Beyond the required LISA free-fall performance: new LISA pathfinder results down to 20 μHz

In the months since the publication of the first results, the noise performance of LISA Pathfinder has improved because of reduced Brownian noise due to the continued decrease in pressure around the test masses, from a better correction of noninertial effects, and from a better calibration of the electrostatic force actuation. In addition, the availability of numerous long noise measurement runs, during which no perturbation is purposely applied to the test masses, has allowed the measurement of noise with good statistics down to 20  μHz. The Letter presents the measured differential acceleration noise figure, which is at (1.74±0.05)  fm s^{-2}/sqrt[Hz] above 2 mHz and (6±1)×10  fm s^{-2}/sqrt[Hz] at 20  μHz, and discusses the physical sources for the measured noise. This performance provides an experimental benchmark demonstrating the ability to realize the low-frequency science potential of the LISA mission, recently selected by the European Space Agency

Cardiovascular and renal outcomes of renin-angiotensin system blockade in adult patients with diabetes mellitus: a systematic review with network meta-analyses

Medications aimed at inhibiting the renin-angiotensin system (RAS) have been used extensively for preventing cardiovascular and renal complications in patients with diabetes, but data that compare their clinical effectiveness are limited. We aimed to compare the effects of classes of RAS blockers on cardiovascular and renal outcomes in adults with diabetes

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