Institution
Istanbul University
Education•Istanbul, Turkey•
About: Istanbul University is a education organization based out in Istanbul, Turkey. It is known for research contribution in the topics: Population & Cancer. The organization has 19050 authors who have published 38464 publications receiving 727640 citations. The organization is also known as: İstanbul Üniversitesi & University of Istanbul.
Topics: Population, Cancer, Breast cancer, Diabetes mellitus, Genotype
Papers published on a yearly basis
Papers
More filters
••
Istanbul University1, Heidelberg University2, University of Liège3, Karolinska University Hospital4, University of Southampton5, Catholic University of the Sacred Heart6, University of Toulouse7, Newcastle upon Tyne Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust8, University of Erlangen-Nuremberg9, First Faculty of Medicine, Charles University in Prague10, University of Antwerp11, Public Health Research Institute12, University of Verona13
TL;DR: An emphasis is placed on low muscle strength as a key characteristic of sarcopenia, uses detection of low muscle quantity and quality to confirm the sarc Openia diagnosis, and provides clear cut-off points for measurements of variables that identify and characterise sarc openia.
Abstract: Background in 2010, the European Working Group on Sarcopenia in Older People (EWGSOP) published a sarcopenia definition that aimed to foster advances in identifying and caring for people with sarcopenia. In early 2018, the Working Group met again (EWGSOP2) to update the original definition in order to reflect scientific and clinical evidence that has built over the last decade. This paper presents our updated findings. Objectives to increase consistency of research design, clinical diagnoses and ultimately, care for people with sarcopenia. Recommendations sarcopenia is a muscle disease (muscle failure) rooted in adverse muscle changes that accrue across a lifetime; sarcopenia is common among adults of older age but can also occur earlier in life. In this updated consensus paper on sarcopenia, EWGSOP2: (1) focuses on low muscle strength as a key characteristic of sarcopenia, uses detection of low muscle quantity and quality to confirm the sarcopenia diagnosis, and identifies poor physical performance as indicative of severe sarcopenia; (2) updates the clinical algorithm that can be used for sarcopenia case-finding, diagnosis and confirmation, and severity determination and (3) provides clear cut-off points for measurements of variables that identify and characterise sarcopenia. Conclusions EWGSOP2's updated recommendations aim to increase awareness of sarcopenia and its risk. With these new recommendations, EWGSOP2 calls for healthcare professionals who treat patients at risk for sarcopenia to take actions that will promote early detection and treatment. We also encourage more research in the field of sarcopenia in order to prevent or delay adverse health outcomes that incur a heavy burden for patients and healthcare systems.
6,250 citations
••
Clotilde Théry1, Kenneth W. Witwer2, Elena Aikawa3, María José Alcaraz4 +414 more•Institutions (209)
TL;DR: The MISEV2018 guidelines include tables and outlines of suggested protocols and steps to follow to document specific EV-associated functional activities, and a checklist is provided with summaries of key points.
Abstract: The last decade has seen a sharp increase in the number of scientific publications describing physiological and pathological functions of extracellular vesicles (EVs), a collective term covering various subtypes of cell-released, membranous structures, called exosomes, microvesicles, microparticles, ectosomes, oncosomes, apoptotic bodies, and many other names. However, specific issues arise when working with these entities, whose size and amount often make them difficult to obtain as relatively pure preparations, and to characterize properly. The International Society for Extracellular Vesicles (ISEV) proposed Minimal Information for Studies of Extracellular Vesicles (“MISEV”) guidelines for the field in 2014. We now update these “MISEV2014” guidelines based on evolution of the collective knowledge in the last four years. An important point to consider is that ascribing a specific function to EVs in general, or to subtypes of EVs, requires reporting of specific information beyond mere description of function in a crude, potentially contaminated, and heterogeneous preparation. For example, claims that exosomes are endowed with exquisite and specific activities remain difficult to support experimentally, given our still limited knowledge of their specific molecular machineries of biogenesis and release, as compared with other biophysically similar EVs. The MISEV2018 guidelines include tables and outlines of suggested protocols and steps to follow to document specific EV-associated functional activities. Finally, a checklist is provided with summaries of key points.
5,988 citations
••
Newcastle University1, Newcastle upon Tyne Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust2, Mayo Clinic3, University of Nottingham4, Istanbul University5, University of British Columbia6, University of California, Los Angeles7, Veterans Health Administration8, Drexel University9, Stavanger University Hospital10, Tohoku University11, King's College London12, Pierre-and-Marie-Curie University13, University of California, San Diego14, McGill University15, Rush University Medical Center16, Autonomous University of Madrid17, Neuroscience Research Australia18, National Institutes of Health19, University of Tokyo20, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill21, Tel Aviv University22, University of Pennsylvania23, University College London24, University of Louisville25, Lund University26, University of Pittsburgh27, University of Washington28, Juntendo University29, Complutense University of Madrid30, University of Göttingen31, Kanazawa University32
TL;DR: The dementia with Lewy bodies (DLB) Consortium has revised criteria for the clinical and pathologic diagnosis of DLB incorporating new information about the core clinical features and suggesting improved methods to assess them as mentioned in this paper.
