scispace - formally typeset
Search or ask a question
Institution

University of Milano-Bicocca

EducationMilan, Italy
About: University of Milano-Bicocca is a education organization based out in Milan, Italy. It is known for research contribution in the topics: Population & Blood pressure. The organization has 8972 authors who have published 22322 publications receiving 620484 citations. The organization is also known as: Università degli Studi di Milano-Bicocca & Universita degli Studi di Milano-Bicocca.


Papers
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
10 Mar 2011-Blood
TL;DR: The strong correlation between serum ferritin and hepcidin at each point during the study indicates that iron itself or the kinetics of iron use in response to hypoxia may signal hePCidin down-regulation, suggesting the existence of hypoxIA-dependent mechanism(s) regulating storage iron mobilization.

134 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: Comparative, pragmatic, long-term and open trials should be done to show long- term efficacy and comparative features of the new antiepileptic drugs, and to better assess the effect on quality-of-life, cost-effectiveness, tolerability, and teratogenic potential.
Abstract: Summary Background Until the early 1990s six major compounds (carbamazepine, ethosuximide, phenobarbital, phenytoin, primidone, and valproic acid) were available for the treatment of epilepsy. However, these drugs have pharmacokinetic limitations, teratogenic potential, and a negative effect on cognitive functions that impairs the quality of patients' lives and limits the use of these drugs in some patients. In addition, 20–30% of patients are refractory to these drugs. Recent developments The development of ten new antiepileptic drugs (vigabatrin, felbamate, gabapentin, lamotrigine, topiramate, tiagabine, oxcarbazepine, levetiracetam, zonisamide, and pregabalin) has expanded treatment options. The newer drugs may be better tolerated, have fewer drug interactions, and seem to affect cognitive functions to a lesser extent than old drugs. Guidelines on the use of new antiepileptic drugs have been developed in the USA and in the UK. Both guidelines offer a clear picture of the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of the new antiepileptic drugs and agree on their use as add-on treatment in patients who do not respond to conventional drugs. The guidelines differ in the type and strength of recommendations. Whereas the US guidelines recommend treatment in newly diagnosed epilepsy with a standard drug or a new drug depending on the individual patient's characteristics, the UK guidelines recommend that a new antiepileptic drug should be considered only if there is no benefit from an old antiepileptic drug, an old drug is contraindicated, there is a previous negative experience with the same drug, or the patient is a woman of childbearing potential. Where next The limited amount of information on the new antiepileptic drugs may explain the discrepancies among the two guidelines and between these and other recommendations. Comparative, pragmatic, long-term and open trials should be done to show long-term efficacy and comparative features of the new antiepileptic drugs, and to better assess the effect on quality-of-life, cost-effectiveness, tolerability, and teratogenic potential. In addition, the conflicts should be resolved between the needs of the regulatory bodies and those of the treating physicians. Finally, there is a need for trial designs to be standardised.

