scispace - formally typeset
Search or ask a question
Institution

Peking University

EducationBeijing, Beijing, China
About: Peking University is a education organization based out in Beijing, Beijing, China. It is known for research contribution in the topics: Population & Cancer. The organization has 143902 authors who have published 181007 publications receiving 4103666 citations. The organization is also known as: PKU & Beida.


Papers
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
Zefang Tang1, Chenwei Li1, Boxi Kang1, Ge Gao1, Cheng Li1, Zemin Zhang 
TL;DR: GEPIA (Gene Expression Profiling Interactive Analysis) fills in the gap between cancer genomics big data and the delivery of integrated information to end users, thus helping unleash the value of the current data resources.
Abstract: Tremendous amount of RNA sequencing data have been produced by large consortium projects such as TCGA and GTEx, creating new opportunities for data mining and deeper understanding of gene functions. While certain existing web servers are valuable and widely used, many expression analysis functions needed by experimental biologists are still not adequately addressed by these tools. We introduce GEPIA (Gene Expression Profiling Interactive Analysis), a web-based tool to deliver fast and customizable functionalities based on TCGA and GTEx data. GEPIA provides key interactive and customizable functions including differential expression analysis, profiling plotting, correlation analysis, patient survival analysis, similar gene detection and dimensionality reduction analysis. The comprehensive expression analyses with simple clicking through GEPIA greatly facilitate data mining in wide research areas, scientific discussion and the therapeutic discovery process. GEPIA fills in the gap between cancer genomics big data and the delivery of integrated information to end users, thus helping unleash the value of the current data resources. GEPIA is available at http://gepia.cancer-pku.cn/.

5,980 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: The Pan-Cancer initiative compares the first 12 tumor types profiled by TCGA with a major opportunity to develop an integrated picture of commonalities, differences and emergent themes across tumor lineages.
Abstract: The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) Research Network has profiled and analyzed large numbers of human tumors to discover molecular aberrations at the DNA, RNA, protein and epigenetic levels. The resulting rich data provide a major opportunity to develop an integrated picture of commonalities, differences and emergent themes across tumor lineages. The Pan-Cancer initiative compares the first 12 tumor types profiled by TCGA. Analysis of the molecular aberrations and their functional roles across tumor types will teach us how to extend therapies effective in one cancer type to others with a similar genomic profile.

5,294 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: The Compact Muon Solenoid (CMS) detector at the Large Hadron Collider (LHC) at CERN as mentioned in this paper was designed to study proton-proton (and lead-lead) collisions at a centre-of-mass energy of 14 TeV (5.5 TeV nucleon-nucleon) and at luminosities up to 10(34)cm(-2)s(-1)
Abstract: The Compact Muon Solenoid (CMS) detector is described. The detector operates at the Large Hadron Collider (LHC) at CERN. It was conceived to study proton-proton (and lead-lead) collisions at a centre-of-mass energy of 14 TeV (5.5 TeV nucleon-nucleon) and at luminosities up to 10(34)cm(-2)s(-1) (10(27)cm(-2)s(-1)). At the core of the CMS detector sits a high-magnetic-field and large-bore superconducting solenoid surrounding an all-silicon pixel and strip tracker, a lead-tungstate scintillating-crystals electromagnetic calorimeter, and a brass-scintillator sampling hadron calorimeter. The iron yoke of the flux-return is instrumented with four stations of muon detectors covering most of the 4 pi solid angle. Forward sampling calorimeters extend the pseudo-rapidity coverage to high values (vertical bar eta vertical bar <= 5) assuring very good hermeticity. The overall dimensions of the CMS detector are a length of 21.6 m, a diameter of 14.6 m and a total weight of 12500 t.

5,193 citations

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


Authors

Showing all 144711 results

NameH-indexPapersCitations
Zhong Lin Wang2452529259003
Yoshua Bengio2021033420313
Jing Wang1844046202769
Richard Peto183683231434
Xiaohui Fan183878168522
H. S. Chen1792401178529
Yang Gao1682047146301
Yang Yang1642704144071
Hua Zhang1631503116769
Rory Collins162489193407
Dongyuan Zhao160872106451
Wei Li1581855124748
Stephen J. O'Brien153106293025
Rui Zhang1512625107917
Kevin J. Gaston15075085635
Network Information
Related Institutions (5)
Shanghai Jiao Tong University
184.6K papers, 3.4M citations

95% related

Chinese Academy of Sciences
634.8K papers, 14.8M citations

93% related

Tsinghua University
200.5K papers, 4.5M citations

93% related

National University of Singapore
165.4K papers, 5.4M citations

92% related

University of Southern California
169.9K papers, 7.8M citations

91% related

Performance
Metrics
No. of papers from the Institution in previous years
YearPapers
20241
2023367
20221,554
202117,268
202016,525
201914,464