Abstract: The dementia with Lewy bodies (DLB) Consortium has revised criteria for the clinical and pathologic diagnosis of DLB incorporating new information about the core clinical features and suggesting improved methods to assess them. REM sleep behavior disorder, severe neuroleptic sensitivity, and reduced striatal dopamine transporter activity on functional neuroimaging are given greater diagnostic weighting as features suggestive of a DLB diagnosis. The 1-year rule distinguishing between DLB and Parkinson disease with dementia may be difficult to apply in clinical settings and in such cases the term most appropriate to each individual patient should be used. Generic terms such as Lewy body (LB) disease are often helpful. The authors propose a new scheme for the pathologic assessment of LBs and Lewy neurites (LN) using alpha-synuclein immunohistochemistry and semiquantitative grading of lesion density, with the pattern of regional involvement being more important than total LB count. The new criteria take into account both Lewy-related and Alzheimer disease (AD)-type pathology to allocate a probability that these are associated with the clinical DLB syndrome. Finally, the authors suggest patient management guidelines including the need for accurate diagnosis, a target symptom approach, and use of appropriate outcome measures. There is limited evidence about specific interventions but available data suggest only a partial response of motor symptoms to levodopa: severe sensitivity to typical and atypical antipsychotics in ∼50%, and improvements in attention, visual hallucinations, and sleep disorders with cholinesterase inhibitors.
4,258 citations
••
Johns Hopkins University1, University of Alabama at Birmingham2, University of Birmingham3, Oklahoma Medical Research Foundation4, Laval University5, University of Manchester6, University College London7, University of California, Los Angeles8, Lund University9, Northwestern University10, Hanyang University11, Dalhousie University12, University of Toronto13, McGill University14, North Shore-LIJ Health System15, Allegheny General Hospital16, University of California, San Diego17, University of Pennsylvania18, Monklands Hospital19, University of the Basque Country20, St Thomas' Hospital21, University of Copenhagen22, New York University23, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill24, Karolinska Institutet25, SUNY Downstate Medical Center26, University of Manitoba27, Wake Forest University28, University of Louisville29, Emory University30, Istanbul University31, Medical University of South Carolina32, University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio33, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center34, University of Maryland, Baltimore35
TL;DR: The Systemic Lupus International Collaborating Clinics (SLICC) group revised and validated the American College of Rheumatology (ACR) systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) classification criteria in order to improve clinical relevance, meet stringent methodology requirements, and incorporate new knowledge regarding the immunology of SLE.
Abstract: Objective The Systemic Lupus International Collaborating Clinics (SLICC) group revised and validated the American College of Rheumatology (ACR) systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) classification criteria in order to improve clinical relevance, meet stringent methodology requirements, and incorporate new knowledge regarding the immunology of SLE. Methods The classification criteria were derived from a set of 702 expert-rated patient scenarios. Recursive partitioning was used to derive an initial rule that was simplified and refined based on SLICC physician consensus. The SLICC group validated the classification criteria in a new validation sample of 690 new expert-rated patient scenarios. Results Seventeen criteria were identified. In the derivation set, the SLICC classification criteria resulted in fewer misclassifications compared with the current ACR classification criteria (49 versus 70; P = 0.0082) and had greater sensitivity (94% versus 86%; P < 0.0001) and equal specificity (92% versus 93%; P = 0.39). In the validation set, the SLICC classification criteria resulted in fewer misclassifications compared with the current ACR classification criteria (62 versus 74; P = 0.24) and had greater sensitivity (97% versus 83%; P < 0.0001) but lower specificity (84% versus 96%; P < 0.0001). Conclusion The new SLICC classification criteria performed well in a large set of patient scenarios rated by experts. According to the SLICC rule for the classification of SLE, the patient must satisfy at least 4 criteria, including at least one clinical criterion and one immunologic criterion OR the patient must have biopsy-proven lupus nephritis in the presence of antinuclear antibodies or antidouble-stranded DNA antibodies. (Less)
3,609 citations
••
Aix-Marseille University1, Genentech2, Samsung Medical Center3, Seconda Università degli Studi di Napoli4, Wayne State University5, Pontifícia Universidade Católica do Rio Grande do Sul6, University of California, Los Angeles7, European Institute of Oncology8, Istanbul University9, Seoul National University Bundang Hospital10, University of California, Davis11
TL;DR: Overall survival was significantly longer with atezolizumab in the ITT and PD-L1-expression populations, and overall survival improvement was similar in patients with squamous non-squamous lung cancer.
3,496 citations
Authors
Showing all 19361 results
Name | H-index | Papers | Citations |
---|---|---|---|
Bobby Samir Acharya | 133 | 1121 | 100545 |
Serkant Ali Cetin | 129 | 1369 | 85175 |
Alexander Nikitenko | 129 | 1159 | 82102 |
Aytul Adiguzel | 124 | 964 | 71366 |
Neil Risch | 122 | 386 | 70042 |
Laurent Poirel | 117 | 621 | 53680 |
Andrei Starodumov | 114 | 697 | 57900 |
Suat Ozkorucuklu | 110 | 698 | 55607 |
Robert J. Desnick | 102 | 694 | 39698 |
Lars Berglund | 97 | 641 | 42300 |
Angel Carracedo | 88 | 885 | 38053 |
Peter A. Merkel | 85 | 430 | 34014 |
Thomas A. Pearson | 84 | 349 | 41573 |
Willy Malaisse | 80 | 1635 | 31641 |
C. Pagliarone | 79 | 796 | 27164 |