Michael T. Lotze

Bio: Michael T. Lotze is an academic researcher from University of Pittsburgh. The author has contributed to research in topics: Immune system & Immunotherapy. The author has an hindex of 103, co-authored 448 publications receiving 42985 citations. Previous affiliations of Michael T. Lotze include University of Tokyo & GlaxoSmithKline.

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.

Guidelines for the use and interpretation of assays for monitoring autophagy

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. 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.

The Beclin 1 network regulates autophagy and apoptosis

Abstract: Beclin 1, the mammalian orthologue of yeast Atg6, has a central role in autophagy, a process of programmed cell survival, which is increased during periods of cell stress and extinguished during the cell cycle. It interacts with several cofactors (Atg14L, UVRAG, Bif-1, Rubicon, Ambra1, HMGB1, nPIST, VMP1, SLAM, IP3R, PINK and survivin) to regulate the lipid kinase Vps-34 protein and promote formation of Beclin 1-Vps34-Vps15 core complexes, thereby inducing autophagy. In contrast, the BH3 domain of Beclin 1 is bound to, and inhibited by Bcl-2 or Bcl-XL. This interaction can be disrupted by phosphorylation of Bcl-2 and Beclin 1, or ubiquitination of Beclin 1. Interestingly, caspase-mediated cleavage of Beclin 1 promotes crosstalk between apoptosis and autophagy. Beclin 1 dysfunction has been implicated in many disorders, including cancer and neurodegeneration. Here, we summarize new findings regarding the organization and function of the Beclin 1 network in cellular homeostasis, focusing on the cross-regulation between apoptosis and autophagy.

The nuclear factor HMGB1 mediates hepatic injury after murine liver ischemia-reperfusion

Abstract: High-mobility group box 1 (HMGB1) is a nuclear factor that is released extracellularly as a late mediator of lethality in sepsis as well as after necrotic, but not apoptotic, death. Here we demonstrate that in contrast to the delayed role of HMGB1 in the systemic inflammation of sepsis, HMGB1 acts as an early mediator of inflammation and organ damage in hepatic ischemia reperfusion (I/R) injury. HMGB1 levels were increased during liver I/R as early as 1 h after reperfusion and then increased in a time-dependent manner up to 24 h. Inhibition of HMGB1 activity with neutralizing antibody significantly decreased liver damage after I/R, whereas administration of recombinant HMGB1 worsened I/R injury. Treatment with neutralizing antibody was associated with less phosphorylation of c-Jun NH2-terminal kinase and higher nuclear factor–κB DNA binding in the liver after I/R. Toll-like receptor 4 (TLR4)-defective (C3H/Hej) mice exhibited less damage in the hepatic I/R model than did wild-type (C3H/HeOuj) mice. Anti-HMGB1 antibody failed to provide protection in C3H/Hej mice, but successfully reduced damage in C3H/Ouj mice. Together, these results demonstrate that HMGB1 is an early mediator of injury and inflammation in liver I/R and implicates TLR4 as one of the receptors that is involved in the process.

Therapy of murine tumors with tumor peptide-pulsed dendritic cells: dependence on T cells, B7 costimulation, and T helper cell 1-associated cytokines.

Abstract: Antigen presentation by host dendritic cells (DC) is critical for the initiation of adaptive immune responses. We have previously demonstrated in immunogenic murine tumor models that bone marrow (BM)-derived DC pulsed ex vivo with synthetic tumor-associated peptides, naturally expressed by tumor cells, serve as effective antitumor vaccines, protecting animals against an otherwise lethal tumor challenge (Mayordomo, J.I., T. Zorina, W.J. Storkus, C. Celluzzi, L.D. Falo, C.J. Melief, T. Ildstad, W.M. Kast, A.B. DeLeo, and M.T. Lotze. 1995. Nature Med. 1:1297-1302). However, T cell-defined epitopes have not been identified for most human cancers. To explore the utility of this approach in the treatment of tumors expressing as yet uncharacterized epitopes, syngeneic granulocyte/macrophage colony-stimulating factor-stimulated and BM-derived DC, pulsed with unfractionated acid-eluted tumor peptides (Storkus, W.J., H.J. Zeh III, R.D. Salter, and M.T. Lotze. 1993. J. Immunother. 14:94-103) were used to treat mice bearing spontaneous, established tumors. The adoptive transfer of 5 x 10(5) tumor peptide-pulsed DC dramatically suppressed the growth of weakly immunogenic tumors in day 4 to day 8 established MCA205 (H-2b) and TS/A (H-2d) tumor models, when applied in three biweekly intravenous injections. Using the immunogenic C3 (H-2b) tumor model in B6 mice, tumor peptide-pulsed DC therapy resulted in the erradication of established d14 tumors and long-term survival in 100% of treated animals. The DC-driven antitumor immune response was primarily cell mediated since the transfer of spleen cells, but not sera, from immunized mice efficiently protected sublethally irradiated naive mice against a subsequent tumor challenge. Furthermore, depletion of either CD4+ or CD8+ T cells from tumor-bearing mice before therapy totally suppressed the therapeutic efficacy of DC pulsed with tumor-derived peptides. Costimulation of the host cell-mediated antitumor immunity was critical since inoculation of the chimeric fusion protein CTLA4-Ig virtually abrogated the therapeutic effects of peptide-pulsed DC in vivo. The analysis of the cytokine pattern in the draining lymph nodes and spleens of tumor-bearing mice immunized with DC pulsed with tumor-eluted peptides revealed a marked upregulation of interleukin (IL) 4 and interferon (IFN) gamma production, as compared with mice immunized with DC alone or DC pulsed with irrelevant peptides. DC-induced antitumor effects were completely blocked by coadministration of neutralizing monoclonal antibody directed against T helper cell 1-associated cytokines (such as IL-12, tumor necrosis factor alpha, IFN-gamma), and eventually, but not initially, blocked by anti-mIL-4 mAb. Based on these results, we believe that DC pulsed with acid-eluted peptides derived from autologous tumors represents a novel approach to the treatment of established, weakly immunogenic tumors, and serves as a basis for designing clinical trials in cancer patients.

