What to consider when pseudohypoparathyroidism is ruled out: IPPSD and differential diagnosis

Background: Pseudohypoparathyroidism (PHP) is a rare disease whose phenotypic features are rather difficult to identify in some cases. Thus, although these patients may present with the Albright''s hereditary osteodystrophy (AHO) phenotype, which is characterized by small stature, obesity with a rounded face, subcutaneous ossifications, mental retardation and brachydactyly, its manifestations are somewhat variable. Indeed, some of them present with a complete phenotype, whereas others show only subtle manifestations. In addition, the features of the AHO phenotype are not specific to it and a similar phenotype is also commonly observed in other syndromes. Brachydactyly type E (BDE) is the most specific and objective feature of the AHO phenotype, and several genes have been associated with syndromic BDE in the past few years. Moreover, these syndromes have a skeletal and endocrinological phenotype that overlaps with AHO/PHP. In light of the above, we have developed an algorithm to aid in genetic testing of patients with clinical features of AHO but with no causative molecular defect at the GNAS locus. Starting with the feature of brachydactyly, this algorithm allows the differential diagnosis to be broadened and, with the addition of other clinical features, can guide genetic testing. Methods: We reviewed our series of patients (n = 23) with a clinical diagnosis of AHO and with brachydactyly type E or similar pattern, who were negative for GNAS anomalies, and classify them according to the diagnosis algorithm to finally propose and analyse the most probable gene(s) in each case. Results: A review of the clinical data for our series of patients, and subsequent analysis of the candidate gene(s), allowed detection of the underlying molecular defect in 12 out of 23 patients: five patients harboured a mutation in PRKAR1A, one in PDE4D, four in TRPS1 and two in PTHLH. Conclusions: This study confirmed that the screening of other genes implicated in syndromes with BDE and AHO or a similar phenotype is very helpful for establishing a correct genetic diagnosis for those patients who have been misdiagnosed with "AHO-like phenotype" with an unknown genetic cause, and also for better describing the characteristic and differential features of these less common syndromes

Guidelines for the use and interpretation of assays for monitoring autophagy (3rd edition)

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. For example, 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 versus those that measure fl ux through the autophagy pathway (i.e., the complete process including the amount and rate of cargo sequestered and degraded). In particular, a block in macroautophagy that results in autophagosome accumulation must be differentiated from stimuli that increase autophagic activity, defi ned as increased autophagy induction coupled with increased delivery to, and degradation within, lysosomes (inmost 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 fi eld 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. It is worth emphasizing here that lysosomal digestion is a stage of autophagy and evaluating its competence is a crucial part of the evaluation of autophagic flux, or complete autophagy. 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. Along these lines, because of the potential for pleiotropic effects due to blocking autophagy through genetic manipulation it is imperative to delete or knock down more than one autophagy-related gene. In addition, some individual Atg proteins, or groups of proteins, are involved in other cellular pathways so not all Atg proteins can be used as a specific marker for an autophagic process. 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

Supplementary Table 10 - 13 from Tumor Explants Elucidate a Cascade of Paracrine SHH, WNT, and VEGF Signals Driving Pancreatic Cancer Angiosuppression

Supplementary Table 10: Antibodies for IHC and IF.Overview of antibodies used for stainings in human PDAC or KPC-derived tissues.Supplementary Table 11: Primer sequences for qRT-PCR.Primers for qRT-PCR-based quantification of ChIP and mRNA samples.Supplementary Table 12: Freezer dryer settings for sponge production.Specific settings for optimal sponge production.Supplementary Table 13: Explant media composition.List of reagents used for human PDAC and murine explants.</p

Supplementary Table 8 from Tumor Explants Elucidate a Cascade of Paracrine SHH, WNT, and VEGF Signals Driving Pancreatic Cancer Angiosuppression

Lymphoid network.Regulatory network for PDAC-associated lymphoid cells, listing the inferred transcriptional targets (Target) for each regulatory protein (Regulator). Association weight (AW) and association mode (AM) are scores to quantify strength/direction of interaction. Sign indicates directionality of the interaction (1 = transactivating, -1 = transrepressing).</p

Supplementary Table 5 from Tumor Explants Elucidate a Cascade of Paracrine SHH, WNT, and VEGF Signals Driving Pancreatic Cancer Angiosuppression

Endothelial network.Regulatory network for PDAC-associated endothelial cells, listing the inferred transcriptional targets (Target) for each regulatory protein (Regulator). Association weight (AW) and association mode (AM) are scores to quantify strength/direction of interaction. Sign indicates directionality of the interaction (1 = transactivating, -1 = transrepressing).</p

Supplementary Figure 7 from Tumor Explants Elucidate a Cascade of Paracrine SHH, WNT, and VEGF Signals Driving Pancreatic Cancer Angiosuppression

WNT Distribution and Expression of Downstream Targets.</p