scispace - formally typeset
Search or ask a question
Institution

Karolinska Institutet

EducationStockholm, Sweden
About: Karolinska Institutet is a education organization based out in Stockholm, Sweden. It is known for research contribution in the topics: Population & Poison control. The organization has 46212 authors who have published 121142 publications receiving 6008130 citations.


Papers
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
08 Jan 1999-Cell
TL;DR: Evidence is presented that ependymal cells are neural stem cells and a novel process in the response to central nervous system injury is identified, identified in response to spinal cord injury.

1,948 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
01 Aug 2000-Gut
TL;DR: The differences between Western and Japanese pathologists in the diagnostic classification of gastrointestinal epithelial neoplastic lesions can be resolved largely by adopting the proposed terminology, which is based on cytological and architectural severity and invasion status.
Abstract: Background—Use of the conventional Western and Japanese classification systems of gastrointestinal epithelial neoplasia results in large diVerences among pathologists in the diagnosis of oesophageal, gastric, and colorectal neoplastic lesions. Aim—To develop common worldwide terminology for gastrointestinal epithelial neoplasia. Methods—Thirty one pathologists from 12 countries reviewed 35 gastric, 20 colorectal, and 21 oesophageal biopsy and resection specimens. The extent of diagnostic agreement between those with Western and Japanese viewpoints was assessed by kappa statistics. The pathologists met in Vienna to discuss the results and to develop a new consensus terminology. Results—The large diVerences between the conventional Western and Japanese diagnoses were confirmed (percentage of specimens for which there was agreement and kappa values: 37% and 0.16 for gastric; 45% and 0.27 for colorectal; and 14% and 0.01 for oesophageal lesions). There was much better agreement among pathologists (71% and 0.55 for gastric; 65% and 0.47 for colorectal; and 62% and 0.31 for oesophageal lesions) when the original assessments of the specimens were regrouped into the categories of the proposed Vienna classification of gastrointestinal epithelial neoplasia: (1) negative for neoplasia/dysplasia, (2) indefinite for neoplasia/dysplasia, (3) non-invasive low grade neoplasia (low grade adenoma/ dysplasia), (4) non-invasive high grade neoplasia (high grade adenoma/ dysplasia, non-invasive carcinoma and suspicion of invasive carcinoma), and (5) invasive neoplasia (intramucosal carcinoma, submucosal carcinoma or beyond). Conclusion—The diVerences between Western and Japanese pathologists in the diagnostic classification of gastrointestinal epithelial neoplastic lesions can be resolved largely by adopting the proposed terminology, which is based on cytological and architectural severity and invasion status. (Gut 2000;47:251‐255)

1,940 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: This paper found that participants specifically fearful of snakes but not spiders (or vice versa) showed facilitated search for the feared objects but did not differ from controls in search for nonfeared fear-relevant or fear-irrelevant, targets.
Abstract: Participants searched for discrepant fear-relevant pictures (snakes or spiders) in grid-pattern arrays of fear-irrelevant pictures belonging to the same category (flowers or mushrooms) and vice versa. Fear-relevant pictures were found more quickly than fear-irrelevant ones. Fear-relevant, but not fear-irrelevant, search was unaffected by the location of the target in the display and by the number of distractors, which suggests parallel search for fear-relevant targets and serial search for fear-irrelevant targets. Participants specifically fearful of snakes but not spiders (or vice versa) showed facilitated search for the feared objects but did not differ from controls in search for nonfeared fear-relevant or fear-irrelevant, targets. Thus, evolutionary relevant threatening stimuli were effective in capturing attention, and this effect was further facilitated if the stimulus was emotionally provocative.

1,919 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: Based on the evidence available for each item of the multimodal perioperative care pathway, the Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) Society, International Association for Surgical Metabolism and Nutrition (IASMEN) and European Society for Clinical Nutrition and Metabolicism (ESPEN) present a comprehensive evidence-based consensus review of peri operative care for colonic surgery.
Abstract: This is the fourth updated Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS®) Society guideline presenting a consensus for optimal perioperative care in colorectal surgery and providing graded recommendations for each ERAS item within the ERAS® protocol. A wide database search on English literature publications was performed. Studies on each item within the protocol were selected with particular attention paid to meta-analyses, randomised controlled trials and large prospective cohorts and examined, reviewed and graded according to Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) system. All recommendations on ERAS® protocol items are based on best available evidence; good-quality trials; meta-analyses of good-quality trials; or large cohort studies. The level of evidence for the use of each item is presented accordingly. The evidence base and recommendation for items within the multimodal perioperative care pathway are presented by the ERAS® Society in this comprehensive consensus review.

