scispace - formally typeset
Search or ask a question
Institution

University of Amsterdam

EducationAmsterdam, Noord-Holland, Netherlands
About: University of Amsterdam is a education organization based out in Amsterdam, Noord-Holland, Netherlands. It is known for research contribution in the topics: Population & Randomized controlled trial. The organization has 59309 authors who have published 140894 publications receiving 5984137 citations. The organization is also known as: UvA & Universiteit van Amsterdam.


Papers
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: Using this resource, it is found—and confirm by independent approaches—that the proposed quiescent/‘+4’ stem cell markers Bmi1, Tert, Hopx and Lrig1 are robustly expressed in CBC cells.
Abstract: Two types of stem cells are currently defined in small intestinal crypts: cycling crypt base columnar (CBC) cells and quiescent ‘+4’ cells. Here, we combine transcriptomics with proteomics to define a definitive molecular signature for Lgr5 + CBC cells. Transcriptional profiling of FACS‐sorted Lgr5 + stem cells and their daughters using two microarray platforms revealed an mRNA stem cell signature of 384 unique genes. Quantitative mass spectrometry on the same cell populations identified 278 proteins enriched in intestinal stem cells. The mRNA and protein data sets showed a high level of correlation and a combined signature of 510 stem cell‐enriched genes was defined. Spatial expression patterns were further characterized by mRNA in‐situ hybridization, revealing that approximately half of the genes were expressed in a gradient with highest levels at the crypt bottom, while the other half was expressed uniquely in Lgr5 + stem cells. Lineage tracing using a newly established knock‐in mouse for one of the signature genes, Smoc2 , confirmed its stem cell specificity. Using this resource, we find—and confirm by independent approaches—that the proposed quiescent/‘+4’ stem cell markers Bmi1 , Tert , Hopx and Lrig1 are robustly expressed in CBC cells.

692 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: Results indicate that idiopathic olfactory dysfunction is associated with an increased risk of developing PD of at least 10%.
Abstract: Olfactory dysfunction is an early and common symptom in Parkinson's disease (PD). In an effort to determine whether otherwise unexplained (idiopathic) olfactory dysfunction is associated with an increased risk of developing PD, we designed a prospective study in a cohort of 361 asymptomatic relatives (parents, siblings, or children) of PD patients. A combination of olfactory detection, identification, and discrimination tasks was used to select groups of hyposmic (n = 40) and normosmic (n = 38) individuals for a 2-year clinical follow-up evaluation and sequential single-photon emission computed tomography (SPECT), using [123I]beta-CIT as a dopamine transporter ligand, to assess nigrostriatal dopaminergic function at baseline and 2 years from baseline. A validated questionnaire, sensitive to the presence of parkinsonism, was used in the follow-up of the remaining 283 relatives. Two years from baseline, 10% of the individuals with idiopathic hyposmia, who also had strongly reduced [123I]beta-CIT binding at baseline, had developed clinical PD as opposed to none of the other relatives in the cohort. In the remaining nonparkinsonian hyposmic relatives, the average rate of decline in dopamine transporter binding was significantly higher than in the normosmic relatives. These results indicate that idiopathic olfactory dysfunction is associated with an increased risk of developing PD of at least 10%.

691 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: The evaluation highlighted particular difficulties in scoring the items on uninterpretable results and withdrawals, and it is essential that reviewers tailor guidelines for scoring items to their review, and ensure that all reviewers are clear on how to score studies.
Abstract: A quality assessment tool for diagnostic accuracy studies, named QUADAS, has recently been developed. Although QUADAS has been used in several systematic reviews, it has not been formally validated. The objective was to evaluate the validity and usefulness of QUADAS. Three reviewers independently rated the quality of 30 studies using QUADAS. We assessed the proportion of agreements between each reviewer and the final consensus rating. This was done for all QUADAS items combined and for each individual item. Twenty reviewers who had used QUADAS in their reviews completed a short structured questionnaire on their experience of QUADAS. Over all items, the agreements between each reviewer and the final consensus rating were 91%, 90% and 85%. The results for individual QUADAS items varied between 50% and 100% with a median value of 90%. Items related to uninterpretable test results and withdrawals led to the most disagreements. The feedback on the content of the tool was generally positive with only small numbers of reviewers reporting problems with coverage, ease of use, clarity of instructions and validity. Major modifications to the content of QUADAS itself are not necessary. The evaluation highlighted particular difficulties in scoring the items on uninterpretable results and withdrawals. Revised guidelines for scoring these items are proposed. It is essential that reviewers tailor guidelines for scoring items to their review, and ensure that all reviewers are clear on how to score studies. Reviewers should consider whether all QUADAS items are relevant to their review, and whether additional quality items should be assessed as part of their review.

