scispace - formally typeset
Search or ask a question
Institution

Francis Crick Institute

FacilityLondon, United Kingdom
About: Francis Crick Institute is a facility organization based out in London, United Kingdom. It is known for research contribution in the topics: Population & Cancer. The organization has 2569 authors who have published 4059 publications receiving 133468 citations. The organization is also known as: The Crick & UK Centre for Medical Research and Innovation.
Topics: Population, Cancer, Immune system, Chromatin, Gene


Papers
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
Daniel J. Klionsky1, Kotb Abdelmohsen2, Akihisa Abe3, Joynal Abedin4  +2519 moreInstitutions (695)
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors present a set of guidelines for the selection and interpretation of methods for use by investigators who aim to examine macro-autophagy and related processes, as well as for reviewers who need to provide realistic and reasonable critiques of papers that are focused on these processes.
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.

5,187 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
Lorenzo Galluzzi1, Lorenzo Galluzzi2, Ilio Vitale3, Stuart A. Aaronson4  +183 moreInstitutions (111)
TL;DR: The Nomenclature Committee on Cell Death (NCCD) has formulated guidelines for the definition and interpretation of cell death from morphological, biochemical, and functional perspectives.
Abstract: Over the past decade, the Nomenclature Committee on Cell Death (NCCD) has formulated guidelines for the definition and interpretation of cell death from morphological, biochemical, and functional perspectives. Since the field continues to expand and novel mechanisms that orchestrate multiple cell death pathways are unveiled, we propose an updated classification of cell death subroutines focusing on mechanistic and essential (as opposed to correlative and dispensable) aspects of the process. As we provide molecularly oriented definitions of terms including intrinsic apoptosis, extrinsic apoptosis, mitochondrial permeability transition (MPT)-driven necrosis, necroptosis, ferroptosis, pyroptosis, parthanatos, entotic cell death, NETotic cell death, lysosome-dependent cell death, autophagy-dependent cell death, immunogenic cell death, cellular senescence, and mitotic catastrophe, we discuss the utility of neologisms that refer to highly specialized instances of these processes. The mission of the NCCD is to provide a widely accepted nomenclature on cell death in support of the continued development of the field.

3,301 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: This poster presents a poster presenting a poster presented at the 2016 International Conference of the Association for the Study of Viral Influenza and its Disruption in China, where it was presented for the first time.
Abstract: Yuelong Shu1, John McCauley2 1. WHO Collaborating Center for Reference and Research on Influenza, Chinese National Influenza Center, National Institute for Viral Disease Control and Prevention, Chinese Center for Disease Control and Prevention, Beijing, China 2. WHO Collaborating Centre for Reference and Research on Influenza, Crick Worldwide Influenza Centre, the Francis Crick Institute, London, United Kingdom

2,306 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
25 Mar 2016-Science
TL;DR: A relationship between clonal neoantigen burden and overall survival in primary lung adenocarcinomas and the impact of neoantigens intratumor heterogeneity (ITH) on antitumor immunity is demonstrated.
Abstract: As tumors grow, they acquire mutations, some of which create neoantigens that influence the response of patients to immune checkpoint inhibitors. We explored the impact of neoantigen intratumor heterogeneity (ITH) on antitumor immunity. Through integrated analysis of ITH and neoantigen burden, we demonstrate a relationship between clonal neoantigen burden and overall survival in primary lung adenocarcinomas. CD8+ tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes reactive to clonal neoantigens were identified in early-stage non–small cell lung cancer and expressed high levels of PD-1. Sensitivity to PD-1 and CTLA-4 blockade in patients with advanced NSCLC and melanoma was enhanced in tumors enriched for clonal neoantigens. T cells recognizing clonal neoantigens were detectable in patients with durable clinical benefit. Cytotoxic chemotherapy–induced subclonal neoantigens, contributing to an increased mutational load, were enriched in certain poor responders. These data suggest that neoantigen heterogeneity may influence immune surveillance and support therapeutic developments targeting clonal neoantigens.

2,284 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
Seth Carbon1, Eric Douglass1, Nathan Dunn1, Benjamin M. Good1  +189 moreInstitutions (19)
TL;DR: GO-CAM, a new framework for representing gene function that is more expressive than standard GO annotations, has been released, and users can now explore the growing repository of these models.
Abstract: The Gene Ontology resource (GO; http://geneontology.org) provides structured, computable knowledge regarding the functions of genes and gene products. Founded in 1998, GO has become widely adopted in the life sciences, and its contents are under continual improvement, both in quantity and in quality. Here, we report the major developments of the GO resource during the past two years. Each monthly release of the GO resource is now packaged and given a unique identifier (DOI), enabling GO-based analyses on a specific release to be reproduced in the future. The molecular function ontology has been refactored to better represent the overall activities of gene products, with a focus on transcription regulator activities. Quality assurance efforts have been ramped up to address potentially out-of-date or inaccurate annotations. New evidence codes for high-throughput experiments now enable users to filter out annotations obtained from these sources. GO-CAM, a new framework for representing gene function that is more expressive than standard GO annotations, has been released, and users can now explore the growing repository of these models. We also provide the ‘GO ribbon’ widget for visualizing GO annotations to a gene; the widget can be easily embedded in any web page.

2,138 citations


Authors

Showing all 2629 results

NameH-indexPapersCitations
Claudia Langenberg12445267326
Richard Stone113130761169
Peter J. Ratcliffe11237166588
Julian Downward11031254130
Peter M. Lansdorp10533043982
Paul Nurse10431045801
Peter J. Parker10340240967
David T. Jones10230674163
Anne O'Garra10023559951
Karen H. Vousden10022757895
Stephen C. West9925729430
Charles Swanton9742353655
Frances R. Balkwill9731051347
François Guillemot9522133003
James C. Smith9343637251
Network Information
Related Institutions (5)
Howard Hughes Medical Institute
34.6K papers, 5.2M citations

97% related

Broad Institute
11.6K papers, 1.5M citations

97% related

Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory
6.6K papers, 1M citations

97% related

European Bioinformatics Institute
10.5K papers, 999.6K citations

96% related

Wellcome Trust Sanger Institute
9.6K papers, 1.2M citations

96% related

Performance
Metrics
No. of papers from the Institution in previous years
YearPapers
202323
202287
2021906
2020800
2019651
2018561