1,918 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
Paul Bastard1, Paul Bastard2, Paul Bastard3, Lindsey B. Rosen4, Qian Zhang2, Eleftherios Michailidis2, Hans-Heinrich Hoffmann2, Yu Zhang4, Karim Dorgham3, Quentin Philippot1, Quentin Philippot3, Jérémie Rosain3, Jérémie Rosain1, Vivien Béziat1, Vivien Béziat2, Vivien Béziat3, Jeremy Manry1, Jeremy Manry3, Elana Shaw4, Liis Haljasmägi5, Pärt Peterson5, Lazaro Lorenzo3, Lazaro Lorenzo1, Lucy Bizien1, Lucy Bizien3, Sophie Trouillet-Assant6, Kerry Dobbs4, Adriana Almeida de Jesus4, Alexandre Belot6, Anne Kallaste7, Emilie Catherinot, Yacine Tandjaoui-Lambiotte1, Jérémie Le Pen2, Gaspard Kerner1, Gaspard Kerner3, Benedetta Bigio2, Yoann Seeleuthner3, Yoann Seeleuthner1, Rui Yang2, Alexandre Bolze, András N Spaan2, András N Spaan8, Ottavia M. Delmonte4, Michael S. Abers4, Alessandro Aiuti9, Giorgio Casari9, Vito Lampasona9, Lorenzo Piemonti9, Fabio Ciceri9, Kaya Bilguvar10, Richard P. Lifton2, Richard P. Lifton10, Marc Vasse, David M. Smadja3, Mélanie Migaud3, Mélanie Migaud1, Jérôme Hadjadj3, Benjamin Terrier3, Darragh Duffy11, Lluis Quintana-Murci11, Lluis Quintana-Murci12, Diederik van de Beek13, Lucie Roussel14, Donald C. Vinh14, Stuart G. Tangye15, Stuart G. Tangye16, Filomeen Haerynck17, David Dalmau18, Javier Martinez-Picado19, Javier Martinez-Picado20, Petter Brodin21, Petter Brodin22, Michel C. Nussenzweig23, Michel C. Nussenzweig2, Stéphanie Boisson-Dupuis1, Stéphanie Boisson-Dupuis3, Stéphanie Boisson-Dupuis2, Carlos Rodríguez-Gallego, Guillaume Vogt3, Trine H. Mogensen24, Trine H. Mogensen25, Andrew J. Oler4, Jingwen Gu4, Peter D. Burbelo4, Jeffrey I. Cohen4, Andrea Biondi26, Laura Rachele Bettini26, Mariella D'Angiò26, Paolo Bonfanti26, Patrick Rossignol27, Julien Mayaux3, Frédéric Rieux-Laucat3, Eystein S. Husebye28, Eystein S. Husebye29, Eystein S. Husebye30, Francesca Fusco, Matilde Valeria Ursini, Luisa Imberti31, Alessandra Sottini31, Simone Paghera31, Eugenia Quiros-Roldan32, Camillo Rossi, Riccardo Castagnoli33, Daniela Montagna33, Amelia Licari33, Gian Luigi Marseglia33, Xavier Duval, Jade Ghosn3, Hgid Lab4, Covid Clinicians5, Covid-Storm Clinicians§4, CoV-Contact Cohort§3, Amsterdam Umc Covid Biobank1, Amsterdam Umc Covid Biobank2, Amsterdam Umc Covid Biobank3, Covid Human Genetic Effort2, John S. Tsang4, Raphaela Goldbach-Mansky4, Kai Kisand5, Michail S. Lionakis4, Anne Puel1, Anne Puel2, Anne Puel3, Shen-Ying Zhang2, Shen-Ying Zhang3, Shen-Ying Zhang1, Steven M. Holland4, Guy Gorochov3, Emmanuelle Jouanguy2, Emmanuelle Jouanguy3, Emmanuelle Jouanguy1, Charles M. Rice2, Aurélie Cobat1, Aurélie Cobat2, Aurélie Cobat3, Luigi D. Notarangelo4, Laurent Abel3, Laurent Abel1, Laurent Abel2, Helen C. Su4, Jean-Laurent Casanova 
23 Oct 2020-Science
TL;DR: A means by which individuals at highest risk of life-threatening COVID-19 can be identified is identified, and the hypothesis that neutralizing auto-Abs against type I IFNs may underlie critical CO VID-19 is tested.
Abstract: Interindividual clinical variability in the course of SARS-CoV-2 infection is immense. We report that at least 101 of 987 patients with life-threatening COVID-19 pneumonia had neutralizing IgG auto-Abs against IFN-ω (13 patients), the 13 types of IFN-α (36), or both (52), at the onset of critical disease; a few also had auto-Abs against the other three type I IFNs. The auto-Abs neutralize the ability of the corresponding type I IFNs to block SARS-CoV-2 infection in vitro. These auto-Abs were not found in 663 individuals with asymptomatic or mild SARS-CoV-2 infection and were present in only 4 of 1,227 healthy individuals. Patients with auto-Abs were aged 25 to 87 years and 95 were men. A B cell auto-immune phenocopy of inborn errors of type I IFN immunity underlies life-threatening COVID-19 pneumonia in at least 2.6% of women and 12.5% of men.

1,913 citations


Authors

Showing all 46522 results

NameH-indexPapersCitations
Meir J. Stampfer2771414283776
Albert Hofman2672530321405
Guido Kroemer2361404246571
Eric B. Rimm196988147119
Scott M. Grundy187841231821
Jing Wang1844046202769
Tadamitsu Kishimoto1811067130860
John Hardy1771178171694
Marc G. Caron17367499802
Ramachandran S. Vasan1721100138108
Adrian L. Harris1701084120365
Douglas F. Easton165844113809
Zulfiqar A Bhutta1651231169329
Judah Folkman165499148611
Ralph A. DeFronzo160759132993
Network Information
Related Institutions (5)
National Institutes of Health
297.8K papers, 21.3M citations

94% related

French Institute of Health and Medical Research
174.2K papers, 8.3M citations

94% related

Lund University
124.6K papers, 5M citations

93% related

Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine
79.2K papers, 4.7M citations

93% related

University of Copenhagen
149.7K papers, 5.9M citations

93% related

Performance
Metrics
No. of papers from the Institution in previous years
YearPapers
2023101
2022500
20217,763
20206,922
20196,057
20185,548