Author
Giulia Petroni
Other affiliations: University of Florence
Bio: Giulia Petroni is an academic researcher from Cornell University. The author has contributed to research in topics: Autophagy & Cancer cell. The author has an hindex of 8, co-authored 21 publications receiving 303 citations. Previous affiliations of Giulia Petroni include University of Florence.
Topics: Autophagy, Cancer cell, Immunogenic cell death, Apoptosis, Interferon
Papers
More filters
University of Michigan1, Cornell University2, University of Pennsylvania3, University of Massachusetts Medical School4, Baylor College of Medicine5, University of Naples Federico II6, Spanish National Research Council7, Complutense University of Madrid8, New York University9, University of Rome Tor Vergata10, Boston Children's Hospital11, NewYork–Presbyterian Hospital12, University of Pittsburgh13, University of Paris14, French Institute of Health and Medical Research15, National University of Cuyo16, Albert Einstein College of Medicine17, University of New Mexico18, Goethe University Frankfurt19, Weizmann Institute of Science20, University of Turku21, Sapienza University of Rome22, Virginia Commonwealth University23, St. Jude Children's Research Hospital24, Discovery Institute25, University of Copenhagen26, University of Tromsø27, Eötvös Loránd University28, Merck & Co.29, University of Freiburg30, Babraham Institute31, University of South Australia32, University of Adelaide33, University of Oviedo34, University of Chicago35, University of Graz36, National Institutes of Health37, City University of New York38, Queens College39, University of Tokyo40, University of Zurich41, University of British Columbia42, Austrian Academy of Sciences43, University of California, San Francisco44, Russian Academy of Sciences45, University Medical Center Groningen46, University of Cambridge47, University of Glasgow48, Rutgers University49, University of Padua50, Kazan Federal University51, University of Bern52, University of Oxford53, Oslo University Hospital54, University of Oslo55, Foundation for Research & Technology – Hellas56, University of Crete57, Francis Crick Institute58, Osaka University59, Chinese Academy of Sciences60, Harvard University61, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai62, Shanghai Jiao Tong University63, Karolinska Institutet64
TL;DR: In this paper, preclinical data linking autophagy dysfunction to the pathogenesis of major human disorders including cancer as well as cardiovascular, neurodegenerative, metabolic, pulmonary, renal, infectious, musculoskeletal, and ocular disorders.
Abstract: Autophagy is a core molecular pathway for the preservation of cellular and organismal homeostasis. Pharmacological and genetic interventions impairing autophagy responses promote or aggravate disease in a plethora of experimental models. Consistently, mutations in autophagy-related processes cause severe human pathologies. Here, we review and discuss preclinical data linking autophagy dysfunction to the pathogenesis of major human disorders including cancer as well as cardiovascular, neurodegenerative, metabolic, pulmonary, renal, infectious, musculoskeletal, and ocular disorders.
365 citations
TL;DR: Qualitative approaches for measuring ICD markers in vitro and ex vivo for the discovery of next-generation antineoplastic agents, the development of personalized anticancer regimens, and the identification of optimal therapeutic combinations for the clinical management of cancer are outlined.
Abstract: Chemotherapy, radiation therapy, as well as targeted anticancer agents can induce clinically relevant tumor-targeting immune responses, which critically rely on the antigenicity of malignant cells and their capacity to generate adjuvant signals. In particular, immunogenic cell death (ICD) is accompanied by the exposure and release of numerous damage-associated molecular patterns (DAMPs), which altogether confer a robust adjuvanticity to dying cancer cells, as they favor the recruitment and activation of antigen-presenting cells. ICD-associated DAMPs include surface-exposed calreticulin (CALR) as well as secreted ATP, annexin A1 (ANXA1), type I interferon, and high-mobility group box 1 (HMGB1). Additional hallmarks of ICD encompass the phosphorylation of eukaryotic translation initiation factor 2 subunit-α (EIF2S1, better known as eIF2α), the activation of autophagy, and a global arrest in transcription and translation. Here, we outline methodological approaches for measuring ICD markers in vitro and ex vivo for the discovery of next-generation antineoplastic agents, the development of personalized anticancer regimens, and the identification of optimal therapeutic combinations for the clinical management of cancer.
344 citations
TL;DR: It is shown that tumor cell autophagy opposes inflammatory cell death following radiation therapy and can be inhibited to enhance antitumor responses, suggesting that mitochondrial outer membrane permeabilization may represent a valid target for boosting radiation therapy immunogenicity in patients with breast cancer.
