scispace - formally typeset
Search or ask a question

University Health Network

HealthcareToronto, Ontario, Canada
About: University Health Network is a healthcare organization based out in Toronto, Ontario, Canada. It is known for research contribution in the topics: Population & Transplantation. The organization has 16273 authors who have published 27479 publications receiving 1145496 citations. The organization is also known as: University Health Network, Toronto & UHN.

More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
01 Nov 2009-Thyroid
TL;DR: Evidence-based recommendations are developed to inform clinical decision-making in the management of thyroid nodules and differentiated thyroid cancer and represent, in the authors' opinion, contemporary optimal care for patients with these disorders.
Abstract: Background: Thyroid nodules are a common clinical problem, and differentiated thyroid cancer is becoming increasingly prevalent. Since the American Thyroid Association's (ATA's) guidelines for the management of these disorders were revised in 2009, significant scientific advances have occurred in the field. The aim of these guidelines is to inform clinicians, patients, researchers, and health policy makers on published evidence relating to the diagnosis and management of thyroid nodules and differentiated thyroid cancer. Methods: The specific clinical questions addressed in these guidelines were based on prior versions of the guidelines, stakeholder input, and input of task force members. Task force panel members were educated on knowledge synthesis methods, including electronic database searching, review and selection of relevant citations, and critical appraisal of selected studies. Published English language articles on adults were eligible for inclusion. The American College of Physicians Guideline Gr...

10,501 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: The American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases (AASLD) practice guidelines on the management of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) were updated in 2010 as discussed by the authors.

6,964 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
Clotilde Théry1, Kenneth W. Witwer2, Elena Aikawa3, María José Alcaraz4  +414 moreInstitutions (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

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: The prevention of Cirrhosis can prevent the development of HCC and progression from chronic HCV infection to advanced fibrosis or cirrhosis may be prevented in 40% of patients who are sustained responders to new antiviral strategies, such as pegylated interferon and ribavirin.

5,557 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


Showing all 16399 results

Daniel Levy212933194778
Hyun-Chul Kim1764076183227
Deborah J. Cook173907148928
Ramachandran S. Vasan1721100138108
Josef M. Penninger154700107295
Kenji Kangawa1531117110059
George A. Wells149941114256
Anthony E. Lang149102895630
Tak W. Mak14880794871
Bruce R. Rosen14868497507
Timothy P. Hughes14583191357
David Goldstein1411301101955
Laurie H. Glimcher13546668983
Valerie W. Rusch13158173809
Han Zhang13097058863
Network Information
Related Institutions (5)
Mayo Clinic
169.5K papers, 8.1M citations

95% related

Brigham and Women's Hospital
110.5K papers, 6.8M citations

95% related

Cleveland Clinic
79.3K papers, 3.4M citations

94% related

Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai
76K papers, 3.7M citations

94% related

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

93% related

No. of papers from the Institution in previous years