scispace - formally typeset
Search or ask a question
Institution

University of Modena and Reggio Emilia

EducationModena, Italy
About: University of Modena and Reggio Emilia is a education organization based out in Modena, Italy. It is known for research contribution in the topics: Population & Medicine. The organization has 8179 authors who have published 22418 publications receiving 671337 citations. The organization is also known as: Università degli Studi di Modena e Reggio Emilia & Universita degli Studi di Modena e Reggio Emilia.


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: The content of these European Society of Cardiology (ESC) Guidelines has been published for personal and educational use only and no commercial use is authorized.
Abstract: Supplementary Table 9, column 'Edoxaban', row 'eGFR category', '95 mL/min' (page 15). The cell should be coloured green instead of yellow. It should also read "60 mg"instead of "60 mg (use with caution in 'supranormal' renal function)."In the above-indicated cell, a footnote has also been added to state: "Edoxaban should be used in patients with high creatinine clearance only after a careful evaluation of the individual thromboembolic and bleeding risk."Supplementary Table 9, column 'Edoxaban', row 'Dose reduction in selected patients' (page 16). The cell should read "Edoxaban 60 mg reduced to 30 mg once daily if any of the following: creatinine clearance 15-50 mL/min, body weight <60 kg, concomitant use of dronedarone, erythromycin, ciclosporine or ketokonazole"instead of "Edoxaban 60 mg reduced to 30 mg once daily, and edoxaban 30 mg reduced to 15mg once daily, if any of the following: creatinine clearance of 30-50 mL/min, body weight <60 kg, concomitant us of verapamil or quinidine or dronedarone."

4,285 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
09 Jun 2011-Nature
TL;DR: YAP/TAZ are identified as sensors and mediators of mechanical cues instructed by the cellular microenvironment and are functionally required for differentiation of mesenchymal stem cells induced by ECM stiffness and for survival of endothelial cells regulated by cell geometry.
Abstract: Cells perceive their microenvironment not only through soluble signals but also through physical and mechanical cues, such as extracellular matrix (ECM) stiffness or confined adhesiveness. By mechanotransduction systems, cells translate these stimuli into biochemical signals controlling multiple aspects of cell behaviour, including growth, differentiation and cancer malignant progression, but how rigidity mechanosensing is ultimately linked to activity of nuclear transcription factors remains poorly understood. Here we report the identification of the Yorkie-homologues YAP (Yes-associated protein) and TAZ (transcriptional coactivator with PDZ-binding motif, also known as WWTR1) as nuclear relays of mechanical signals exerted by ECM rigidity and cell shape. This regulation requires Rho GTPase activity and tension of the actomyosin cytoskeleton, but is independent of the Hippo/LATS cascade. Crucially, YAP/TAZ are functionally required for differentiation of mesenchymal stem cells induced by ECM stiffness and for survival of endothelial cells regulated by cell geometry; conversely, expression of activated YAP overrules physical constraints in dictating cell behaviour. These findings identify YAP/TAZ as sensors and mediators of mechanical cues instructed by the cellular microenvironment.

4,120 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: The beneficial effects of inflammation devoted to the neutralization of dangerous/harmful agents early in life and in adulthood become detrimental late in life in a period largely not foreseen by evolution, according to the antagonistic pleiotropy theory of aging.
Abstract: In this paper we extend the “network theory of aging,” and we argue that a global reduction in the capacity to cope with a variety of stressors and a concomitant progressive increase in proinflammatory status are major characteristics of the aging process. This phenomenon, which we will refer to as “inflamm-aging,” is provoked by a continuous antigenic load and stress. On the basis of evolutionary studies, we also argue that the immune and the stress responses are equivalent and that antigens are nothing other than particular types of stressors. We also propose to return macrophage to its rightful place as central actor not only in the inflammatory response and immunity, but also in the stress response. The rate of reaching the threshold of proinflammatory status over which diseases/disabilities ensue and the individual capacity to cope with and adapt to stressors are assumed to be complex traits with a genetic component. Finally, we argue that the persistence of inflammatory stimuli over time represents the biologic background (first hit) favoring the susceptibility to age-related diseases/disabilities. A second hit (absence of robust gene variants and/or presence of frail gene variants) is likely necessary to develop overt organ-specific age-related diseases having an inflammatory pathogenesis, such as atherosclerosis, Alzheimer's disease, osteoporosis, and diabetes. Following this perspective, several paradoxes of healthy centenarians (increase of plasma levels of inflammatory cytokines, acute phase proteins, and coagulation factors) are illustrated and explained. In conclusion, the beneficial effects of inflammation devoted to the neutralization of dangerous/harmful agents early in life and in adulthood become detrimental late in life in a period largely not foreseen by evolution, according to the antagonistic pleiotropy theory of aging.

3,763 citations


Authors

Showing all 8322 results

NameH-indexPapersCitations
Carlo M. Croce1981135189007
Gregory Y.H. Lip1693159171742
Geoffrey Burnstock141148899525
Peter M. Rothwell13477967382
Claudio Franceschi12085659868
Lorenzo Galluzzi11847771436
Leonardo M. Fabbri10956660838
David N. Reinhoudt107108248814
Stefano Pileri10063543369
Andrea Bizzeti99116846880
Brian K. Shoichet9828140313
Dante Gatteschi9772748729
Roberta Sessoli9542441458
Thomas A. Buchholz9349433409
Pier Luigi Zinzani9285735476
Network Information
Related Institutions (5)
University of Bologna
115.1K papers, 3.4M citations

97% related

Sapienza University of Rome
155.4K papers, 4.3M citations

97% related

University of Padua
114.8K papers, 3.6M citations

97% related

University of Milan
139.7K papers, 4.6M citations

95% related

Katholieke Universiteit Leuven
176.5K papers, 6.2M citations

93% related

Performance
Metrics
No. of papers from the Institution in previous years
YearPapers
202376
2022230
20212,354
20202,083
20191,633
20181,450