Institution
Catholic University of Korea
Education•Seoul, South Korea•
About: Catholic University of Korea is a education organization based out in Seoul, South Korea. It is known for research contribution in the topics: Population & Cancer. The organization has 19828 authors who have published 32750 publications receiving 530956 citations.
Topics: Population, Cancer, Transplantation, Medicine, Diabetes mellitus
Papers published on a yearly basis
Papers
More filters
••
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
••
Daniel J. Klionsky1, Fábio Camargo Abdalla2, Hagai Abeliovich3, Robert T. Abraham4 +1284 more•Institutions (463)
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
••
TL;DR: The new definition recognizes the multifactorial nature of dry eye as a disease where loss of homeostasis of the tear film is the central pathophysiological concept and central to the scheme is a positive diagnosis of DED with signs and symptoms, and this is directed towards management to restore homeostosis.
Abstract: The goals of the TFOS DEWS II Definition and Classification Subcommittee were to create an evidence-based definition and a contemporary classification system for dry eye disease (DED). The new definition recognizes the multifactorial nature of dry eye as a disease where loss of homeostasis of the tear film is the central pathophysiological concept. Ocular symptoms, as a broader term that encompasses reports of discomfort or visual disturbance, feature in the definition and the key etiologies of tear film instability, hyperosmolarity, and ocular surface inflammation and damage were determined to be important for inclusion in the definition. In the light of new data, neurosensory abnormalities were also included in the definition for the first time. In the classification of DED, recent evidence supports a scheme based on the pathophysiology where aqueous deficient and evaporative dry eye exist as a continuum, such that elements of each are considered in diagnosis and management. Central to the scheme is a positive diagnosis of DED with signs and symptoms, and this is directed towards management to restore homeostasis. The scheme also allows consideration of various related manifestations, such as non-obvious disease involving ocular surface signs without related symptoms, including neurotrophic conditions where dysfunctional sensation exists, and cases where symptoms exist without demonstrable ocular surface signs, including neuropathic pain. This approach is not intended to override clinical assessment and judgment but should prove helpful in guiding clinical management and research.
1,758 citations
••
University of Bologna1, University of Utah2, University of Jena3, Imperial College London4, University of Barcelona5, Royal Liverpool and Broadgreen University Hospital NHS Trust6, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center7, University of Poitiers8, Norwegian University of Science and Technology9, University of Adelaide10, Catholic University of Korea11, University of Chicago12, University of Toronto13, University of Bordeaux14, Masaryk University15, Heidelberg University16, Leipzig University17, University of Naples Federico II18, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center19, University of Turin20, Wayne State University21, Cornell University22, Uppsala University23
TL;DR: Optimal responders to chronic myeloid leukemia treatment should continue therapy indefinitely, with careful surveillance, or they can be enrolled in controlled studies of treatment discontinuation once a deeper molecular response is achieved.
1,679 citations
••
Population Health Research Institute1, Centra2, Charles University in Prague3, University of Washington Medical Center4, Brigham and Women's Hospital5, National University of Ireland, Galway6, University College London7, Jagiellonian University8, University of Würzburg9, Semmelweis University10, Karolinska Institutet11, University of the Philippines12, University of La Frontera13, University of Cape Town14, Aalborg University15, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven16, Catholic University of Korea17, Monash University18, Universiti Teknologi MARA19, Paris Diderot University20
TL;DR: Among patients with stable atherosclerotic vascular disease, those assigned to rivaroxaban (2.5 mg twice daily) plus aspirin had better cardiovascular outcomes and more major bleeding events than those assign to aspirin alone.
Abstract: BackgroundWe evaluated whether rivaroxaban alone or in combination with aspirin would be more effective than aspirin alone for secondary cardiovascular prevention. MethodsIn this double-blind trial, we randomly assigned 27,395 participants with stable atherosclerotic vascular disease to receive rivaroxaban (2.5 mg twice daily) plus aspirin (100 mg once daily), rivaroxaban (5 mg twice daily), or aspirin (100 mg once daily). The primary outcome was a composite of cardiovascular death, stroke, or myocardial infarction. The study was stopped for superiority of the rivaroxaban-plus-aspirin group after a mean follow-up of 23 months. ResultsThe primary outcome occurred in fewer patients in the rivaroxaban-plus-aspirin group than in the aspirin-alone group (379 patients [4.1%] vs. 496 patients [5.4%]; hazard ratio, 0.76; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.66 to 0.86; P<0.001; z=−4.126), but major bleeding events occurred in more patients in the rivaroxaban-plus-aspirin group (288 patients [3.1%] vs. 170 patients [1....
1,587 citations
Authors
Showing all 19904 results
Name | H-index | Papers | Citations |
---|---|---|---|
Taeghwan Hyeon | 139 | 563 | 75814 |
Young Moo Lee | 94 | 583 | 30559 |
Zigang Dong | 90 | 553 | 27370 |
You Han Bae | 86 | 285 | 30688 |
Lei Xing | 79 | 905 | 24057 |
Christopher H. Contag | 79 | 373 | 23355 |
Daijin Kim | 76 | 695 | 25017 |
Jeong Min Lee | 73 | 647 | 22376 |
Ziad Nahas | 69 | 186 | 23852 |
Sug Hyung Lee | 64 | 454 | 21552 |
Gil Yosipovitch | 64 | 442 | 14571 |
Hyun Cheol Chung | 63 | 499 | 26405 |
Jongmin Lee | 63 | 721 | 17600 |
Nam Jin Yoo | 63 | 403 | 12692 |
Dae Yong Kim | 61 | 460 | 13824 |