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. 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 vs. those that measure flux through the autophagy pathway (i.e., the complete process); thus, a block in macroautophagy that results in autophagosome accumulation needs to be differentiated from stimuli that result in increased 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. 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. 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 autophagy assays, we hope to encourage technical innovation in the field

[Abstract unavailable

No abstract

The primary genetic, environmental, and metabolic factors responsible for causing insulin resistance and pancreatic beta-cell failure and the precise sequence of events leading to the development of type 2 diabetes are not yet fully understood. Abnormalities of triglyceride storage and lipolysis in insulin-sensitive tissues are an early manifestation of conditions characterized by insulin resistance and are detectable before the development of postprandial or fasting hyperglycemia. Increased free fatty acid (FFA) flux from adipose tissue to nonadipose tissue, resulting from abnormalities of fat metabolism, participates in and amplifies many of the fundamental metabolic derangements that are characteristic of the insulin resistance syndrome and type 2 diabetes. It is also likely to play an important role in the progression from normal glucose tolerance to fasting hyperglycemia and conversion to frank type 2 diabetes in insulin resistant individuals. Adverse metabolic consequences of increased FFA flux, to be discussed in this review, are extremely wide ranging and include, but are not limited to: 1) dyslipidemia and hepatic steatosis, 2) impaired glucose metabolism and insulin sensitivity in muscle and liver, 3) diminished insulin clearance, aggravating peripheral tissue hyperinsulinemia, and 4) impaired pancreatic beta-cell function. The precise biochemical mechanisms whereby fatty acids and cytosolic triglycerides exert their effects remain poorly understood. Recent studies, however, suggest that the sequence of events may be the following: in states of positive net energy balance, triglyceride accumulation in "fat-buffering" adipose tissue is limited by the development of adipose tissue insulin resistance. This results in diversion of energy substrates to nonadipose tissue, which in turn leads to a complex array of metabolic abnormalities characteristic of insulin-resistant states and type 2 diabetes. Recent evidence suggests that some of the biochemical mechanisms whereby glucose and fat exert adverse effects in insulin-sensitive and insulin-producing tissues are shared, thus implicating a diabetogenic role for energy excess as a whole. Although there is now evidence that weight loss through reduction of caloric intake and increase in physical activity can prevent the development of diabetes, it remains an open question as to whether specific modulation of fat metabolism will result in improvement in some or all of the above metabolic derangements or will prevent progression from insulin resistance syndrome to type 2 diabetes.

BACKGROUND:Pediatric healthcare is critically dependent on the availability of accurate and precise laboratory biomarkers of pediatric disease, and on the availability of reference intervals to allow appropriate clinical interpretation. The development and growth of children profoundly influence normal circulating concentrations of biochemical markers and thus the respective reference intervals. There are currently substantial gaps in our knowledge of the influences of age, sex, and ethnicity on reference intervals. We report a comprehensive covariate-stratified reference interval database established from a healthy, nonhospitalized, and multiethnic pediatric population.