scispace - formally typeset
Search or ask a question
Institution

Tokyo Medical University

EducationTokyo, Tôkyô, Japan
About: Tokyo Medical University is a education organization based out in Tokyo, Tôkyô, Japan. It is known for research contribution in the topics: Population & Cancer. The organization has 5319 authors who have published 10593 publications receiving 226319 citations. The organization is also known as: Tōkyō Ika Daigaku & Tokyo Isen.


Papers
More filters
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

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: These guidelines are presented 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.
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. 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 vs. those that measure flux through the autophagy pathway (i.e., the complete process); thus, a block in macroautophagy that results in autophagosome accumulation needs to be differentiated from stimuli that result in increased 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. 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. 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 autophagy assays, we hope to encourage technical innovation in the field.

4,316 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this article, the authors summarise present global efforts to counteract this problem and point the way forward to address the pandemic of physical inactivity, concluding that, although evidence for the benefits of physical activity for health has been available since the 1950s, promotion to improve the health of populations has lagged in relation to the available evidence.

2,186 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: Recommendations are to subclassify T1 into T1a, T1b, and T1c, and to group involvement of main bronchus as T2 regardless of distance from carina; to group partial and total atelectasis/pneumonitis as T1; to reclassify diaphragm invasion as T4; and to delete mediastinal pleura invasion as a T descriptor.

1,511 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this article, the authors evaluated the validity and reproducibility of noninvasive brachial-ankle pulse wave velocity (baPWV) measurements and examined the alteration of BAWV in patients with coronary artery disease (CAD).
Abstract: The present study was conducted to evaluate the validity and reproducibility of noninvasive brachial-ankle pulse wave velocity (baPWV) measurements and to examine the alteration of baPWV in patients with coronary artery disease (CAD). Simultaneous recordings of baPWV by a simple, noninvasive method and aortic pulse wave velosity (PWV) using a catheter tip with pressure manometer were performed in 41 patients with CAD, vasospastic angina, or cardiomyopathy. In 32 subjects (15 controls and 17 patients with CAD), baPWV was recorded independently by two observers in a random manner. In 55 subjects (14 controls and 41 patients with CAD), baPWV was recorded twice by a single observer on different days. baPWV were compared among 172 patients with CAD (aged 62 +/- 8 years); 655 age-matched patients without CAD but with hypertension, diabetes mellitus, or dyslipidemia; and 595 age-matched healthy subjects without these risk factors. baPWV correlated well with aortic PWV (r=0.87, p<0.01). Pearson's correlation coefficients of interobserver and intraobserver reproducibility were r=0.98 and r=0.87, respectively. The corresponding coefficients of variation were 8.4% and 10.0%. baPWV were significantly higher in CAD patients than in non-CAD patients with risk factors, for both genders (p<0.01). In addition, baPWV were higher in non-CAD patients with risk factors than in healthy subjects without risk factors. Thus, the validity and reproducibility of baPWV measurements are considerably high, and this method seems to be an acceptable marker reflecting vascular damages. baPWV measured by this simple, noninvasive method is suitable for screening vascular damages in a large population.

1,487 citations


Authors

Showing all 5345 results

NameH-indexPapersCitations
Yuji Matsuzawa143836116711
Takashi Kadowaki13787389729
Ko Okumura134105767530
Jerry W. Shay13363974774
Katsuhiko Mikoshiba12086662394
Lawrence Steinman11963955583
Masahiro Miura8867926711
Nobutaka Hattori8897543465
Kazuhiko Yamamoto8277829369
Mitsunori Fukuda7637929345
Hiroshi Handa7655223782
Ichizo Nishino7562931331
Mamoru Watanabe7464920402
Koichi Tanaka7337618730
Hideoki Ogawa7268822332
Network Information
Related Institutions (5)
Juntendo University
23.7K papers, 644.1K citations

97% related

Kyoto Prefectural University of Medicine
17.6K papers, 420.4K citations

96% related

Yokohama City University
19.8K papers, 520.3K citations

95% related

Nagoya City University
18.5K papers, 458.9K citations

93% related

Tokyo Medical and Dental University
35.6K papers, 1M citations

92% related

Performance
Metrics
No. of papers from the Institution in previous years
YearPapers
202315
202237
2021943
2020833
2019640
2018582