The Anzhen Risk Scoring System for Acute Type A Aortic Dissection: A Prospective Observational Study Protocol

Introduction: Acute type A aortic dissection (ATAAD) is a catastrophic disease with fatal outcomes. Malperfusion syndrome (MPS) is a serious complication of ATAAD, with an incidence of 20–40%. Many studies have shown that MPS is the main risk factor for poor ATAAD prognosis. However, a risk scoring system for ATAAD based on MPS is lacking. Here, we designed a risk scoring system for ATAAD to assess mortality through quantitative assessment of relevant organ malperfusion and subsequently develop rational treatment strategies.Methods and analysis: This was a prospective observational study. Patients’ perioperative clinical data were collected to establish a database of ATAAD (N≥3000) and determine whether these patients had malperfusion complications. The Anzhen risk scoring system was established on the basis of organ malperfusion by using a random forest survival model and a logistics model. The better method was then chosen to establish a revised risk scoring system.Ethics and dissemination: This study received ethical approval from the Ethics Committees of Beijing Anzhen Hospital, Capital Medical University (KS2019034-1). Patient consent was waived because biological samples were not collected, and no patient rights were violated. Findings will be disseminated at scientific conferences and in peer-reviewed publications

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

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