Guidelines for the use and interpretation of assays for monitoring autophagy in higher eukaryotes

Research in autophagy continues to accelerate,(1) and as a result many new scientists are entering the field. Accordingly, it is important to establish a standard set of criteria for monitoring macroautophagy in different organisms. Recent reviews have described the range of assays that have been used for this purpose.(2,3) There are many useful and convenient methods that can be used to monitor macroautophagy in yeast, but relatively few in other model systems, and there is much confusion regarding acceptable methods to measure macroautophagy in higher eukaryotes. A key point that needs to be emphasized is that there is a difference between measurements that monitor the numbers of autophagosomes versus those that measure flux through the autophagy pathway; thus, a block in macroautophagy that results in autophagosome accumulation needs to be differentiated from fully functional autophagy that includes delivery to, and degradation within, lysosomes (in most higher eukaryotes) or the vacuole (in plants and fungi). Here, we present a set of guidelines for the selection and interpretation of the methods that can be used by investigators who are attempting to examine macroautophagy and related processes, as well as by reviewers who need to provide realistic and reasonable critiques of papers that investigate these processes. This set of guidelines is 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 verify an autophagic response.

The James Lind Library: explaining and illustrating the evolution of fair tests of medical treatments

The James Lind Library (www.jameslindlibrary.org) has been established to improve public and professional general knowledge about fair tests of treatments in healthcare and their history. Its foundation was laid ten years ago at the Royal College of Physicians of Edinburgh, and its administrative centre is in the College's Sibbald Library, one of the most important collections of historic medical manuscripts, papers and books in the world. The James Lind Library is a website that introduces visitors to the principles of fair tests of treatments, with a series of short, illustrated essays, which are currently available in English, Arabic, Chinese, French, Portuguese, Russian and Spanish. A 100-page book-- Testing Treatments--is now available free through the website, both in English and in Arabic and Spanish translations. To illustrate the evolution of ideas related to fair tests of treatments from 2000 BC to the present, the James Lind Library contains key passages and images from manuscripts, books and journal articles, many of them accompanied by commentaries, biographies, portraits and other relevant documents and images, including audio and video files. New material is being added to the website continuously, as relevant new records are identified and as methods for testing treatments evolve. A multinational, multilingual editorial team oversees the development of the website, which currently receives tens of thousands of visitors every month.

The FReedom from Ischemic Events-New Dimensions for Survival (FRIENDS) registry: design of a prospective cohort study of patients with advanced peripheral artery disease.

BACKGROUND Advanced lower extremity peripheral artery disease (PAD), whether presenting as acute limb ischemia (ALI) or chronic critical limb ischemia (CLI), is associated with high rates of cardiovascular ischemic events, amputation, and death. Past research has focused on strategies of revascularization, but few data are available that prospectively evaluate the impact of key process of care factors (spanning pre-admission, acute hospitalization, and post-discharge) that might contribute to improving short and long-term health outcomes. METHODS/DESIGN The FRIENDS registry is designed to prospectively evaluate a range of patient and health system care delivery factors that might serve as future targets for efforts to improve limb and systemic outcomes for patients with ALI or CLI. This hypothesis-driven registry was designed to evaluate the contributions of: (i) pre-hospital limb ischemia symptom duration, (ii) use of leg revascularization strategies, and (iii) use of risk-reduction pharmacotherapies, as pre-specified factors that may affect amputation-free survival. Sequential patients would be included at an index "vascular specialist-defined" ALI or CLI episode, and patients excluded only for non-vascular etiologies of limb threat. Data including baseline demographics, functional status, co-morbidities, pre-hospital time segments, and use of medical therapies; hospital-based use of revascularization strategies, time segments, and pharmacotherapies; and rates of systemic ischemic events (e.g., myocardial infarction, stroke, hospitalization, and death) and limb ischemic events (e.g., hospitalization for revascularization or amputation) will be recorded during a minimum of one year follow-up. DISCUSSION The FRIENDS registry is designed to evaluate the potential impact of key factors that may contribute to adverse outcomes for patients with ALI or CLI. Definition of new "health system-based" therapeutic targets could then become the focus of future interventional clinical trials for individuals with advanced PAD.

Combining Enzalutamide with Abiraterone, Prednisone, and Androgen Deprivation Therapy in the STAMPEDE Trial.

There are compelling reasons to study the addition of both enzalutamide and abiraterone, in combination, to standard-of-care for hormone-naïve prostate cancer. Through a protocol amendment, this will be assessed in the STAMPEDE trial, with overall survival as primary outcome measure.