| 1. |
- 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.
|
|
| 2. |
- Geahlen, J. H., et al.
(author)
-
Evolution of the human gastrokine locus and confounding factors regarding the pseudogenicity of GKN3
- 2013
-
In: Physiological Genomics. - : American Physiological Society. - 1094-8341 .- 1531-2267. ; 45:15, s. 667-683
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- In a screen for genes expressed specifically in gastric mucous neck cells, we identified GKN3, the recently discovered third member of the gastrokine family. We present confirmatory mouse data and novel porcine data showing that mouse GKN3 expression is confined to mucous cells of the corpus neck and antrum base and is prominently expressed in metaplastic lesions. GKN3 was proposed originally to be expressed in some human populations and a pseudogene in others. To investigate that hypothesis, we studied human GKN3 evolution in the context of its paralogous genomic neighbors, GKN1 and GKN2. Haplotype analysis revealed that GKN3 mimics GKN2 in patterns of exonic SNP allocation, whereas GKN1 appeared to be more stringently selected. GKN3 showed signatures of both directional selection and population based selective sweeps in humans. One such selective sweep includes SNP rs10187256, originally identified as an ancestral tryptophan to premature STOP codon mutation. The derived (nonancestral) allele went to fixation in Asia. We show that another SNP, rs75578132, identified 5 bp downstream of rs10187256, exhibits a second selective sweep in almost all Europeans, some Latinos, and some Africans, possibly resulting from a reintroduction of European genes during African colonization. Finally, we identify a mutation that would destroy the splice donor site in the putative exon3-intron3 boundary, which occurs in all human genomes examined to date. Our results highlight a stomach-specific human genetic locus, which has undergone various selective sweeps across European, Asian, and African populations and thus reflects geographic and ethnic patterns in genome evolution.
|
|
| 3. |
- Muñoz, Nubia, et al.
(author)
-
Impact of Human Papillomavirus (HPV)-6/11/16/18 Vaccine on All HPV-Associated Genital Diseases in Young Women.
- 2010
-
In: Journal of the National Cancer Institute. - : Oxford University Press (OUP). - 1460-2105 .- 0027-8874. ; 102, s. 325-339
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Background The impact of the prophylactic vaccine against human papillomavirus (HPV) types 6, 11, 16, and 18 (HPV6/11/16/18) on all HPV-associated genital disease was investigated in a population that approximates sexually naive women in that they were "negative to 14 HPV types" and in a mixed population of HPV-exposed and -unexposed women (intention-to-treat group). Methods This analysis studied 17 622 women aged 15-26 years who were enrolled in one of two randomized, placebo-controlled, efficacy trials for the HPV6/11/16/18 vaccine (first patient on December 28, 2001, and studies completed July 31, 2007). Vaccine or placebo was given at day 1, month 2, and month 6. All women underwent cervicovaginal sampling and Papanicolaou (Pap) testing at day 1 and every 6-12 months thereafter. Outcomes were any cervical intraepithelial neoplasia; any external anogenital and vaginal lesions; Pap test abnormalities; and procedures such as colposcopy and definitive therapy. Absolute rates are expressed as women with endpoint per 100 person-years at risk. Results The average follow-up was 3.6 years (maximum of 4.9 years). In the population that was negative to 14 HPV types, vaccination was up to 100% effective in reducing the risk of HPV16/18-related high-grade cervical, vulvar, and vaginal lesions and of HPV6/11-related genital warts. In the intention-to-treat group, vaccination also statistically significantly reduced the risk of any high-grade cervical lesions (19.0% reduction; rate vaccine = 1.43, rate placebo = 1.76, difference = 0.33, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.13 to 0.54), vulvar and vaginal lesions (50.7% reduction; rate vaccine = 0.10, rate placebo = 0.20, difference = 0.10, 95% CI = 0.04 to 0.16), genital warts (62.0% reduction; rate vaccine = 0.44, rate placebo = 1.17, difference = 0.72, 95% CI = 0.58 to 0.87), Pap abnormalities (11.3% reduction; rate vaccine = 10.36, rate placebo = 11.68, difference = 1.32, 95% CI = 0.74 to 1.90), and cervical definitive therapy (23.0% reduction; rate vaccine = 1.97, rate placebo = 2.56, difference = 0.59, 95% CI = 0.35 to 0.83), irrespective of causal HPV type. Conclusions High-coverage HPV vaccination programs among adolescents and young women may result in a rapid reduction of genital warts, cervical cytological abnormalities, and diagnostic and therapeutic procedures. In the longer term, substantial reductions in the rates of cervical, vulvar, and vaginal cancers may follow.
|
|
