Osteoarthritis Classification Scales: Interobserver Reliability and Arthroscopic Correlation

The MARS Group* Background: Osteoarthritis of the knee is commonly diagnosed and monitored with radiography. However, the reliability of radiographic classification systems for osteoarthritis and the correlation of these classifications with the actual degree of confirmed degeneration of the articular cartilage of the tibiofemoral joint have not been adequately studied. Methods: As the Multicenter ACL (anterior cruciate ligament) Revision Study (MARS) Group, we conducted a multicenter, prospective longitudinal cohort study of patients undergoing revision surgery after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. We followed 632 patients who underwent radiographic evaluation of the knee (an anteroposterior weight-bearing radiograph, a posteroanterior weight-bearing radiograph made with the knee in 45°of flexion [Rosenberg radiograph], or both) and arthroscopic evaluation of the articular surfaces. Three blinded examiners independently graded radiographic findings according to six commonly used systems-the Kellgren-Lawrence, International Knee Documentation Committee, Fairbank, Brandt et al., Ahlbäck, and Jäger-Wirth classifications. Interobserver reliability was assessed with use of the intraclass correlation coefficient. The association between radiographic classification and arthroscopic findings of tibiofemoral chondral disease was assessed with use of the Spearman correlation coefficient. Results: Overall, 45°posteroanterior flexion weight-bearing radiographs had higher interobserver reliability (intraclass correlation coefficient = 0.63; 95% confidence interval, 0.61 to 0.65) compared with anteroposterior radiographs (intraclass continue

Consensus Paper: Pathological Mechanisms Underlying Neurodegeneration in Spinocerebellar Ataxias.

Intensive scientific research devoted in the recent years to understand the molecular mechanisms or neurodegeneration in spinocerebellar ataxias (SCAs) are identifying new pathways and targets providing new insights and a better understanding of the molecular pathogenesis in these diseases. In this consensus manuscript, the authors discuss their current views on the identified molecular processes causing or modulating the neurodegenerative phenotype in spinocerebellar ataxias with the common opinion of translating the new knowledge acquired into candidate targets for therapy. The following topics are discussed: transcription dysregulation, protein aggregation, autophagy, ion channels, the role of mitochondria, RNA toxicity, modulators of neurodegeneration and current therapeutic approaches. Overall point of consensus includes the common vision of neurodegeneration in SCAs as a multifactorial, progressive and reversible process, at least in early stages. Specific points of consensus include the role of the dysregulation of protein folding, transcription, bioenergetics, calcium handling and eventual cell death with apoptotic features of neurons during SCA disease progression. Unresolved questions include how the dysregulation of these pathways triggers the onset of symptoms and mediates disease progression since this understanding may allow effective treatments of SCAs within the window of reversibility to prevent early neuronal damage. Common opinions also include the need for clinical detection of early neuronal dysfunction, for more basic research to decipher the early neurodegenerative process in SCAs in order to give rise to new concepts for treatment strategies and for the translation of the results to preclinical studies and, thereafter, in clinical practice.JOURNAL ARTICLESCOPUS: cp.jinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishe

Erratum to: Guidelines for the use and interpretation of assays for monitoring autophagy (3rd edition) (Autophagy, 12, 1, 1-222, 10.1080/15548627.2015.1100356

non present

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