| 1. |
- Boria, Ilenia, et al.
(author)
-
The ribosomal basis of Diamond-Blackfan Anemia : mutation and database update
- 2010
-
In: Human Mutation. - : Hindawi Limited. - 1059-7794 .- 1098-1004. ; 31:12, s. 1269-1279
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Diamond-Blackfan Anemia (DBA) is characterized by a defect of erythroid progenitors and, clinically, by anemia and malformations. DBA exhibits an autosomal dominant pattern of inheritance with incomplete penetrance. Currently nine genes, all encoding ribosomal proteins (RP), have been found mutated in approximately 50% of patients. Experimental evidence supports the hypothesis that DBA is primarily the result of defective ribosome synthesis. By means of a large collaboration among six centers, we report here a mutation update that includes nine genes and 220 distinct mutations, 56 of which are new. The DBA Mutation Database now includes data from 355 patients. Of those where inheritance has been examined, 125 patients carry a de novo mutation and 72 an inherited mutation. Mutagenesis may be ascribed to slippage in 65.5% of indels, whereas CpG dinucleotides are involved in 23% of transitions. Using bioinformatic tools we show that gene conversion mechanism is not common in RP genes mutagenesis, notwithstanding the abundance of RP pseudogenes. Genotype-phenotype analysis reveals that malformations are more frequently associated with mutations in RPL5 and RPL11 than in the other genes. All currently reported DBA mutations together with their functional and clinical data are included in the DBA Mutation Database.
|
|
| 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.
|
|
