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

Bacterial Cholangitis in Autosomal Dominant Polycystic Kidney and Liver Disease

Objective: To describe first episodes of bacterial cholangitis complicating autosomal dominant polycystic kidney disease (ADPKD) and autosomal dominant polycystic liver disease (ADPLD) and to identify risk factors for cholangitis episodes among patients with ADPKD-associated polycystic liver disease (PLD). Patients and Methods: We searched the electronic medical records at our tertiary referral center for episodes of cholangitis in patients with ADPKD or ADPLD from January 1, 1996, through June 30, 2017. Cases were categorized as suspected or definite cholangitis by expert review. Clinical, laboratory, and radiologic data were manually abstracted. A nested case-control study was conducted to investigate risk factors for cholangitis in patients with ADPKD. Results: We identified 29 cases of definite or suspected cholangitis complicating PLD (24 with ADPKD-associated PLD and 5 with ADPLD). Among patients with definite cholangitis in ADPKD-associated PLD (n=19) vs ADPLD (n=4), the mean ± SD age was 62.4±12.2 vs 55.1±8.6 years, and 9 (47.4%) vs 0 (0%), respectively, were male. The odds of gallstones (odds ratio [OR], 21.6; 95% CI, 3.17-927; P<.001), prior cholecystectomy (OR, 12.2; 95% CI, 1.59-552; P=.008), duodenal diverticulum (OR, 13.5; 95% CI, 2.44 to not estimable; P=.004), type 2 diabetes mellitus (OR, 6.41; 95% CI, 1.01 to not estimable; P=.05), prior endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (OR, 14.0; 95% CI, 1.80-631; P=.005), and prior kidney transplant (OR, 8.06; 95% CI, 1.72-76.0; P=.004) were higher in patients with ADPKD-associated PLD with definite cholangitis compared to controls. Conclusion: Gallstones, prior cholecystectomy, duodenal diverticulosis, type 2 diabetes mellitus, prior endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography, and prior kidney transplant constituted risk factors for cholangitis among patients with ADPKD-associated PLD

New directions in intervention: cyber-bullying, schools and teachers

Book synopsis: This book brings together the most current thinking and research on educator stress and how education systems can support quality teachers and quality education. It adopts an occupational health perspective to examine the problem of educator stress and presents theory-driven intervention strategies to reduce stress load and support educator resilience and healthy school organizations. The book provides an international perspective on key challenges facing educators such as teacher stress, teacher retention, training effective teachers, teacher accountability, cyber-bullying in schools, and developing healthy school systems. Divided into four parts, the book starts out by introducing and defining the problem of educator stress internationally and examining educator stress in the context of school, education system, and education policy factors. Part I includes chapters on educator mental health and well-being, stress-related biological vulnerabilities, the relation of stress to teaching self-efficacy, turnover in charter schools, and the role of culture in educator stress. Part II reviews the main conceptual models that explain educator stress while applying an occupational health framework to education contexts which stresses the role of organizational factors, including work organization and work practices. It ends with a proposal of a dynamic integrative theory of educator stress, which highlights the changing nature of educator stress with time and context. Part III starts with the definition of what constitute healthy school organizations as a backdrop to the following chapters which review the application of occupational health psychology theories and intervention approaches to reducing educator stress, promoting teacher resources and developing healthy school systems. Chapters include interventions at the individual, individual-organizational interface and organizational levels. Part III ends with a chapter addressing cyber-bullying, a new challenge affecting schools and teachers. Part IV discusses the implications for research, practice and policy in education, including teacher training and development. In addition, it presents a review of methodological issues facing researchers on educator stress and identifies future trends for research on this topic, including the use of ecological momentary assessment in educator stress research. The editors’ concluding comments reflect upon the application of an occupational health perspective to advance research, practice and policy directed at reducing stress in educators, and promoting teacher and school well-being

Relationships between school climate, bullying and delinquent behaviours

© 2017 Springer Science+Business Media B.V. Given that schools are, potentially, powerful sites for influencing adolescent behaviour, it is important that there is greater understanding of the psychosocial aspects of the school climate that can be leveraged for this purpose. The research reported in this article used structural equation modelling (with data from a sample of 6120 students at Australian high schools) to examine the influence of the psychosocial school-level environment on students’ self-reported experiences of bully victimisation (i.e. being victims of bullying) and engagement in delinquent behaviours. Further, we examined whether bully victimisation mediated the relationships between school climate variables and delinquent behaviours. School connectedness and rule clarity were negatively associated with both bully victimisation and delinquency (p &lt; 0.05), and teacher support was negatively associated with bully victimisation (p &lt; 0.01), confirming the importance of these aspects of the school-level environment. However, affirming diversity and reporting and seeking help both had positive influences on bully victimisation (p &lt; 0.05), raising concerns about the ways in which these aspects of the school-level environment might have been promoted. Importantly, bully victimisation was found to mediate the influence of five of the six school climate constructs on delinquent behaviours (p &lt; 0.001). This study advance our understanding of how specific aspects of the school climate influence the prevalence of bullying and delinquent behaviour, adding weight to the call for educators to actively monitor and enhance psychosocial aspects of the school climate in order to improve student behavioural outcomes