, 0.61; 95% CI, 0.50-0.76; P<.001). These survival differences remained after additional adjustment for stage, grade, histology, and age at diagnosis (for BRCA1: HR, 0.73; 95% CI, 0.64-0.84; P<.001; and for BRCA2: HR, 0.49; 95% CI, 0.39-0.61; P<.001). The BRCA1 HR estimate was significantly different from the HR estimated in the adjusted model (P for heterogeneity=.003). Conclusion Among patients with invasive EOC, having a germline mutation in BRCA1 or BRCA2 was associated with improved 5-year overall survival. BRCA2 carriers had the best prognosis. JAMA. 2012;307(4):382-390
|
|
