Institution
State University of New York Upstate Medical University
Education•Syracuse, New York, United States•
About: State University of New York Upstate Medical University is a education organization based out in Syracuse, New York, United States. It is known for research contribution in the topics: Population & Attention deficit hyperactivity disorder. The organization has 6867 authors who have published 11415 publications receiving 391112 citations. The organization is also known as: SUNY Upstate Medical University & Upstate Medical.
Papers published on a yearly basis
Papers
More filters
••
TL;DR: A two-dose regimen of BNT162b2 conferred 95% protection against Covid-19 in persons 16 years of age or older and safety over a median of 2 months was similar to that of other viral vaccines.
Abstract: Background Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection and the resulting coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19) have afflicted tens of millions of people in a world...
10,274 citations
••
Broad Institute1, Harvard University2, Boston Children's Hospital3, University of Washington4, University of Arizona5, Cardiff University6, Google7, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai8, Samsung Medical Center9, Vertex Pharmaceuticals10, University of Michigan11, University of Cambridge12, State University of New York Upstate Medical University13, Karolinska Institutet14, University of Eastern Finland15, University of Oxford16, Wellcome Trust Centre for Human Genetics17, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center18, University of Ottawa19, University of Pennsylvania20, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill21, University of Helsinki22, University of California, San Diego23, University of Mississippi Medical Center24
TL;DR: The aggregation and analysis of high-quality exome (protein-coding region) DNA sequence data for 60,706 individuals of diverse ancestries generated as part of the Exome Aggregation Consortium (ExAC) provides direct evidence for the presence of widespread mutational recurrence.
Abstract: Large-scale reference data sets of human genetic variation are critical for the medical and functional interpretation of DNA sequence changes. Here we describe the aggregation and analysis of high-quality exome (protein-coding region) DNA sequence data for 60,706 individuals of diverse ancestries generated as part of the Exome Aggregation Consortium (ExAC). This catalogue of human genetic diversity contains an average of one variant every eight bases of the exome, and provides direct evidence for the presence of widespread mutational recurrence. We have used this catalogue to calculate objective metrics of pathogenicity for sequence variants, and to identify genes subject to strong selection against various classes of mutation; identifying 3,230 genes with near-complete depletion of predicted protein-truncating variants, with 72% of these genes having no currently established human disease phenotype. Finally, we demonstrate that these data can be used for the efficient filtering of candidate disease-causing variants, and for the discovery of human 'knockout' variants in protein-coding genes.
8,758 citations
••
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
••
Broad Institute1, Harvard University2, QIMR Berghofer Medical Research Institute3, Cardiff University4, North Carolina State University5, Trinity College, Dublin6, University of Edinburgh7, Karolinska Institutet8, Uppsala University9, University of Southern California10, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill11, University College London12, National Health Service13, University of Oxford14, University of Aberdeen15, Strathclyde Institute of Pharmacy and Biomedical Sciences16, State University of New York Upstate Medical University17, University of Coimbra18
TL;DR: The extent to which common genetic variation underlies the risk of schizophrenia is shown, using two analytic approaches, and the major histocompatibility complex is implicate, which is shown to involve thousands of common alleles of very small effect.
Abstract: Schizophrenia is a severe mental disorder with a lifetime risk of about 1%, characterized by hallucinations, delusions and cognitive deficits, with heritability estimated at up to 80%(1,2). We performed a genome-wide association study of 3,322 European individuals with schizophrenia and 3,587 controls. Here we show, using two analytic approaches, the extent to which common genetic variation underlies the risk of schizophrenia. First, we implicate the major histocompatibility complex. Second, we provide molecular genetic evidence for a substantial polygenic component to the risk of schizophrenia involving thousands of common alleles of very small effect. We show that this component also contributes to the risk of bipolar disorder, but not to several non-psychiatric diseases.
4,573 citations
••
University of Vermont1, Delft University of Technology2, Northwestern University3, Vrije Universiteit Brussel4, University of British Columbia5, Leiden University Medical Center6, University of Oregon7, University of Maryland, Baltimore8, State University of New York Upstate Medical University9, University of Massachusetts Lowell10
TL;DR: A definition of a joint coordinate system (JCS) for the shoulder, elbow, wrist, and hand is proposed and a standard for the local axis system in each articulating segment or bone is generated.
3,866 citations
Authors
Showing all 6923 results
Name | H-index | Papers | Citations |
---|---|---|---|
Eugene Braunwald | 230 | 1711 | 264576 |
Mark J. Daly | 204 | 763 | 304452 |
Stephen V. Faraone | 188 | 1427 | 140298 |
Joseph Biederman | 179 | 1012 | 117440 |
Dorret I. Boomsma | 176 | 1507 | 136353 |
Michael John Owen | 160 | 1110 | 135795 |
Joseph Jankovic | 153 | 1146 | 93840 |
Hakon Hakonarson | 152 | 968 | 101604 |
Michael Conlon O'Donovan | 142 | 736 | 118857 |
Stanley Nattel | 132 | 778 | 65700 |
Michael E. Thase | 131 | 923 | 75995 |
Richard D. Gelber | 127 | 467 | 81399 |
Christopher A. Walsh | 123 | 455 | 55874 |
Michael C. Neale | 121 | 620 | 66343 |
Russell A. Barkley | 119 | 355 | 60109 |