Abstract: Autophagy supports both cellular and organismal homeostasis. However, whether autophagy should be inhibited or activated for cancer therapy remains unclear. Deletion of essential autophagy genes increased the sensitivity of mouse mammary carcinoma cells to radiation therapy in vitro and in vivo (in immunocompetent syngeneic hosts). Autophagy-deficient cells secreted increased amounts of type I interferon (IFN), which could be limited by CGAS or STING knockdown, mitochondrial DNA depletion or mitochondrial outer membrane permeabilization blockage via BCL2 overexpression or BAX deletion. In vivo, irradiated autophagy-incompetent mammary tumors elicited robust immunity, leading to improved control of distant nonirradiated lesions via systemic type I IFN signaling. Finally, a genetic signature of autophagy had negative prognostic value in patients with breast cancer, inversely correlating with mitochondrial abundance, type I IFN signaling and effector immunity. As clinically useful autophagy inhibitors are elusive, our findings suggest that mitochondrial outer membrane permeabilization may represent a valid target for boosting radiation therapy immunogenicity in patients with breast cancer.
183 citations
TL;DR: The main immunomodulatory effects of targeted anticancer agents are discussed and potential avenues to harness them in support of superior clinical efficacy are explored.
115 citations
TL;DR: It is reported that mouse mammary carcinoma TSA cells lacking Casp3 or subjected to chemical caspase inhibition were as sensitive to the cytostatic and cytotoxic effects of radiation therapy in vitro as their control counterparts, yet secreted increased levels of type I IFN.
Abstract: Caspase 3 (CASP3) has a key role in the execution of apoptosis, and many cancer cells are believed to disable CASP3 as a mechanism of resistance to cytotoxic therapeutics. Alongside, CASP3 regulates stress-responsive immunomodulatory pathways, including secretion of type I interferon (IFN). Here, we report that mouse mammary carcinoma TSA cells lacking Casp3 or subjected to chemical caspase inhibition were as sensitive to the cytostatic and cytotoxic effects of radiation therapy (RT) in vitro as their control counterparts, yet secreted increased levels of type I IFN. This effect originated from the accrued accumulation of irradiated cells with cytosolic DNA, likely reflecting the delayed breakdown of cells experiencing mitochondrial permeabilization in the absence of CASP3. Casp3-/- TSA cells growing in immunocompetent syngeneic mice were more sensitive to RT than their CASP3-proficient counterparts, and superior at generating bona fide abscopal responses in the presence of an immune checkpoint blocker. Finally, multiple genetic signatures of apoptotic proficiency were unexpectedly found to have robust negative (rather than positive) prognostic significance in a public cohort of breast cancer patients. However, these latter findings were not consistent with genetic signatures of defective type I IFN signaling, which were rather associated with improved prognosis. Differential gene expression analysis on patient subgroups with divergent prognosis (as stratified by independent signatures of apoptotic proficiency) identified SLC7A2 as a new biomarker with independent prognostic value in breast cancer patients. With the caveats associated with the retrospective investigation of heterogeneous, public databases, our data suggest that apoptotic caspases may influence the survival of breast cancer patients (or at least some subsets thereof) via mechanisms not necessarily related to type I IFN signaling as they identify a novel independent prognostic biomarker that awaits prospective validation.
89 citations
Cited by
More filters
Journal Article•
TL;DR: Coppe et al. as mentioned in this paper showed that human cells induced to senesce by genotoxic stress secrete myriad factors associated with inflammation and malignancy, including interleukin (IL)-6 and IL-8.
Abstract: 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
2,150 citations
Daniel J. Klionsky1, Amal Kamal Abdel-Aziz2, Sara Abdelfatah3, Mahmoud Abdellatif4 +2980 more•Institutions (777)
TL;DR: In this article, the authors 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.
Abstract: 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.
1,129 citations
NanoString Technologies1, Ghent University2, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven3, Cornell University4, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center5, Ludwig Institute for Cancer Research6, Charles University in Prague7, Istituto Superiore di Sanità8, National Institutes of Health9, Institute of Cancer Research10, Merck & Co.11, University of Manchester12, University of California, San Diego13, Harvard University14, University of Navarra15, University of Pittsburgh16, McMaster University17, University of Tromsø18, Humanitas University19, University of Turin20, QIMR Berghofer Medical Research Institute21, Université de Montréal22, University of São Paulo23, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center24, Yale University25
TL;DR: An updated operational definition of immunogenic cell death is provided, the key factors that dictate the ability of dying cells to drive an adaptive immune response are discussed, and experimental assays that are currently available for the assessment of ICD in vitro and in vivo are summarized.
