Displaying all 3 publications

Abstract:
Sort:
  1. Outcome of immunosuppression in children with IgA vasculitis-related nephritis
    Rohner K, Marlais M, Ahn YH, Ali A, Alsharief A, Novak AB, et al.
    Nephrol Dial Transplant, 2024 Jul 31;39(8):1299-1309.
    PMID: 38211969 DOI: 10.1093/ndt/gfae009
    BACKGROUND: Immunoglobulin A vasculitis with nephritis (IgAVN) is the most common vasculitis in children. Due to a lack of evidence, treatment recommendations are based on expert opinion, resulting in variation. The aim of this study was to describe the clinical presentation, treatment and outcome of an extremely large cohort of children with biopsy-proven IgAVN in order to identify prognostic risk factors and signals of treatment efficacy.

    METHODS: Retrospective data were collected on 1148 children with biopsy-proven IgAVN between 2005 and 2019 from 41 international paediatric nephrology centres across 25 countries and analysed using multivariate analysis. The primary outcome was estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) and persistent proteinuria at last follow-up.

    RESULTS: The median follow-up was 3.7 years (interquartile range 2-6.2). At last follow-up, 29% of patients had an eGFR <90 mL/min/1.73 m2, 36% had proteinuria and 3% had chronic kidney disease stage 4-5. Older age, lower eGFR at onset, hypertension and histological features of tubular atrophy and segmental sclerosis were predictors of poor outcome. There was no evidence to support any specific second-line immunosuppressive regimen being superior to others, even when further analysing subgroups of children with reduced kidney function, nephrotic syndrome or hypoalbuminemia at onset. Delayed start of immunosuppressive treatment was associated with a lower eGFR at last follow-up.

    CONCLUSION: In this large retrospective cohort, key features associated with disease outcome are highlighted. Importantly, there was no evidence to support that any specific immunosuppressive treatments were superior to others. Further discovery science and well-conducted clinical trials are needed to define accurate treatment and improve outcomes of IgAVN.

  2. Fulltext Guidelines for the use and interpretation of assays for monitoring autophagy (3rd edition)
    Klionsky DJ, Abdelmohsen K, Abe A, Abedin MJ, Abeliovich H, Acevedo Arozena A, et al.
    Autophagy, 2016;12(1):1-222.
    PMID: 26799652 DOI: 10.1080/15548627.2015.1100356
  3. Fulltext Guidelines for the use and interpretation of assays for monitoring autophagy (4th edition)1
    Klionsky DJ, Abdel-Aziz AK, Abdelfatah S, Abdellatif M, Abdoli A, Abel S, et al.
    Autophagy, 2021 Jan;17(1):1-382.
    PMID: 33634751 DOI: 10.1080/15548627.2020.1797280
    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.
Related Terms
    Try searching for something
Filters
Contact Us

Please provide feedback to Administrator (afdal@afpm.org.my)

External Links