References of "Lingor, Paul"
     in
Bookmark and Share    
Full Text
Peer Reviewed
See detailAlpha-synuclein deregulates the expression of COL4A2 and impairs ER-Golgi function
Paiva, Isabel; Jain, Garav; Lázaro, Diana F et al

in Neurobiology of Disease (2018)

Detailed reference viewed: 53 (0 UL)
Full Text
Peer Reviewed
See detailmiR-182-5p and miR-183-5p Act as GDNF Mimics in Dopaminergic Midbrain Neurons.
Roser, Anna-Elisa; Caldi Gomes, Lucas; Halder, Rashi UL et al

in Molecular Therapy: Nucleic Acids (2018)

Detailed reference viewed: 58 (0 UL)
Full Text
Peer Reviewed
See detailAn Observational Study of the Effect of Levodopa-Carbidopa Intestinal Gel on Activities of Daily Living and Quality of Life in Advanced Parkinson's Disease Patients.
Krüger, Rejko UL; Lingor, Paul; Doskas, Triantafyllos et al

in Advances in therapy (2017)

INTRODUCTION: Continuous delivery of levodopa-carbidopa intestinal gel (LCIG) by percutaneous endoscopic gastrojejunostomy (PEG-J) in advanced Parkinson's disease (PD) patients reduces variability in ... [more ▼]

INTRODUCTION: Continuous delivery of levodopa-carbidopa intestinal gel (LCIG) by percutaneous endoscopic gastrojejunostomy (PEG-J) in advanced Parkinson's disease (PD) patients reduces variability in plasma levels, providing better control of motor fluctuations ("on" and "off" states). The MONOTREAT study assessed the effect of LCIG on activities of daily living, motor and non-motor symptoms, and quality of life in advanced PD patients. METHODS: This prospective, observational study included patients with advanced, levodopa-responsive PD with either 2-4 h of "off" time or 2 h of dyskinesia daily. Patients received LCIG via PEG-J for 16 h continuously. Effectiveness was assessed using Unified PD Rating Scale parts II and III, the Non-Motor Symptom Scale, and the PD Questionnaire-8. RESULTS: The mean (SD) treatment duration was 275 (157) days. Patients experienced significant improvement from baseline in activities of daily living at final visit (p < 0.05) as well as at months 3 and 6 (p < 0.0001). Patients also experienced significant improvements from baseline in quality of life and non-motor symptoms at all time points (p < 0.001 for all). Specifically, patients manifested significant improvements in mean change from baseline at every study visit in five of nine non-motor symptom score domains: sleep/fatigue, mood/cognition, gastrointestinal tract, urinary, and miscellaneous. One-third of patients (32.8%) experienced an adverse event; 21.9% experienced a serious adverse event; 11.1% discontinued because of an adverse event. CONCLUSION: This study demonstrated significant and clinically relevant improvements in measures of activities of daily living, quality of life, and a specific subset of non-motor symptoms after treatment with LCIG. FUNDING: AbbVie Inc. [less ▲]

Detailed reference viewed: 98 (3 UL)
Full Text
Peer Reviewed
See detailAdvanced stages of PD: interventional therapies and related patient-centered care
Krüger, Rejko UL; Hilker, Rudiger; Winkler, Christian et al

in Journal of neural transmission (Vienna, Austria : 1996) (2016)

During the last decades, symptomatic treatment of motor symptoms of Parkinson's disease (PD) improved continuously and is reflected by long-range independency of the patient during the disease course ... [more ▼]

During the last decades, symptomatic treatment of motor symptoms of Parkinson's disease (PD) improved continuously and is reflected by long-range independency of the patient during the disease course. However, advanced stages of PD still represent an important challenge to patients, caregivers and treating physicians. In patients with advanced PD, interventional therapy strategies are increasingly applied. These device-related treatment strategies using pump-based continuous dopaminergic stimulation (CDS) or deep brain stimulation (DBS) opened new treatment options especially if motor complications predominate. Well-designed clinical studies on these interventional therapeutic approaches provided class 1 evidence for the efficacy of DBS and CDS in advanced PD and opened new perspectives for their use in earlier disease stages also. Therefore, careful selection of patients amenable to the (semi)invasive therapy options becomes more and more important and requires an interdisciplinary setting that accounts for (i) optimal patient information and awareness, (ii) selection of best individual treatment modality, (iii) training of relatives and caregivers, (iv) management of complications, and (v) follow-up care. Here, we address these topics by summarizing current state-of-the-art in patient selection, providing specificities of treatment options and troubleshooting, and defining steps towards an optimized patient-centered care. Interventional therapies pioneer in the area of individualized treatment approaches for PD, and may be complemented in the future by biomarker-based improved stratification and by closed-loop systems for adaptive therapeutic strategies. In the present review, we summarize the proceedings of an Expert Workshop on Parkinson's disease held on November 22, 2014 in Frankfurt, Germany. [less ▲]

Detailed reference viewed: 175 (9 UL)
Full Text
Peer Reviewed
See detailGuidelines for the use and interpretation of assays for monitoring autophagy.
Klionsky, Daniel J.; Abdalla, Fabio C.; Abeliovich, Hagai et al

in Autophagy (2012), 8(4), 445-544

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 ... [more ▼]

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. [less ▲]

Detailed reference viewed: 560 (49 UL)