Abstract: Cells succumbing to stress via regulated cell death (RCD) can initiate an adaptive immune response associated with immunological memory, provided they display sufficient antigenicity and adjuvanticity. Moreover, multiple intracellular and microenvironmental features determine the propensity of RCD to drive adaptive immunity. Here, we provide an updated operational definition of immunogenic cell death (ICD), discuss the key factors that dictate the ability of dying cells to drive an adaptive immune response, summarize experimental assays that are currently available for the assessment of ICD in vitro and in vivo, and formulate guidelines for their interpretation.
544 citations
TL;DR: Immunostimulatory chemotherapeutics stand out as promising partners for combination regimens involving immune checkpoint inhibitors, although additional research is required to identify the optimal regimens.
Abstract: Conventional chemotherapeutics have been developed into clinically useful agents based on their ability to preferentially kill malignant cells, generally owing to their elevated proliferation rate. Nonetheless, the clinical activity of various chemotherapies is now known to involve the stimulation of anticancer immunity either by initiating the release of immunostimulatory molecules from dying cancer cells or by mediating off-target effects on immune cell populations. Understanding the precise immunological mechanisms that underlie the efficacy of chemotherapy has the potential not only to enable the identification of superior biomarkers of response but also to accelerate the development of synergistic combination regimens that enhance the clinical effectiveness of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) relative to their effectiveness as monotherapies. Indeed, accumulating evidence supports the clinical value of combining appropriately dosed chemotherapies with ICIs. In this Review, we discuss preclinical and clinical data on the immunostimulatory effects of conventional chemotherapeutics in the context of ICI-based immunotherapy.
536 citations
University of Michigan1, Cornell University2, University of Pennsylvania3, University of Massachusetts Medical School4, University of Naples Federico II5, Baylor College of Medicine6, Spanish National Research Council7, Complutense University of Madrid8, New York University9, University of Rome Tor Vergata10, Boston Children's Hospital11, NewYork–Presbyterian Hospital12, University of Pittsburgh13, French Institute of Health and Medical Research14, University of Paris15, National University of Cuyo16, Albert Einstein College of Medicine17, University of New Mexico18, Goethe University Frankfurt19, Weizmann Institute of Science20, University of Turku21, Sapienza University of Rome22, Virginia Commonwealth University23, St. Jude Children's Research Hospital24, Discovery Institute25, University of Copenhagen26, University of Tromsø27, Eötvös Loránd University28, Merck & Co.29, University of Freiburg30, Babraham Institute31, University of South Australia32, University of Adelaide33, University of Oviedo34, University of Chicago35, University of Graz36, National Institutes of Health37, City University of New York38, Queens College39, University of Tokyo40, University of Zurich41, Austrian Academy of Sciences42, University of British Columbia43, University of California, San Francisco44, Russian Academy of Sciences45, University Medical Center Groningen46, University of Cambridge47, University of Glasgow48, Rutgers University49, University of Padua50, University of Bern51, Kazan Federal University52, University of Oxford53, University of Oslo54, Oslo University Hospital55, University of Crete56, Foundation for Research & Technology – Hellas57, Francis Crick Institute58, Osaka University59, Chinese Academy of Sciences60, Harvard University61, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai62, Shanghai Jiao Tong University63, Karolinska Institutet64
TL;DR: In this paper, preclinical data linking autophagy dysfunction to the pathogenesis of major human disorders including cancer as well as cardiovascular, neurodegenerative, metabolic, pulmonary, renal, infectious, musculoskeletal, and ocular disorders.
Abstract: Autophagy is a core molecular pathway for the preservation of cellular and organismal homeostasis. Pharmacological and genetic interventions impairing autophagy responses promote or aggravate disease in a plethora of experimental models. Consistently, mutations in autophagy-related processes cause severe human pathologies. Here, we review and discuss preclinical data linking autophagy dysfunction to the pathogenesis of major human disorders including cancer as well as cardiovascular, neurodegenerative, metabolic, pulmonary, renal, infectious, musculoskeletal, and ocular disorders.
365 citations