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

Epidemiologia da sífilis gestacional em Fortaleza, Ceará, Brasil: um agravo sem controle Epidemiology of gestational syphilis in Fortaleza, Ceará State, Brazil: an uncontrolled disease

O objetivo deste estudo transversal foi conhecer o perfil epidemiológico das gestantes com VDRL reagente, em Fortaleza, Ceará, Brasil, no ano de 2008. Foi verificado o percentual das gestantes com sífilis que foram consideradas inadequadamente tratadas e os motivos da inadequação, de acordo com as normas do Ministério da Saúde. Foram entrevistadas 58 gestantes no pós-parto imediato, internadas em cinco maternidades públicas do município, e consultadas as informações do prontuário e do cartão das gestantes. Foram avaliados dados sociodemográficos, obstétricos e variáveis relacionadas ao diagnóstico e tratamento da gestante e do parceiro. Apenas três (5,2%; IC95%: 1,8%-14,1%) gestantes foram consideradas adequadamente tratadas. O principal motivo da inadequação do tratamento foi a falta ou inadequação do tratamento do parceiro (88% dos casos; IC95%: 76,2%-94,4%). Foi possível constatar a necessidade de um segundo VDRL no terceiro trimestre de gestação. Os dados evidenciaram que o atendimento recebido pela gestante não foi suficiente para garantir o controle da sífilis congênita.<br>This cross-sectional study investigated the epidemiological profile of pregnant women with positive VDRL in Fortaleza, Ceará State, Brazil, in 2008. The study verified the proportion of pregnant women with syphilis that was classified as treated incorrectly according to Brazilian Ministry of Health guidelines, and assessed the reasons for inadequate treatment. Fifty-eight women who had given birth at five public maternity hospitals were interviewed consecutively following delivery. Data were also recovered from medical files and pregnancy cards. Sociodemographic and obstetric data and information related to the diagnosis and treatment of syphilis in both pregnant women and their partners were analyzed. Only three (5.2%; 95%CI: 1.8%-14.1%) pregnant women had received adequate treatment. The main reason for inadequate treatment was lack of partner treatment (88% of cases; 95%CI: 76.2%-94.4%). Medical care as currently provided does not guarantee the control of gestational syphilis in this sample