691 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
Heather C Mefford1, Andrew J. Sharp2, Carl Baker1, Andy Itsara1, Zhaoshi Jiang1, Karen Buysse3, Shuwen Huang4, Viv K. Maloney4, John A. Crolla4, Diana Baralle5, Amanda L. Collins5, Catherine Mercer5, Koenraad Norga6, Thomy de Ravel6, Koenraad Devriendt6, Ernie M.H.F. Bongers7, Nicole de Leeuw7, William Reardon, Stefania Gimelli2, Frédérique Béna2, Raoul C.M. Hennekam8, Raoul C.M. Hennekam9, Alison Male9, Lorraine Gaunt10, Jill Clayton-Smith10, Ingrid Simonic, Soo Mi Park, Sarju G. Mehta, Serena Nik-Zainal, C. Geoffrey Woods, Helen V. Firth, Georgina Parkin, Marco Fichera, Santina Reitano, Mariangela Lo Giudice, Kelly Li, Iris Casuga, Adam Broomer, Bernard Conrad11, Markus Schwerzmann11, Lorenz Räber11, Sabina Gallati11, Pasquale Striano12, Antonietta Coppola12, John Tolmie13, Edward S. Tobias13, Chris Lilley13, Lluís Armengol14, Yves Spysschaert3, Patrick Verloo3, Anja De Coene3, Linde Goossens3, Geert Mortier3, Frank Speleman3, Ellen van Binsbergen15, Marcel R. Nelen15, Ron Hochstenbach15, Martin Poot15, Louise Gallagher, Michael Gill, Jon McClellan1, Mary Claire King1, Regina Regan16, Cindy Skinner, Roger E. Stevenson, Stylianos E. Antonarakis2, Caifu Chen, Xavier Estivill14, Björn Menten3, Giorgio Gimelli, Susan M. Gribble17, Stuart Schwartz18, James S. Sutcliffe19, Tom Walsh1, Samantha J. L. Knight16, Jonathan Sebat20, Corrado Romano, Charles E. Schwartz, Joris A. Veltman7, Bert B.A. de Vries7, Joris Vermeesch6, John C. K. Barber4, Lionel Willatt, May Tassabehji10, Evan E. Eichler21, Evan E. Eichler1 
TL;DR: Recurrent molecular lesions that elude syndromic classification and whose disease manifestations must be considered in a broader context of development as opposed to being assigned to a specific disease are identified.
Abstract: BACKGROUND: Duplications and deletions in the human genome can cause disease or predispose persons to disease. Advances in technologies to detect these changes allow for the routine identification of submicroscopic imbalances in large numbers of patients. METHODS: We tested for the presence of microdeletions and microduplications at a specific region of chromosome 1q21.1 in two groups of patients with unexplained mental retardation, autism, or congenital anomalies and in unaffected persons. RESULTS: We identified 25 persons with a recurrent 1.35-Mb deletion within 1q21.1 from screening 5218 patients. The microdeletions had arisen de novo in eight patients, were inherited from a mildly affected parent in three patients, were inherited from an apparently unaffected parent in six patients, and were of unknown inheritance in eight patients. The deletion was absent in a series of 4737 control persons (P=1.1x10(-7)). We found considerable variability in the level of phenotypic expression of the microdeletion; phenotypes included mild-to-moderate mental retardation, microcephaly, cardiac abnormalities, and cataracts. The reciprocal duplication was enriched in nine children with mental retardation or autism spectrum disorder and other variable features (P=0.02). We identified three deletions and three duplications of the 1q21.1 region in an independent sample of 788 patients with mental retardation and congenital anomalies. CONCLUSIONS: We have identified recurrent molecular lesions that elude syndromic classification and whose disease manifestations must be considered in a broader context of development as opposed to being assigned to a specific disease. Clinical diagnosis in patients with these lesions may be most readily achieved on the basis of genotype rather than phenotype.

690 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
29 Oct 2009-Nature
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors reported that GRB 090423 lies at a redshift of z approximate to 8.2, implying that massive stars were being produced and dying as GRBs similar to 630 Myr after the Big Bang.
Abstract: Long-duration gamma-ray bursts (GRBs) are thought to result from the explosions of certain massive stars(1), and some are bright enough that they should be observable out to redshifts of z > 20 using current technology(2-4). Hitherto, the highest redshift measured for any object was z = 6.96, for a Lyman-alpha emitting galaxy(5). Here we report that GRB 090423 lies at a redshift of z approximate to 8.2, implying that massive stars were being produced and dying as GRBs similar to 630 Myr after the Big Bang. The burst also pinpoints the location of its host galaxy.

689 citations


Authors

Showing all 59759 results

NameH-indexPapersCitations
Richard A. Flavell2311328205119
Scott M. Grundy187841231821
Stuart H. Orkin186715112182
Kenneth C. Anderson1781138126072
David A. Weitz1781038114182
Dorret I. Boomsma1761507136353
Brenda W.J.H. Penninx1701139119082
Michael Kramer1671713127224
Nicholas J. White1611352104539
Lex M. Bouter158767103034
Wolfgang Wagner1562342123391
Jerome I. Rotter1561071116296
David Cella1561258106402
David Eisenberg156697112460
Naveed Sattar1551326116368
Network Information
Related Institutions (5)
University College London
210.6K papers, 9.8M citations

94% related

University of Edinburgh
151.6K papers, 6.6M citations

94% related

University of Pennsylvania
257.6K papers, 14.1M citations

94% related

Columbia University
224K papers, 12.8M citations

94% related

University of Pittsburgh
201K papers, 9.6M citations

94% related

Performance
Metrics
No. of papers from the Institution in previous years
YearPapers
2023198
2022698
20219,648
20208,534
20197,822
20186,407