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.

For example, 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 versus those that measure flux through the autophagy pathway (i.e., the complete process including the amount and rate of cargo sequestered and degraded). In particular, a block in macroautophagy that results in autophagosome accumulation must be differentiated from stimuli that increase 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. It is worth emphasizing here that lysosomal digestion is a stage of autophagy and evaluating its competence is a crucial part of the evaluation of autophagic flux, or complete autophagy.

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. Along these lines, because of the potential for pleiotropic effects due to blocking autophagy through genetic manipulation, it is imperative to target by gene knockout or RNA interference more than one autophagy-related protein. In addition, some individual Atg proteins, or groups of proteins, are involved in other cellular pathways implying that not all Atg proteins can be used as a specific marker for an autophagic process. 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 assays, we hope to encourage technical innovation in the field.

/pdf/guidelines-for-the-use-and-interpretation-of-assays-for-ijf2t30pbq.pdf

Guidelines for the use and interpretation of assays for monitoring autophagy (3rd edition)

Over the past decade, the Nomenclature Committee on Cell Death (NCCD) has formulated guidelines for the definition and interpretation of cell death from morphological, biochemical, and functional perspectives. Since the field continues to expand and novel mechanisms that orchestrate multiple cell death pathways are unveiled, we propose an updated classification of cell death subroutines focusing on mechanistic and essential (as opposed to correlative and dispensable) aspects of the process. As we provide molecularly oriented definitions of terms including intrinsic apoptosis, extrinsic apoptosis, mitochondrial permeability transition (MPT)-driven necrosis, necroptosis, ferroptosis, pyroptosis, parthanatos, entotic cell death, NETotic cell death, lysosome-dependent cell death, autophagy-dependent cell death, immunogenic cell death, cellular senescence, and mitotic catastrophe, we discuss the utility of neologisms that refer to highly specialized instances of these processes. The mission of the NCCD is to provide a widely accepted nomenclature on cell death in support of the continued development of the field.

https://biblio.ugent.be/publication/8555786/file/8555788.pdf

Molecular mechanisms of cell death: recommendations of the Nomenclature Committee on Cell Death 2018.

In 2009, the Nomenclature Committee on Cell Death (NCCD) proposed a set of recommendations for the definition of distinct cell death morphologies and for the appropriate use of cell death-related terminology, including 'apoptosis', 'necrosis' and 'mitotic catastrophe'. In view of the substantial progress in the biochemical and genetic exploration of cell death, time has come to switch from morphological to molecular definitions of cell death modalities. Here we propose a functional classification of cell death subroutines that applies to both in vitro and in vivo settings and includes extrinsic apoptosis, caspase-dependent or -independent intrinsic apoptosis, regulated necrosis, autophagic cell death and mitotic catastrophe. Moreover, we discuss the utility of expressions indicating additional cell death modalities. On the basis of the new, revised NCCD classification, cell death subroutines are defined by a series of precise, measurable biochemical features.

/pdf/molecular-definitions-of-cell-death-subroutines-q5g428rlyi.pdf

Molecular definitions of cell death subroutines: recommendations of the Nomenclature Committee on Cell Death 2012

PLoS BIOLOGY Senescence-Associated Secretory Phenotypes Reveal Cell-Nonautonomous Functions of Oncogenic RAS and the p53 Tumor Suppressor Jean-Philippe Coppe 1 , Christopher K. Patil 1[ , Francis Rodier 1,2[ , Yu Sun 3 , Denise P. Mun oz 1,2 , Joshua Goldstein 1¤ , Peter S. Nelson 3 , Pierre-Yves Desprez 1,4 , Judith Campisi 1,2* 1 Life Sciences Division, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, Berkeley, California, United States of America, 2 Buck Institute for Age Research, Novato, California, United States of America, 3 Division of Human Biology, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, Washington, United States of America, 4 California Pacific Medical Center Research Institute, San Francisco, California, United States of America Cellular senescence suppresses cancer by arresting cell proliferation, essentially permanently, in response to oncogenic stimuli, including genotoxic stress. We modified the use of antibody arrays to provide a quantitative assessment of factors secreted by senescent cells. We show that human cells induced to senesce by genotoxic stress secrete myriad factors associated with inflammation and malignancy. This senescence-associated secretory phenotype (SASP) developed slowly over several days and only after DNA damage of sufficient magnitude to induce senescence. Remarkably similar SASPs developed in normal fibroblasts, normal epithelial cells, and epithelial tumor cells after genotoxic stress in culture, and in epithelial tumor cells in vivo after treatment of prostate cancer patients with DNA- damaging chemotherapy. In cultured premalignant epithelial cells, SASPs induced an epithelial–mesenchyme transition and invasiveness, hallmarks of malignancy, by a paracrine mechanism that depended largely on the SASP factors interleukin (IL)-6 and IL-8. Strikingly, two manipulations markedly amplified, and accelerated development of, the SASPs: oncogenic RAS expression, which causes genotoxic stress and senescence in normal cells, and functional loss of the p53 tumor suppressor protein. Both loss of p53 and gain of oncogenic RAS also exacerbated the promalignant paracrine activities of the SASPs. Our findings define a central feature of genotoxic stress-induced senescence. Moreover, they suggest a cell-nonautonomous mechanism by which p53 can restrain, and oncogenic RAS can promote, the development of age-related cancer by altering the tissue microenvironment. Citation: Coppe JP, Patil CK, Rodier F, Sun Y, Mun oz DP, et al. (2008) Senescence-associated secretory phenotypes reveal cell-nonautonomous functions of oncogenic RAS and the p53 tumor suppressor. PLoS Biol 6(12): e301. doi:10.1371/journal.pbio.0060301 Introduction Cancer is a multistep disease in which cells acquire increasingly malignant phenotypes. These phenotypes are acquired in part by somatic mutations, which derange normal controls over cell proliferation (growth), survival, invasion, and other processes important for malignant tumorigenesis [1]. In addition, there is increasing evidence that the tissue microenvironment is an important determinant of whether and how malignancies develop [2,3]. Normal tissue environ- ments tend to suppress malignant phenotypes, whereas abnormal tissue environments such at those caused by inﬂammation can promote cancer progression. Cancer development is restrained by a variety of tumor suppressor genes. Some of these genes permanently arrest the growth of cells at risk for neoplastic transformation, a process termed cellular senescence [4–6]. Two tumor suppressor pathways, controlled by the p53 and p16INK4a/pRB proteins, regulate senescence responses. Both pathways integrate multiple aspects of cellular physiology and direct cell fate towards survival, death, proliferation, or growth arrest, depending on the context [7,8]. Several lines of evidence indicate that cellular senescence is a potent tumor-suppressive mechanism [4,9,10]. Many poten- tially oncogenic stimuli (e.g., dysfunctional telomeres, DNA PLoS Biology | www.plosbiology.org damage, and certain oncogenes) induce senescence [6,11]. Moreover, mutations that dampen the p53 or p16INK4a/pRB pathways confer resistance to senescence and greatly increase cancer risk [12,13]. Most cancers harbor mutations in one or both of these pathways [14,15]. Lastly, in mice and humans, a senescence response to strong mitogenic signals, such as those delivered by certain oncogenes, prevents premalignant lesions from progressing to malignant cancers [16–19]. Academic Editor: Julian Downward, Cancer Research UK, United Kingdom Received June 27, 2008; Accepted October 22, 2008; Published December 2, 2008 Copyright: O 2008 Coppe et al. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited. Abbreviations: CM, conditioned medium; DDR, DNA damage response; ELISA, enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay; EMT, epithelial–mesenchymal transition; GSE, genetic suppressor element; IL, interleukin; MIT, mitoxantrone; PRE, presenescent; PrEC, normal human prostate epithelial cell; REP, replicative exhaustion; SASP, senescence-associated secretory phenotype; SEN, senescent; shRNA, short hairpin RNA; XRA, X-irradiation * To whom correspondence should be addressed. E-mail: jcampisi@lbl.gov [ These authors contributed equally to this work. ¤ Current address: Genomics Institute of the Novartis Research Foundation, San Diego, California, United States of America December 2008 | Volume 6 | Issue 12 | e301

