2 research outputs found

    Guidelines for the use and interpretation of assays for monitoring autophagy (4th edition)1.

    Get PDF
    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

    Impact of antibiotic resistance on outcomes of neutropenic cancer patients with Pseudomonas aeruginosa bacteraemia (IRONIC study) : Study protocol of a retrospective multicentre international study

    Get PDF
    Introduction Pseudomonas aeruginosa (PA) has historically been one of the major causes of severe sepsis and death among neutropenic cancer patients. There has been a recent increase of multidrug-resistant PA (MDRPA) isolates that may determine a worse prognosis, particularly in immunosuppressed patients. The aim of this study is to establish the impact of antibiotic resistance on the outcome of neutropenic onco-haematological patients with PA bacteraemia, and to identify the risk factors for MDRPA bacteraemia and mortality. Methods and analysis This is a retrospective, observational, multicentre, international study. All episodes of PA bacteraemia occurring in neutropenic onco-haematological patients followed up at the participating centres from 1 January 2006 to 31 May 2018 will be retrospectively reviewed. The primary end point will be overall case-fatality rate within 30 days of onset of PA bacteraemia. The secondary end points will be to describe the following: the incidence and risk factors for multidrug-resistant and extremely drug-resistant PA bacteraemia (by comparing the episodes due to susceptible PA with those produced by MDRPA), the efficacy of ceftolozane/tazobactam, the rates of persistent bacteraemia and bacteraemia relapse and the risk factors for very early (48 hours), early (7 days) and overall (30 days) case-fatality rates. Ethics and dissemination The Clinical Research Ethics Committee of Bellvitge University Hospital approved the protocol of the study at the primary site. To protect personal privacy, identifying information of each patient in the electronic database will be encrypted. The processing of the patients' personal data collected in the study will comply with the Spanish Data Protection Act of 1998 and with the European Directive on the privacy of data. All data collected, stored and processed will be anonymised. Results will be reported at conferences and in peer-reviewed publications
    corecore