Showing papers by "Isabella Caniggia published in 2016"

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

Abstract: 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.

Erratum to: Guidelines for the use and interpretation of assays for monitoring autophagy (3rd edition) (Autophagy, 12, 1, 1-222, 10.1080/15548627.2015.1100356

Abstract: Author(s): Klionsky, DJ; Abdelmohsen, K; Abe, A; Abedin, MJ; Abeliovich, H; Arozena, AA; Adachi, H; Adams, CM; Adams, PD; Adeli, K; Adhihetty, PJ; Adler, SG; Agam, G; Agarwal, R; Aghi, MK; Agnello, M; Agostinis, P; Aguilar, PV; Aguirre-Ghiso, J; Airoldi, EM; Ait-Si-Ali, S; Akematsu, T; Akporiaye, ET; Al-Rubeai, M; Albaiceta, GM; Albanese, C; Albani, D; Albert, ML; Aldudo, J; Algul, H; Alirezaei, M; Alloza, I; Almasan, A; Almonte-Beceril, M; Alnemri, ES; Alonso, C; Altan-Bonnet, N; Altieri, DC; Alvarez, S; Alvarez-Erviti, L; Alves, S; Amadoro, G; Amano, A; Amantini, C; Ambrosio, S; Amelio, I; Amer, AO; Amessou, M; Amon, A; An, Z; Anania, FA; Andersen, SU; Andley, UP; Andreadi, CK; Andrieu-Abadie, N; Anel, A; Ann, DK; Anoopkumar-Dukie, S; Antonioli, M; Aoki, H; Apostolova, N; Aquila, S; Aquilano, K; Araki, K; Arama, E; Aranda, A; Araya, J; Arcaro, A; Arias, E; Arimoto, H; Ariosa, AR; Armstrong, JL; Arnould, T; Arsov, I; Asanuma, K; Askanas, V; Asselin, E; Atarashi, R; Atherton, SS; Atkin, JD; Attardi, LD; Auberger, P; Auburger, G; Aurelian, L; Autelli, R

Aberrant TGFβ Signaling Contributes to Altered Trophoblast Differentiation in Preeclampsia

Abstract: TGFβ has been implicated in preeclampsia, but its intracellular signaling via phosphorylated mothers against decapentaplegic (SMADs) and SMAD-independent proteins in the placenta remains elusive. Here we show that TGFβ receptor-regulated SMAD2 was activated (Ser(465/467) phosphorylation) in syncytiotrophoblast and proliferating extravillous trophoblast cells of first-trimester placenta, whereas inhibitory SMAD7 located primarily to cytotrophoblast cells. SMAD2 phosphorylation decreased with advancing gestation, whereas SMAD7 expression increased and shifted to syncytiotrophoblasts toward term. Additionally, we found that the TGFβ SMAD-independent signaling via partitioning defective protein 6 (PARD6)/Smad ubiquitylation regulatory factor was activated at approximately 10-12 weeks of gestation in cytotrophoblast and extravillous trophoblast cells comprising the anchoring column. Placentae from early-onset, but not late-onset, preeclampsia exhibited elevated SMAD2 phosphorylation and SMAD7 levels. Whereas PARD6 expression increased and SMURF1 levels decreased in preeclamptic placentae, their association increased. SMAD2 phosphorylation by TGFβ in villous explants and BeWo cells resulted in a reduction of Glial cell missing-1 (GCM1) and fusogenic protein syncytin-1 while increasing cell cycle regulators cyclin E-1 (CCNE1) and cyclin-dependent kinase 4. SMAD7 abrogated the proliferative effects of TGFβ. CCNE1 levels were increased in preeclamptic placentae, whereas GCM1 was markedly reduced. In addition, TGFβ treatment increased the association of PARD6 and SMURF1 and down-regulated Ras homolog gene family, member A (RHOA) GTPase in JEG3 cells. In a wound assay, TGFβ treatment increased the association of PARD6 and SMURF1 and triggered JEG3 cell migration through increased cellular protrusions. Taken together, our data indicate that TGFβ signaling via both SMAD2/7 and PARD6/SMURF1 pathways plays a role in trophoblast growth and differentiation. Altered SMAD regulation of GCM1 and CCNE1 and aberrant expression/activation of PARD6/SMURF1 may contribute to the pathogenesis of preeclampsia by affecting cellular pathways associated with this disorder.