Chang Gung University

About: Chang Gung University is a education organization based out in Taoyuan City, Taiwan. It is known for research contribution in the topics: Population & Cancer. The organization has 28958 authors who have published 35359 publications receiving 768667 citations. The organization is also known as: Chang Gung Medical College & Chang Gung College of Medicine and Technology.

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

Abstract: 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 flux 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, 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. 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 target by gene knockout or RNA interference more than one autophagy-related protein. In addition, some individual Atg proteins, or groups of proteins, are involved in other cellular pathways implying that 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 assays, we hope to encourage technical innovation in the field.

Guidelines for the use and interpretation of assays for monitoring autophagy

Abstract: 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.

Cetuximab and chemotherapy as initial treatment for metastatic colorectal cancer.

Abstract: Background We investigated the efficacy of cetuximab plus irinotecan, fluorouracil, and leucovorin (FOLFIRI) as first-line treatment for metastatic colorectal cancer and sought associations between the mutation status of the KRAS gene in tumors and clinical response to cetuximab. Methods We randomly assigned patients with epidermal growth factor receptor–positive colorectal cancer with unresectable metastases to receive FOLFIRI either alone or in combination with cetuximab. The primary end point was progression-free survival. Results A total of 599 patients received cetuximab plus FOLFIRI, and 599 received FOLFIRI alone. The hazard ratio for progression-free survival in the cetuximab–FOLFIRI group as compared with the FOLFIRI group was 0.85 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.72 to 0.99; P=0.048). There was no significant difference in the overall survival between the two treatment groups (hazard ratio, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.81 to 1.07; P=0.31). There was a significant interaction between treatment group and KRAS ...

Risk of hepatocellular carcinoma across a biological gradient of serum hepatitis B virus DNA level.

Abstract: ContextSerum hepatitis B virus (HBV) DNA level is a marker of viral replication and efficacy of antiviral treatment in individuals with chronic hepatitis B.ObjectiveTo evaluate the relationship between serum HBV DNA level and risk of hepatocellular carcinoma.Design, Setting, and ParticipantsProspective cohort study of 3653 participants (aged 30-65 years), who were seropositive for the hepatitis B surface antigen and seronegative for antibodies against the hepatitis C virus, recruited to a community-based cancer screening program in Taiwan between 1991 and 1992.Main Outcome MeasureIncidence of hepatocellular carcinoma during follow-up examination and by data linkage with the national cancer registry and the death certification systems.ResultsThere were 164 incident cases of hepatocellular carcinoma and 346 deaths during a mean follow-up of 11.4 years and 41 779 person-years of follow-up. The incidence of hepatocellular carcinoma increased with serum HBV DNA level at study entry in a dose-response relationship ranging from 108 per 100 000 person-years for an HBV DNA level of less than 300 copies/mL to 1152 per 100 000 person-years for an HBV DNA level of 1 million copies/mL or greater. The corresponding cumulative incidence rates of hepatocellular carcinoma were 1.3% and 14.9%, respectively. The biological gradient of hepatocellular carcinoma by serum HBV DNA levels remained significant (P<.001) after adjustment for sex, age, cigarette smoking, alcohol consumption, serostatus for the hepatitis B e antigen (HBeAg), serum alanine aminotransferase level, and liver cirrhosis at study entry. The dose-response relationship was most prominent for participants who were seronegative for HBeAg with normal serum alanine aminotransferase levels and no liver cirrhosis at study entry. Participants with persistent elevation of serum HBV DNA level during follow-up had the highest hepatocellular carcinoma risk.ConclusionElevated serum HBV DNA level (≥10 000 copies/mL) is a strong risk predictor of hepatocellular carcinoma independent of HBeAg, serum alanine aminotransferase level, and liver cirrhosis.