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.

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

Recent discoveries are redefining our view of cellular senescence as a trigger of tissue remodelling that acts during normal embryonic development and upon tissue damage. To achieve this, senescent cells arrest their own proliferation, recruit phagocytic immune cells and promote tissue renewal. This sequence of events - senescence, followed by clearance and then regeneration - may not be efficiently completed in aged tissues or in pathological contexts, thereby resulting in the accumulation of senescent cells. Increasing evidence indicates that both pro-senescent therapies and antisenescent therapies can be beneficial. In cancer and during active tissue repair, pro-senescent therapies contribute to minimize the damage by limiting proliferation and fibrosis, respectively. Conversely, antisenescent therapies may help to eliminate accumulated senescent cells and to recover tissue function.

Cellular senescence: from physiology to pathology.

Cellular senescence has historically been viewed as an irreversible cell-cycle arrest mechanism that acts to protect against cancer, but recent discoveries have extended its known role to complex biological processes such as development, tissue repair, ageing and age-related disorders. New insights indicate that, unlike a static endpoint, senescence represents a series of progressive and phenotypically diverse cellular states acquired after the initial growth arrest. A deeper understanding of the molecular mechanisms underlying the multi-step progression of senescence and the development and function of acute versus chronic senescent cells may lead to new therapeutic strategies for age-related pathologies and extend healthy lifespan.

The role of senescent cells in ageing

https://research.vu.nl/ws/files/104498064/Cellular_Senescence_Defining_a_Path_Forward.pdf

Cellular Senescence: Defining a Path Forward

Oncogene-induced senescence (OIS) is crucial for tumour suppression. Senescent cells implement a complex pro-inflammatory response termed the senescence-associated secretory phenotype (SASP). The SASP reinforces senescence, activates immune surveillance and paradoxically also has pro-tumorigenic properties. Here, we present evidence that the SASP can also induce paracrine senescence in normal cells both in culture and in human and mouse models of OIS in vivo. Coupling quantitative proteomics with small-molecule screens, we identified multiple SASP components mediating paracrine senescence, including TGF-β family ligands, VEGF, CCL2 and CCL20. Amongst them, TGF-β ligands play a major role by regulating p15(INK4b) and p21(CIP1). Expression of the SASP is controlled by inflammasome-mediated IL-1 signalling. The inflammasome and IL-1 signalling are activated in senescent cells and IL-1α expression can reproduce SASP activation, resulting in senescence. Our results demonstrate that the SASP can cause paracrine senescence and impact on tumour suppression and senescence in vivo.

/pdf/a-complex-secretory-program-orchestrated-by-the-inflammasome-497eel9f7m.pdf

Mindaugas Andrulis

Papers

A complex secretory program orchestrated by the inflammasome controls paracrine senescence