scispace - formally typeset
Search or ask a question
Institution

Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai

EducationNew York, New York, United States
About: Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai is a education organization based out in New York, New York, United States. It is known for research contribution in the topics: Population & Cancer. The organization has 37488 authors who have published 76057 publications receiving 3704104 citations. The organization is also known as: Mount Sinai School of Medicine.


Papers
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: The hepatic stellate cell has surprised and engaged physiologists, pathologists, and hepatologists for over 130 years, yet clear evidence of its role in hepatic injury and fibrosis only emerged following the refinement of methods for its isolation and characterization.
Abstract: The hepatic stellate cell has surprised and engaged physiologists, pathologists, and hepatologists for over 130 years, yet clear evidence of its role in hepatic injury and fibrosis only emerged following the refinement of methods for its isolation and characterization. The paradigm in liver injury of activation of quiescent vitamin A-rich stellate cells into proliferative, contractile, and fibrogenic myofibroblasts has launched an era of astonishing progress in understanding the mechanistic basis of hepatic fibrosis progression and regression. But this simple paradigm has now yielded to a remarkably broad appreciation of the cell's functions not only in liver injury, but also in hepatic development, regeneration, xenobiotic responses, intermediary metabolism, and immunoregulation. Among the most exciting prospects is that stellate cells are essential for hepatic progenitor cell amplification and differentiation. Equally intriguing is the remarkable plasticity of stellate cells, not only in their variable intermediate filament phenotype, but also in their functions. Stellate cells can be viewed as the nexus in a complex sinusoidal milieu that requires tightly regulated autocrine and paracrine cross-talk, rapid responses to evolving extracellular matrix content, and exquisite responsiveness to the metabolic needs imposed by liver growth and repair. Moreover, roles vital to systemic homeostasis include their storage and mobilization of retinoids, their emerging capacity for antigen presentation and induction of tolerance, as well as their emerging relationship to bone marrow-derived cells. As interest in this cell type intensifies, more surprises and mysteries are sure to unfold that will ultimately benefit our understanding of liver physiology and the diagnosis and treatment of liver disease.

2,419 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: The MR-PRESSO test detects and corrects horizontal pleiotropy in multi-instrument Mendelian randomization (MR) analyses and introduces distortions in the causal estimates in MR that ranged on average from –131% to 201%; it is shown using simulations that the MR-pressO test is best suited when horizontal Pleiotropy occurs in <50% of instruments.
Abstract: Horizontal pleiotropy occurs when the variant has an effect on disease outside of its effect on the exposure in Mendelian randomization (MR). Violation of the ‘no horizontal pleiotropy’ assumption can cause severe bias in MR. We developed the Mendelian randomization pleiotropy residual sum and outlier (MR-PRESSO) test to identify horizontal pleiotropic outliers in multi-instrument summary-level MR testing. We showed using simulations that the MR-PRESSO test is best suited when horizontal pleiotropy occurs in 48% of causal relationships.

2,362 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
06 Aug 2008-JAMA
TL;DR: This report provides guidelines for when to initiate antiretroviral therapy, selection of appropriate initial regimens, patient monitoring, when to change therapy, and what regimens to use when changing.
Abstract: Context New trial data and drug regimens that have become available in the last 2 years warrant an update to guidelines for antiretroviral therapy (ART) in human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)–infected adults in resource-rich settings. Objective To provide current recommendations for the treatment of adult HIV infection with ART and use of laboratory-monitoring tools. Guidelines include when to start therapy and with what drugs, monitoring for response and toxic effects, special considerations in therapy, and managing antiretroviral failure. Data Sources, Study Selection, and Data Extraction Data that had been published or presented in abstract form at scientific conferences in the past 2 years were systematically searched and reviewed by an International Antiviral Society–USA panel. The panel reviewed available evidence and formed recommendations by full panel consensus. Data Synthesis Treatment is recommended for all adults with HIV infection; the strength of the recommendation and the quality of the evidence increase with decreasing CD4 cell count and the presence of certain concurrent conditions. Recommended initial regimens include 2 nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors (tenofovir/emtricitabine or abacavir/lamivudine) plus a nonnucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor (efavirenz), a ritonavir-boosted protease inhibitor (atazanavir or darunavir), or an integrase strand transfer inhibitor (raltegravir). Alternatives in each class are recommended for patients with or at risk of certain concurrent conditions. CD4 cell count and HIV-1 RNA level should be monitored, as should engagement in care, ART adherence, HIV drug resistance, and quality-of-care indicators. Reasons for regimen switching include virologic, immunologic, or clinical failure and drug toxicity or intolerance. Confirmed treatment failure should be addressed promptly and multiple factors considered. Conclusion New recommendations for HIV patient care include offering ART to all patients regardless of CD4 cell count, changes in therapeutic options, and modifications in the timing and choice of ART in the setting of opportunistic illnesses such as cryptococcal disease and tuberculosis.

