Proposed definition of competencies for surgical neuro-oncology training

Objective: The aim of this work is to define competencies and entrustable professional activities (EPAs) to be imparted within the framework of surgical neuro-oncological residency and fellowship training as well as the education of medical students. Improved and specific training in surgical neuro-oncology promotes neuro-oncological expertise, quality of surgical neuro-oncological treatment and may also contribute to further development of neuro-oncological techniques and treatment protocols. Specific curricula for a surgical neuro-oncologic education have not yet been established. Methods: We used a consensus-building approach to propose skills, competencies and EPAs to be imparted within the framework of surgical neuro-oncological training. We developed competencies and EPAs suitable for training in surgical neuro-oncology. Result: In total, 70 competencies and 8 EPAs for training in surgical neuro-oncology were proposed. EPAs were defined for the management of the deteriorating patient, the management of patients with the diagnosis of a brain tumour, tumour-based resections, function-based surgical resections of brain tumours, the postoperative management of patients, the collaboration as a member of an interdisciplinary and/or -professional team and finally for the care of palliative and dying patients and their families. Conclusions and Relevance: The present work should subsequently initiate a discussion about the proposed competencies and EPAs and, together with the following discussion, contribute to the creation of new training concepts in surgical neuro-oncology

Guidelines for the use and interpretation of assays for monitoring autophagy

In 2008 we published the first set of guidelines for standardizing research in autophagy. Since then, research on this topic has continued to accelerate, and many new scientists have entered the field. Our knowledge base and relevant new technologies have also been expanding. Accordingly, it is important to update these guidelines for monitoring autophagy in different organisms. Various reviews have described the range of assays that have been used for this purpose. Nevertheless, there continues to be confusion regarding acceptable methods to measure autophagy, especially in multicellular eukaryotes. A key point that needs to be emphasized is that there is a difference between measurements that monitor the numbers or volume of autophagic elements (e.g., autophagosomes or autolysosomes) at any stage of the autophagic process vs. those that measure flux through the autophagy pathway (i.e., the complete process); thus, a block in macroautophagy that results in autophagosome accumulation needs to be differentiated from stimuli that result in increased autophagic activity, defined as increased autophagy induction coupled with increased delivery to, and degradation within, lysosomes (in most higher eukaryotes and some protists such as Dictyostelium) or the vacuole (in plants and fungi). In other words, it is especially important that investigators new to the field understand that the appearance of more autophagosomes does not necessarily equate with more autophagy. In fact, in many cases, autophagosomes accumulate because of a block in trafficking to lysosomes without a concomitant change in autophagosome biogenesis, whereas an increase in autolysosomes may reflect a reduction in degradative activity. Here, we present a set of guidelines for the selection and interpretation of methods for use by investigators who aim to examine macroautophagy and related processes, as well as for reviewers who need to provide realistic and reasonable critiques of papers that are focused on these processes. These guidelines are not meant to be a formulaic set of rules, because the appropriate assays depend in part on the question being asked and the system being used. In addition, we emphasize that no individual assay is guaranteed to be the most appropriate one in every situation, and we strongly recommend the use of multiple assays to monitor autophagy. In these guidelines, we consider these various methods of assessing autophagy and what information can, or cannot, be obtained from them. Finally, by discussing the merits and limits of particular autophagy assays, we hope to encourage technical innovation in the field