Rubinstein-Taybi syndrome (RSTS) is an autosomal dominant disorder, caused by loss-of-function variants in CREBBP or EP300. Affected individuals present with distinctive craniofacial features, broad thumbs and/or halluces, and intellectual disability. RSTS phenotype has been well characterized in individuals of European descent but not in other populations. In this study, individuals from diverse populations with RSTS were assessed by clinical examination and facial analysis technology. Clinical data of 38 individuals from 14 different countries were analyzed. The median age was 7 years (age range: 7 months to 47 years), and 63% were females. The most common phenotypic features in all population groups included broad thumbs and/or halluces in 97%, convex nasal ridge in 94%, and arched eyebrows in 92%. Face images of 87 individuals with RSTS (age range: 2 months to 47 years) were collected for evaluation using facial analysis technology. We compared images from 82 individuals with RSTS against 82 age- and sex-matched controls and obtained an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) of 0.99 (p
In 2008, we published the first set of guidelines for standardizing research in autophagy. Since then, this topic has received increasing attention, and many scientists have entered the field. Our knowledge base and relevant new technologies have also been expanding. Thus, it is important to formulate on a regular basis updated guidelines for monitoring autophagy in different organisms. Despite numerous reviews, there continues to be confusion regarding acceptable methods to evaluate autophagy, especially in multicellular eukaryotes. Here, we present a set of guidelines for investigators to select and interpret methods to examine autophagy and related processes, and for reviewers to provide realistic and reasonable critiques of reports that are focused on these processes. These guidelines are not meant to be a dogmatic set of rules, because the appropriateness of any assay largely depends on the question being asked and the system being used. Moreover, no individual assay is perfect for every situation, calling for the use of multiple techniques to properly monitor autophagy in each experimental setting. Finally, several core components of the autophagy machinery have been implicated in distinct autophagic processes (canonical and noncanonical autophagy), implying that genetic approaches to block autophagy should rely on targeting two or more autophagy-related genes that ideally participate in distinct steps of the pathway. Along similar lines, because multiple proteins involved in autophagy also regulate other cellular pathways including apoptosis, not all of them can be used as a specific marker for bona fide autophagic responses. Here, we critically discuss current methods of assessing autophagy and the information they can, or cannot, provide. Our ultimate goal is to encourage intellectual and technical innovation in the field.