Kolling Institute of Medical Research

About: Kolling Institute of Medical Research is a based out in . It is known for research contribution in the topics: Population & Pregnancy. The organization has 1149 authors who have published 2396 publications receiving 94986 citations.

Guidelines for the use and interpretation of assays for monitoring autophagy (3rd edition)

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.

Canagliflozin and Renal Outcomes in Type 2 Diabetes and Nephropathy

Abstract: Background Type 2 diabetes mellitus is the leading cause of kidney failure worldwide, but few effective long-term treatments are available. In cardiovascular trials of inhibitors of sodium...

Safety and Tumor Responses with Lambrolizumab (Anti–PD-1) in Melanoma

Abstract: A b s t r ac t Background The programmed death 1 (PD-1) receptor is a negative regulator of T-cell effector mechanisms that limits immune responses against cancer. We tested the anti–PD-1 antibody lambrolizumab (previously known as MK-3475) in patients with advanced melanoma. Methods We administered lambrolizumab intravenously at a dose of 10 mg per kilogram of body weight every 2 or 3 weeks or 2 mg per kilogram every 3 weeks in patients with advanced melanoma, both those who had received prior treatment with the immune checkpoint inhibitor ipilimumab and those who had not. Tumor responses were assessed every 12 weeks. Results A total of 135 patients with advanced melanoma were treated. Common adverse events attributed to treatment were fatigue, rash, pruritus, and diarrhea; most of the adverse events were low grade. The confirmed response rate across all dose cohorts, evaluated by central radiologic review according to the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST), version 1.1, was 38% (95% confidence interval [CI], 25 to 44), with the highest confirmed response rate observed in the cohort that received 10 mg per kilogram every 2 weeks (52%; 95% CI, 38 to 66). The response rate did not differ significantly between patients who had received prior ipilimumab treatment and those who had not (confirmed response rate, 38% [95% CI, 23 to 55] and 37% [95% CI, 26 to 49], respectively). Responses were durable in the majority of patients (median follow-up, 11 months among patients who had a response); 81% of the patients who had a response (42 of 52) were still receiving treatment at the time of analysis in March 2013. The overall median progression-free survival among the 135 patients was longer than 7 months. Conclusions In patients with advanced melanoma, including those who had had disease progression while they had been receiving ipilimumab, treatment with lambrolizumab resulted in a high rate of sustained tumor regression, with mainly grade 1 or 2 toxic effects. (Funded by Merck Sharp and Dohme; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01295827.)

Cellular actions of the insulin-like growth factor binding proteins.

Abstract: In addition to their roles in IGF transport, the six IGF-binding proteins (IGFBPs) regulate cell activity in various ways. By sequestering IGFs away from the type I IGF receptor, they may inhibit mitogenesis, differentiation, survival, and other IGF-stimulated events. IGFBP proteolysis can reverse this inhibition or generate IGFBP fragments with novel bioactivity. Alternatively, IGFBP interaction with cell or matrix components may concentrate IGFs near their receptor, enhancing IGF activity. IGF receptor-independent IGFBP actions are also increasingly recognized. IGFBP-1 interacts with alpha(5)beta(1) integrin, influencing cell adhesion and migration. IGFBP-2, -3, -5, and -6 have heparin-binding domains and can bind glycosaminoglycans. IGFBP-3 and -5 have carboxyl-terminal basic motifs incorporating heparin-binding and additional basic residues that interact with the cell surface and matrix, the nuclear transporter importin-beta, and other proteins. Serine/threonine kinase receptors are proposed for IGFBP-3 and -5, but their signaling functions are poorly understood. Other cell surface IGFBP-interacting proteins are uncharacterized as functional receptors. However, IGFBP-3 binds and modulates the retinoid X receptor-alpha, interacts with TGFbeta signaling through Smad proteins, and influences other signaling pathways. These interactions can modulate cell cycle and apoptosis. Because IGFBPs regulate cell functions by diverse mechanisms, manipulation of IGFBP-regulated pathways is speculated to offer therapeutic opportunities in cancer and other diseases.

Cancer-related inflammation and treatment effectiveness

Abstract: Inflammation is a recognised hallmark of cancer that substantially contributes to the development and progression of malignancies. In established cancers, there is increasing evidence for the roles that local immune response and systemic inflammation have in progression of tumours and survival of patients with cancer. This knowledge provides an opportunity to target these inflammatory responses to improve patient outcomes. In this Review, we examine the complex interplay between local immune responses and systemic inflammation, and their influence on clinical outcomes, and propose potential anti-inflammatory interventions for patients with cancer.