@article{KuzkinaRoessleSegeretal.2023,
  author    = {Kuzkina, A. and R{\"o}ßle, J. and Seger, A. and Panzer, C. and Kohl, A. and Maltese, V. and Musacchio, T. and Blaschke, S. J. and Tamg{\"u}ney, G. and Kaulitz, S. and Rak, K. and Scherzad, A. and Zimmermann, P. H. and Klussmann, J. P. and Hackenberg, S. and Volkmann, J. and Sommer, C. and Sommerauer, M. and Doppler, K.},
  title     = {Combining skin and olfactory α-synuclein seed amplification assays (SAA)—towards biomarker-driven phenotyping in synucleinopathies},
  series = {npj Parkinson's Disease},
  volume    = {9},
  journal   = {npj Parkinson's Disease},
  issn      = {2373-8057},
  doi       = {10.1038/s41531-023-00519-8},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-357687},
  year      = {2023},
  abstract  = {Seed amplification assays (SAA) are becoming commonly used in synucleinopathies to detect α-synuclein aggregates. Studies in Parkinson's disease (PD) and isolated REM-sleep behavior disorder (iRBD) have shown a considerably lower sensitivity in the olfactory epithelium than in CSF or skin. To get an insight into α-synuclein (α-syn) distribution within the nervous system and reasons for low sensitivity, we compared SAA assessment of nasal brushings and skin biopsies in PD (n = 27) and iRBD patients (n = 18) and unaffected controls (n = 30). α-syn misfolding was overall found less commonly in the olfactory epithelium than in the skin, which could be partially explained by the nasal brushing matrix exerting an inhibitory effect on aggregation. Importantly, the α-syn distribution was not uniform: there was a higher deposition of misfolded α-syn across all sampled tissues in the iRBD cohort compared to PD (supporting the notion of RBD as a marker of a more malignant subtype of synucleinopathy) and in a subgroup of PD patients, misfolded α-syn was detectable only in the olfactory epithelium, suggestive of the recently proposed brain-first PD subtype. Assaying α-syn of diverse origins, such as olfactory (part of the central nervous system) and skin (peripheral nervous system), could increase diagnostic accuracy and allow better stratification of patients.},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{SchendzielorzFroelichRaketal.2016,
  author    = {Schendzielorz, P. and Froelich, K. and Rak, K. and Gehrke, T. and Scherzad, A. and Hagen, R. and Radeloff, A.},
  title     = {Labeling Adipose-Derived Stem Cells with Hoechst 33342: Usability and Effects on Differentiation Potential and DNA Damage},
  series = {Stem Cells International},
  journal   = {Stem Cells International},
  doi       = {10.1155/2016/6549347},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-181268},
  year      = {2016},
  abstract  = {Adipose-derived stem cells (ASCs) have been extensively studied in the field of stem cell research and possess numerous clinical applications. Cell labeling is an essential component of various experimental protocols and Hoechst 33342 (H33342) represents a cost-effective and easy methodology for live staining. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the labeling of rat ASCs with two different concentrations of H33342 (0.5 μg/mL and 5 μg/mL), with particular regard to usability, interference with cell properties, and potential DNA damage. Hoechst 33342 used at a low concentration of 0.5 μg/mL did not significantly affect cell proliferation, viability, or differentiation potential of the ASCs, nor did it cause any significant DNA damage as measured by the olive tail moment. High concentrations of 5 μg/mL H33342, however, impaired the proliferation and viability of the ASCs, and considerable DNA damage was observed. Undesirable colabeling of unlabeled cocultivated cells was seen in particular with higher concentrations of H33342, independent of varying washing procedures. Hence, H33342 labeling with lower concentrations represents a usable method, which does not affect the tested cell properties. However, the colabeling of adjacent cells is a drawback of the technique.},
  language  = {en}
}