Dendritic cells and the control of immunity

Abstract: B and T lymphocytes are the mediators of immunity, but their function is under the control of dendritic cells. Dendritic cells in the periphery capture and process antigens, express lymphocyte co-stimulatory molecules, migrate to lymphoid organs and secrete cytokines to initiate immune responses. They not only activate lymphocytes, they also tolerize T cells to antigens that are innate to the body (self-antigens), thereby minimizing autoimmune reactions. Once a neglected cell type, dendritic cells can now be readily obtained in sufficient quantities to allow molecular and cell biological analysis. With knowledge comes the realization that these cells are a powerful tool for manipulating the immune system.

The role of pattern-recognition receptors in innate immunity: update on Toll-like receptors

Abstract: The discovery of Toll-like receptors (TLRs) as components that recognize conserved structures in pathogens has greatly advanced understanding of how the body senses pathogen invasion, triggers innate immune responses and primes antigen-specific adaptive immunity. Although TLRs are critical for host defense, it has become apparent that loss of negative regulation of TLR signaling, as well as recognition of self molecules by TLRs, are strongly associated with the pathogenesis of inflammatory and autoimmune diseases. Furthermore, it is now clear that the interaction between TLRs and recently identified cytosolic innate immune sensors is crucial for mounting effective immune responses. Here we describe the recent advances that have been made by research into the role of TLR biology in host defense and disease.

Immunobiology of Dendritic Cells

Abstract: Dendritic cells (DCs) are antigen-presenting cells with a unique ability to induce primary immune responses. DCs capture and transfer information from the outside world to the cells of the adaptive immune system. DCs are not only critical for the induction of primary immune responses, but may also be important for the induction of immunological tolerance, as well as for the regulation of the type of T cell-mediated immune response. Although our understanding of DC biology is still in its infancy, we are now beginning to use DC-based immunotherapy protocols to elicit immunity against cancer and infectious diseases.

Interleukin-10 and the interleukin-10 receptor.

Abstract: Interleukin-10 (IL-10), first recognized for its ability to inhibit activation and effector function of T cells, monocytes, and macrophages, is a multifunctional cytokine with diverse effects on most hemopoietic cell types. The principal routine function of IL-10 appears to be to limit and ultimately terminate inflammatory responses. In addition to these activities, IL-10 regulates growth and/or differentiation of B cells, NK cells, cytotoxic and helper T cells, mast cells, granulocytes, dendritic cells, keratinocytes, and endothelial cells. IL-10 plays a key role in differentiation and function of a newly appreciated type of T cell, the T regulatory cell, which may figure prominently in control of immune responses and tolerance in vivo. Uniquely among hemopoietic cytokines, IL-10 has closely related homologs in several virus genomes, which testify to its crucial role in regulating immune and inflammatory responses. This review highlights findings that have advanced our understanding of IL-10 and its receptor, as well as its in vivo function in health and disease.

Myeloid-derived suppressor cells as regulators of the immune system.

Abstract: Myeloid-derived suppressor cells (MDSCs) are a heterogeneous population of cells that expand during cancer, inflammation and infection, and that have a remarkable ability to suppress T-cell responses. These cells constitute a unique component of the immune system that regulates immune responses in healthy individuals and in the context of various diseases. In this Review, we discuss the origin, mechanisms of expansion and suppressive functions of MDSCs, as well as the potential to target these cells for therapeutic benefit.