2 research outputs found

    The Microbiome of Temporal Arteries

    Get PDF
    Objective: A role for microorganisms in giant cell arteritis (GCA) has long been suspected. We describe the microbiomes of temporal arteries from patients with GCA and controls. Methods: Temporal artery biopsies from patients suspected to have GCA were collected under aseptic conditions and snap-frozen. Fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) and long-read 16S rRNA-gene sequencing was used to examine microbiomes of temporal arteries. Taxonomic classification of bacterial sequences was performed to the genus level and relative abundances were calculated. Microbiome differential abundances were analyzed by principal coordinate analysis (PCoA) with comparative Unifrac distances and predicted functional profiling using PICRUSt. Results : Forty-seven patients, including 9 with biopsy-positive GCA, 15 with biopsy-negative GCA and 23 controls without GCA, were enrolled. FISH for bacterial DNA revealed signal in the arterial media. Beta, but not alpha, diversity differed between GCA and control temporal arteries (P = 0.042). Importantly, there were no significant differences between biopsy-positive and biopsy-negative GCA (P > 0.99). The largest differential abundances seen between GCA and non-GCA temporal arteries included Proteobacteria (P), Bifidobacterium (g), Parasutterella (g) and Granulicatella (g) [Log 2-fold change > 4]. Conclusion: Temporal arteries are not sterile, but rather are inhabited by a community of bacteria. We have demonstrated that there are microbiomic differences between GCA and non-GCA temporal arteries, but not between biopsy-positive and biopsy-negative GCA

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

    No full text
    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
    corecore