134 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
Didac Carmona-Gutierrez1, Maria A. Bauer1, Andreas Zimmermann1, Andrés Aguilera2, Nicanor Austriaco3, Kathryn R. Ayscough4, Rena Balzan5, Shoshana Bar-Nun6, Antonio Barrientos7, Peter Belenky8, Marc Blondel9, Ralf J. Braun10, Michael Breitenbach10, William Wc Burhans11, Sabrina Büttner1, Sabrina Büttner12, Duccio Cavalieri13, Michael Chang14, Katrina Kf Cooper15, Manuela Côrte-Real16, Vítor Costa17, Vítor Costa18, Christophe Cullin19, Ian W. Dawes20, Jörn Dengjel21, Martin Mb Dickman22, Tobias Eisenberg1, Birthe Fahrenkrog23, Nicolas Fasel24, Kai-Uwe Fröhlich1, Ali Gargouri, Sergio Giannattasio25, Paola Goffrini26, Campbell W. Gourlay27, Chris M. Grant28, Michael Mt Greenwood29, Nicoletta Guaragnella25, Thomas Heger, Jürgen J. Heinisch30, Eva Herker31, Johannes M. Herrmann32, Sebastian J. Hofer1, Antonio Jiménez-Ruiz33, Helmut Jungwirth1, Katharina Kainz1, Dimitrios P. Kontoyiannis34, Paula Ludovico35, Paula Ludovico16, Stéphen Manon19, Enzo Martegani36, Cristina Mazzoni37, Lynn La Megeney38, Lynn La Megeney39, Christa Meisinger40, Jens Nielsen41, Jens Nielsen42, Thomas Nyström43, Heinz Hd Osiewacz44, Tiago Tf Outeiro, Hay-Oak Park45, Tobias Pendl1, Dina Petranovic41, Stéphane Picot46, Peter Polčic47, Ted Powers48, Mark Ramsdale49, Mark Rinnerthaler50, Patrick Rockenfeller27, Patrick Rockenfeller1, Christoph Ruckenstuhl1, Raffael Schaffrath51, María Segovia52, Fedor Ff Severin53, Amir Sharon6, Stephan J. Sigrist54, Cornelia Sommer-Ruck1, Maria João Sousa16, Johan Jm Thevelein55, Karin Thevissen55, Vladimir I. Titorenko56, Michel Mb Toledano57, Mick F. Tuite27, F-Nora Vögtle40, Benedikt Westermann10, Joris Winderickx55, Silke Wissing, Stefan Wölfl58, Zhaojie J Zhang59, Richard Y. Zhao60, Bing Zhou61, Lorenzo Galluzzi62, Lorenzo Galluzzi63, Guido Kroemer, Frank Madeo1 
University of Graz1, Spanish National Research Council2, Providence College3, University of Sheffield4, University of Malta5, Tel Aviv University6, University of Miami7, Brown University8, French Institute of Health and Medical Research9, University of Bayreuth10, Roswell Park Cancer Institute11, Stockholm University12, University of Florence13, University Medical Center Groningen14, Rowan University15, University of Minho16, University of Porto17, Instituto de Biologia Molecular e Celular18, University of Bordeaux19, University of New South Wales20, University of Fribourg21, Texas A&M University22, Université libre de Bruxelles23, University of Lausanne24, National Research Council25, University of Parma26, University of Kent27, University of Manchester28, Royal Military College of Canada29, University of Osnabrück30, Heinrich Pette Institute31, Kaiserslautern University of Technology32, University of Alcalá33, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center34, RMIT University35, University of Milano-Bicocca36, Sapienza University of Rome37, University of Ottawa38, Ottawa Hospital Research Institute39, University of Freiburg40, Chalmers University of Technology41, Technical University of Denmark42, University of Gothenburg43, Goethe University Frankfurt44, Ohio State University45, Centre national de la recherche scientifique46, Comenius University in Bratislava47, University of Minnesota48, University of Exeter49, University of Salzburg50, University of Kassel51, University of Málaga52, Moscow State University53, Free University of Berlin54, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven55, Concordia University56, Université Paris-Saclay57, Heidelberg University58, University of Wyoming59, University of Maryland, Baltimore60, Tsinghua University61, Paris Descartes University62, Cornell University63
TL;DR: Unified criteria for the definition of accidental, regulated, and programmed forms of cell death in yeast based on a series of morphological and biochemical criteria are proposed.
Abstract: Elucidating the biology of yeast in its full complexity has major implications for science, medicine and industry. One of the most critical processes determining yeast life and physiology is cel-lular demise. However, the investigation of yeast cell death is a relatively young field, and a widely accepted set of concepts and terms is still missing. Here, we propose unified criteria for the defi-nition of accidental, regulated, and programmed forms of cell death in yeast based on a series of morphological and biochemical criteria. Specifically, we provide consensus guidelines on the differ-ential definition of terms including apoptosis, regulated necrosis, and autophagic cell death, as we refer to additional cell death rou-tines that are relevant for the biology of (at least some species of) yeast. As this area of investigation advances rapidly, changes and extensions to this set of recommendations will be implemented in the years to come. Nonetheless, we strongly encourage the au-thors, reviewers and editors of scientific articles to adopt these collective standards in order to establish an accurate framework for yeast cell death research and, ultimately, to accelerate the pro-gress of this vibrant field of research.

134 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In patients with squamous cell carcinoma of the tongue, young age is an independent predictor of worse survival and survival analysis supports this conclusion.

133 citations


Authors

Showing all 9226 results

NameH-indexPapersCitations
Carlo Rovelli1461502103550
Giuseppe Mancia1451369139692
Marco Bersanelli142526105135
Teruki Kamon1422034115633
Marco Colonna13951271166
M. I. Martínez134125179885
A. Mennella13246393236
Roberto Salerno132119783409
Federico Ferri132137689337
Marco Paganoni132143888482
Arabella Martelli131131884029
Sandra Malvezzi129132684401
Andrea Massironi129111578457
Marco Pieri129128582914
Cristina Riccardi129162791452
Network Information
Related Institutions (5)
Sapienza University of Rome
155.4K papers, 4.3M citations

97% related

University of Bologna
115.1K papers, 3.4M citations

96% related

University of Padua
114.8K papers, 3.6M citations

96% related

University of Milan
139.7K papers, 4.6M citations

96% related

VU University Amsterdam
75.6K papers, 3.4M citations

95% related

Performance
Metrics
No. of papers from the Institution in previous years
YearPapers
2023173
2022349
20212,468
20202,253
20191,905
20181,706