| 1. |
|
|
| 2. |
|
|
| 3. |
|
|
| 4. |
- Schmitt, A, et al.
(author)
-
How a neuropsychiatric brain bank should be run : a consensus paper of Brainnet Europe II.
- 2007
-
In: Journal of neural transmission. - : Springer Science and Business Media LLC. - 0300-9564 .- 1435-1463. ; 114:5, s. 527-37
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- The development of new molecular and neurobiological methods, computer-assisted quantification techniques and neurobiological investigation methods which can be applied to the human brain, all have evoked an increased demand for post-mortem tissue in research. Psychiatric disorders are considered to be of neurobiological origin. Thus far, however, the etiology and pathophysiology of schizophrenia, depression and dementias are not well understood at the cellular and molecular level. The following will outline the consensus of the working group for neuropsychiatric brain banking organized in the Brainnet Europe II, on ethical guidelines for brain banking, clinical diagnostic criteria, the minimal clinical data set of retrospectively analyzed cases as well as neuropathological standard investigations to perform stageing for neurodegenerative disorders in brain tissue. We will list regions of interest for assessments in psychiatric disorder, propose a dissection scheme and describe preservation and storage conditions of tissue. These guidelines may be of value for future implementations of additional neuropsychiatric brain banks world-wide.
|
|
| 5. |
- Alafuzoff, Irina, et al.
(author)
-
Staging/typing of Lewy body related alpha-synuclein pathology : a study of the BrainNet Europe Consortium
- 2009
-
In: Acta Neuropathologica. - : Springer Science and Business Media LLC. - 0001-6322 .- 1432-0533. ; 117:6, s. 635-652
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- When 22 members of the BrainNet Europe (BNE) consortium assessed 31 cases with alpha-synuclein (alphaS) immunoreactive (IR) pathology applying the consensus protocol described by McKeith and colleagues in 2005, the inter-observer agreement was 80%, being lowest in the limbic category (73%). When applying the staging protocol described by Braak and colleagues in 2003, agreement was only 65%, and in some cases as low as 36%. When modifications of these strategies, i.e., McKeith's protocol by Leverenz and colleagues from 2009, Braak's staging by Müller and colleagues from 2005 were applied then the agreement increased to 78 and 82%, respectively. In both of these modifications, a reduced number of anatomical regions/blocks are assessed and still in a substantial number of cases, the inter-observer agreement differed significantly. Over 80% agreement in both typing and staging of alphaS pathology could be achieved when applying a new protocol, jointly designed by the BNE consortium. The BNE-protocol assessing alphaS-IR lesions in nine blocks offered advantages over the previous modified protocols because the agreement between the 22 observers was over 80% in most cases. Furthermore, in the BNE-protocol, the alphaS pathology is assessed as being present or absent and thus the quality of staining and the assessment of the severity of alphaS-IR pathology do not alter the inter-observer agreement, contrary to other assessment strategies. To reach these high agreement rates an entity of amygdala-predominant category was incorporated. In conclusion, here we report a protocol for assessing alphaS pathology that can achieve a high inter-observer agreement for both the assignment to brainstem, limbic, neocortical and amygdala-predominant categories of synucleinopathy and the Braak stages.
|
|
| 6. |
|
|
| 7. |
|
|
| 8. |
- Klionsky, Daniel J., et al.
(author)
-
Guidelines for the use and interpretation of assays for monitoring autophagy in higher eukaryotes
- 2008
-
In: Autophagy. - : Landes Bioscience. - 1554-8627 .- 1554-8635. ; 4:2, s. 151-175
-
Research review (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Research in autophagy continues to accelerate,1 and as a result many new scientists are entering the field. Accordingly, it is important to establish a standard set of criteria for monitoring macroautophagy in different organisms. Recent reviews have described the range of assays that have been used for this purpose.2,3 There are many useful and convenient methods that can be used to monitor macroautophagy in yeast, but relatively few in other model systems, and there is much confusion regarding acceptable methods to measure macroautophagy in higher eukaryotes. A key point that needs to be emphasized is that there is a difference between measurements that monitor the numbers of autophagosomes versus those that measure flux through the autophagy pathway; thus, a block in macroautophagy that results in autophagosome accumulation needs to be differentiated from fully functional autophagy that includes delivery to, and degradation within, lysosomes (in most higher eukaryotes) or the vacuole (in plants and fungi). Here, we present a set of guidelines for the selection and interpretation of the methods that can be used by investigators who are attempting to examine macroautophagy and related processes, as well as by reviewers who need to provide realistic and reasonable critiques of papers that investigate these processes. This set of guidelines is 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 verify an autophagic response.
|
|
| 9. |
|
|
| 10. |
|
|