2,357 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: A set of guidelines for the selection and interpretation of the methods that can be used by investigators who are attempting to examine macroautophagy and related processes, as well as by reviewers who need to provide realistic and reasonable critiques of papers that investigate these processes are presented.
Abstract: Research in autophagy continues to accelerate,(1) and as a result many new scientists are entering the field Accordingly, it is important to establish a standard set of criteria for monitoring macroautophagy in different organisms Recent reviews have described the range of assays that have been used for this purpose(2,3) There are many useful and convenient methods that can be used to monitor macroautophagy in yeast, but relatively few in other model systems, and there is much confusion regarding acceptable methods to measure macroautophagy in higher eukaryotes A key point that needs to be emphasized is that there is a difference between measurements that monitor the numbers of autophagosomes versus those that measure flux through the autophagy pathway; thus, a block in macroautophagy that results in autophagosome accumulation needs to be differentiated from fully functional autophagy that includes delivery to, and degradation within, lysosomes (in most higher eukaryotes) or the vacuole (in plants and fungi) Here, we present a set of guidelines for the selection and interpretation of the methods that can be used by investigators who are attempting to examine macroautophagy and related processes, as well as by reviewers who need to provide realistic and reasonable critiques of papers that investigate these processes This set of guidelines is 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 verify an autophagic response

2,310 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: A comprehensive review of the current literature on post-acute COVID-19, its pathophysiology and its organ-specific sequelae is provided in this paper, where the authors discuss relevant considerations for the multidisciplinary care of COPD survivors and propose a framework for the identification of those at high risk for COPD and their coordinated management through dedicated COPD clinics.
Abstract: Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is the pathogen responsible for the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, which has resulted in global healthcare crises and strained health resources. As the population of patients recovering from COVID-19 grows, it is paramount to establish an understanding of the healthcare issues surrounding them. COVID-19 is now recognized as a multi-organ disease with a broad spectrum of manifestations. Similarly to post-acute viral syndromes described in survivors of other virulent coronavirus epidemics, there are increasing reports of persistent and prolonged effects after acute COVID-19. Patient advocacy groups, many members of which identify themselves as long haulers, have helped contribute to the recognition of post-acute COVID-19, a syndrome characterized by persistent symptoms and/or delayed or long-term complications beyond 4 weeks from the onset of symptoms. Here, we provide a comprehensive review of the current literature on post-acute COVID-19, its pathophysiology and its organ-specific sequelae. Finally, we discuss relevant considerations for the multidisciplinary care of COVID-19 survivors and propose a framework for the identification of those at high risk for post-acute COVID-19 and their coordinated management through dedicated COVID-19 clinics.

2,307 citations


Authors

Showing all 37948 results

NameH-indexPapersCitations
Robert Langer2812324326306
Shizuo Akira2611308320561
Gordon H. Guyatt2311620228631
Eugene Braunwald2301711264576
Bruce S. McEwen2151163200638
Robert J. Lefkowitz214860147995
Peter Libby211932182724
Mark J. Daly204763304452
Stuart H. Orkin186715112182
Paul G. Richardson1831533155912
Alan C. Evans183866134642
John C. Morris1831441168413
Paul M. Thompson1832271146736
Tadamitsu Kishimoto1811067130860
Bruce M. Psaty1811205138244
Network Information
Related Institutions (5)
Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine
79.2K papers, 4.7M citations

99% related

University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center
75.2K papers, 4.4M citations

98% related

University of California, San Francisco
186.2K papers, 12M citations

98% related

Baylor College of Medicine
94.8K papers, 5M citations

98% related

Brigham and Women's Hospital
110.5K papers, 6.8M citations

98% related

Performance
Metrics
No. of papers from the Institution in previous years
YearPapers
2023157
2022844
20217,117
20206,224
20195,200
20184,505