Displaying all 4 publications

Abstract:
Sort:
  1. Goh GK, Dunker AK, Foster JA, Uversky VN
    Microb Pathog, 2020 Apr;141:103976.
    PMID: 31940461 DOI: 10.1016/j.micpath.2020.103976
    The Nipah Virus (NiV) was first isolated during a 1998-9 outbreak in Malaysia. The outbreak initially infected farm pigs and then moved to humans from pigs with a case-fatality rate (CFR) of about 40%. After 2001, regular outbreaks occurred with higher CFRs (~71%, 2001-5, ~93%, 2008-12). The spread arose from drinking virus-laden palm date sap and human-to-human transmission. Intrinsic disorder analysis revealed strong correlation between the percentage of disorder in the N protein and CFR (Regression: r2 = 0.93, p 
  2. Aljabali AA, Hassan SS, Pabari RM, Shahcheraghi SH, Mishra V, Charbe NB, et al.
    Future Sci OA, 2021 Oct;7(9):FSO744.
    PMID: 34737885 DOI: 10.2144/fsoa-2021-0031
    The purpose of this review is to highlight recent scientific developments and provide an overview of virus self-assembly and viral particle dynamics. Viruses are organized supramolecular structures with distinct yet related features and functions. Plant viruses are extensively used in biotechnology, and virus-like particulate matter is generated by genetic modification. Both provide a material-based means for selective distribution and delivery of drug molecules. Through surface engineering of their capsids, virus-derived nanomaterials facilitate various potential applications for selective drug delivery. Viruses have significant implications in chemotherapy, gene transfer, vaccine production, immunotherapy and molecular imaging.
  3. 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.
  4. 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
Related Terms
Filters
Contact Us

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

External Links