Guidelines for the use and interpretation of assays for monitoring autophagy (4th edition)1.

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

Late Quaternary sea-level change and early human societies in the central and eastern Mediterranean Basin : an interdisciplinary review

This article reviews key data and debates focused on relative sea-level changes since the Last Interglacial (approximately the last 132,000 years) in the Mediterranean Basin, and their implications for past human populations. Geological and geomorphological landscape studies are critical to archaeology. Coastal regions provide a wide range of resources to the populations that inhabit them. Coastal landscapes are increasingly the focus of scholarly discussions from the earliest exploitation of littoral resources and early hominin cognition, to the inundation of the earliest permanently settled fishing villages and eventually, formative centres of urbanisation. In the Mediterranean, these would become hubs of maritime transportation that gave rise to the roots of modern seaborne trade. As such, this article represents an original review of both the geo-scientific and archaeological data that specifically relate to sea-level changes and resulting impacts on both physical and cultural landscapes from the Palaeolithic until the emergence of the Classical periods. Our review highlights that the interdisciplinary links between coastal archaeology, geomorphology and sea-level changes are important to explain environmental impacts on coastal human societies and human migration. We review geological indicators of sea level and outline how archaeological features are commonly used as proxies for measuring past sea levels, both gradual changes and catastrophic events. We argue that coastal archaeologists should, as a part of their analyses, incorporate important sea-level concepts, such as indicative meaning. The interpretation of the indicative meaning of Roman fishtanks, for example, plays a critical role in reconstructions of late Holocene Mediterranean sea levels. We identify avenues for future work, which include the consideration of glacial isostatic adjustment (GIA) in addition to coastal tectonics to explain vertical movements of coastlines, more research on Palaeolithic island colonisation, broadening of Palaeolithic studies to include materials from the entire coastal landscape and not just coastal resources, a focus on rescue of archaeological sites under threat by coastal change, and expansion of underwater archaeological explorations in combination with submarine geomorphology. This article presents a collaborative synthesis of data, some of which have been collected and analysed by the authors, as the MEDFLOOD (MEDiterranean sea-level change and projection for future FLOODing) community, and highlights key sites, data, concepts and ongoing debates

Changes in lymphocyte count induced by repeated cycles with low-dose interleukin-2 and interferon-α in 146 patients with renal cell carcinoma.

Aims and background. The exact mechanism by which recombinant interleukine-2 and interferon-α modulate the immunological response, inducing long-term responses in metastatic renal cell carcinoma, is still not clear. The aim of the study was to analyze the modifications in peripheral blood lymphocytes during cycles of low-dose immunotherapy as a marker of the biological response to the treatment in 146 patients with renal cell carcinoma (advanced and localized disease). Methods and study design. Peripheral blood lymphocytes were evaluated before and after every cycle of treatment. Results. We found a statistically significant overall difference between pre- and post-cycle values (mean increase of 39%). The differences between pre- and post-cycle lymphocyte counts for each cycle were significant. Also, the post-cycle lymphocyte count of each cycle remained higher than the baseline value. Furthermore, pre-cycle lymphocyte counts of each cycle were still higher than the baseline value, with no difference between a pre-cycle lymphocyte mean value and the other one (except that between the first and second cycle). From the end of each cycle, but before starting the next one, the absolute value of lymphocytes fell on the average by 15-30%, concurring with the fact that, even starting from pre-cycle values higher than baseline, the immune system remains sensitive to chronically repeated stimulation by immunotherapy. We also found that non-metastatic patients had a higher number of peripheral blood lymphocytes than metastatic patients, whereas the latter had a lower immune response to therapy. Conclusions. The results support the idea that “maintenance” immunotherapy may not develop resistance over time in terms of biological response and thus may have a role as chronic therapy in combination with other drugs such as target therapy. We suppose that the immune system of patients with metastases is in a state of relative impairment, resulting in less sensitivity to immunostimulating agents

Mapping the human genetic architecture of COVID-19

The genetic make-up of an individual contributes to the susceptibility and response to viral infection. Although environmental, clinical and social factors have a role in the chance of exposure to SARS-CoV-2 and the severity of COVID-191,2, host genetics may also be important. Identifying host-specific genetic factors may reveal biological mechanisms of therapeutic relevance and clarify causal relationships of modifiable environmental risk factors for SARS-CoV-2 infection and outcomes. We formed a global network of researchers to investigate the role of human genetics in SARS-CoV-2 infection and COVID-19 severity. Here we describe the results of three genome-wide association meta-analyses that consist of up to 49,562 patients with COVID-19 from 46 studies across 19 countries. We report 13 genome-wide significant loci that are associated with SARS-CoV-2 infection or severe manifestations of COVID-19. Several of these loci correspond to previously documented associations to lung or autoimmune and inflammatory diseases3–7. They also represent potentially actionable mechanisms in response to infection. Mendelian randomization analyses support a causal role for smoking and body-mass index for severe COVID-19 although not for type II diabetes. The identification of novel host genetic factors associated with COVID-19 was made possible by the community of human genetics researchers coming together to prioritize the sharing of data, results, resources and analytical frameworks. This working model of international collaboration underscores what is possible for future genetic discoveries in emerging pandemics, or indeed for any complex human disease

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

International audienceIn 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