Metal-based nanoparticles as antimicrobial agents: an overview

Metal-based nanoparticles have been extensively investigated for a set of biomedical applications. According to the World Health Organization, in addition to their reduced size and selectivity for bacteria, metal-based nanoparticles have also proved to be effective against pathogens listed as a priority. Metal-based nanoparticles are known to have non-specific bacterial toxicity mechanisms (they do not bind to a specific receptor in the bacterial cell) which not only makes the development of resistance by bacteria difficult, but also broadens the spectrum of antibacterial activity. As a result, a large majority of metal-based nanoparticles efficacy studies performed so far have shown promising results in both Gram-positive and Gram-negative bacteria. The aim of this review has been a comprehensive discussion of the state of the art on the use of the most relevant types of metal nanoparticles employed as antimicrobial agents. A special emphasis to silver nanoparticles is given, while others (e.g., gold, zinc oxide, copper, and copper oxide nanoparticles) commonly used in antibiotherapy are also reviewed. The novelty of this review relies on the comparative discussion of the different types of metal nanoparticles, their production methods, physicochemical characterization, and pharmacokinetics together with the toxicological risk encountered with the use of different types of nanoparticles as antimicrobial agents. Their added-value in the development of alternative, more effective antibiotics against multi-resistant Gram-negative bacteria has been highlighted.M.L.G., M.E. (Miren Ettcheto), A.C., and E.S.L. belong to 2017SGR-1477. E.S.-L., A.C., M.E. (Marta Espina), and M.L.G. acknowledge the support of Institute of Nanoscience and Nanotechnology (ART2018 project). E.B.S. wants to acknowledge the Portuguese Science and Technology Foundation (FCT/MCT) and European Funds (PRODER/COMPETE) for the projects M-ERA-NET-0004/2015-PAIRED and UIDB/04469/2020, co-funded by FEDER, under the partnership Agreement PT2020.info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersio

Accelerating Medicines Partnership® Schizophrenia (AMP® SCZ):Rationale and Study Design of the Largest Global Prospective Cohort Study of Clinical High Risk for Psychosis

This article describes the rationale, aims, and methodology of the Accelerating Medicines Partnership® Schizophrenia (AMP® SCZ). This is the largest international collaboration to date that will develop algorithms to predict trajectories and outcomes of individuals at clinical high risk (CHR) for psychosis and to advance the development and use of novel pharmacological interventions for CHR individuals. We present a description of the participating research networks and the data processing analysis and coordination center, their processes for data harmonization across 43 sites from 13 participating countries (recruitment across North America, Australia, Europe, Asia, and South America), data flow and quality assessment processes, data analyses, and the transfer of data to the National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH) Data Archive (NDA) for use by the research community. In an expected sample of approximately 2000 CHR individuals and 640 matched healthy controls, AMP SCZ will collect clinical, environmental, and cognitive data along with multimodal biomarkers, including neuroimaging, electrophysiology, fluid biospecimens, speech and facial expression samples, novel measures derived from digital health technologies including smartphone-based daily surveys, and passive sensing as well as actigraphy. The study will investigate a range of clinical outcomes over a 2-year period, including transition to psychosis, remission or persistence of CHR status, attenuated positive symptoms, persistent negative symptoms, mood and anxiety symptoms, and psychosocial functioning. The global reach of AMP SCZ and its harmonized innovative methods promise to catalyze the development of new treatments to address critical unmet clinical and public health needs in CHR individuals.</p

Guidelines for the use and interpretation of assays for monitoring autophagy (4th edition)

In 2008, we published the first set of guidelines for standardizing research in autophagy. Since then, this topic has received increasing attention, and many scientists have entered the field. Our knowledge base and relevant new technologies have also been expanding. Thus, it is important to formulate on a regular basis updated guidelines for monitoring autophagy in different organisms. Despite numerous reviews, there continues to be confusion regarding acceptable methods to evaluate autophagy, especially in multicellular eukaryotes. Here, we present a set of guidelines for investigators to select and interpret methods to examine autophagy and related processes, and for reviewers to provide realistic and reasonable critiques of reports that are focused on these processes. These guidelines are not meant to be a dogmatic set of rules, because the appropriateness of any assay largely depends on the question being asked and the system being used. Moreover, no individual assay is perfect for every situation, calling for the use of multiple techniques to properly monitor autophagy in each experimental setting. Finally, several core components of the autophagy machinery have been implicated in distinct autophagic processes (canonical and noncanonical autophagy), implying that genetic approaches to block autophagy should rely on targeting two or more autophagy-related genes that ideally participate in distinct steps of the pathway. Along similar lines, because multiple proteins involved in autophagy also regulate other cellular pathways including apoptosis, not all of them can be used as a specific marker for bona fide autophagic responses. Here, we critically discuss current methods of assessing autophagy and the information they can, or cannot, provide. Our ultimate goal is to encourage intellectual and technical innovation in the field

Erratum to: Guidelines for the use and interpretation of assays for monitoring autophagy (3rd edition) (Autophagy, 12, 1, 1-222, 10.1080/15548627.2015.1100356

non present