Senescence-Associated Secretory Phenotypes Reveal Cell-Nonautonomous Functions of Oncogenic RAS and the p53 Tumor Suppressor

For most species, aging promotes a host of degenerative pathologies that are characterized by debilitating losses of tissue or cellular function. However, especially among vertebrates, aging also promotes hyperplastic pathologies, the most deadly of which is cancer. In contrast to the loss of function that characterizes degenerating cells and tissues, malignant (cancerous) cells must acquire new (albeit aberrant) functions that allow them to develop into a lethal tumor. This review discusses the idea that, despite seemingly opposite characteristics, the degenerative and hyperplastic pathologies of aging are at least partly linked by a common biological phenomenon: a cellular stress response known as cellular senescence. The senescence response is widely recognized as a potent tumor suppressive mechanism. However, recent evidence strengthens the idea that it also drives both degenerative and hyperplastic pathologies, most likely by promoting chronic inflammation. Thus, the senescence response may be the result of antagonistically pleiotropic gene action.

/pdf/aging-cellular-senescence-and-cancer-3wk3hl6x7h.pdf

Aging, Cellular Senescence, and Cancer

We have examined the regulation of the proliferating cell nuclear antigen gene (PCNA) in a hamster fibroblast cell line (tk-ts 13) which is temperature sensitive for growth These tk-ts 13 cells, at the restrictive temperature, are growth arrested in the G1 phase of the cell cycle The cells were stably transfected with a full length human PCNA gene, and the resulting cell lines (K525 cells) were analyzed We find that, in growth arrested K525 cells, a cryptopromoter is activated in the transfected human PCNA gene The cryptopromoter resides in intron 4 which is necessary for proper regulation of the PCNA gene Removal of this intron leads to increased expression of PCNA in cells which have entered the Go state An Alu sequence residing in intron 4 is implicated as the promoter element which is active during growth arrest © 1992 Wiley-Liss, Inc

A cryptopromoter is activated in the proliferating cell nuclear antigen gene of growth arrested cells.

Life-span extension :

Protein degradation via the proteosome.

All living organisms are subject to progressive loss of function and damage to their tissues, a process known as aging. At the cellular level, the accumulation of damage to DNA, proteins, and organelles induces cellular senescence, a stress-response pathway that likely influences the aging process. Although the senescence arrest program was initially described in vitro, accumulating evidence suggests that this damage response program occurs in a variety of pathologic settings. This review discusses aspects of the senescence program, their interrelationships with damage arrest pathways, the cell cycle, and the impact of senescence in vivo.

The senescence arrest program and the cell cycle.

The detection of senescent cells has become an important area of research in the aging field. Due to the complexity of the senescence program and the lack of a unique signature for senescence, the detection of these cells remains problematic. This is especially true for in vivo detection in aged or diseased tissue samples. This chapter outlines approaches for the detection of senescent cells based upon methods established for mesenchymal cells in culture. A stepwise approach to the detection of senescent cells using multiple techniques is provided.

Christian Sell

Papers

A cryptopromoter is activated in the proliferating cell nuclear antigen gene of growth arrested cells.

Life-span extension :

Protein degradation via the proteosome.

The senescence arrest program and the cell cycle.

Detecting Senescence: Methods and Approaches