Autophagy, or cellular self-digestion, is a cellular pathway involved in protein and organelle degradation, with an astonishing number of connections to human disease and physiology. For example, autophagic dysfunction is associated with cancer, neurodegeneration, microbial infection and ageing. Paradoxically, although autophagy is primarily a protective process for the cell, it can also play a role in cell death. Understanding autophagy may ultimately allow scientists and clinicians to harness this process for the purpose of improving human health.

/pdf/autophagy-fights-disease-through-cellular-self-digestion-5i6zc9bv8a.pdf

Autophagy fights disease through cellular self-digestion

Autophagy is a process by which components of the cell are degraded to maintain essential activity and viability in response to nutrient limitation. Extensive genetic studies have shown that the yeast ATG1 kinase has an essential role in autophagy induction. Furthermore, autophagy is promoted by AMP activated protein kinase (AMPK), which is a key energy sensor and regulates cellular metabolism to maintain energy homeostasis. Conversely, autophagy is inhibited by the mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR), a central cell-growth regulator that integrates growth factor and nutrient signals. Here we demonstrate a molecular mechanism for regulation of the mammalian autophagy-initiating kinase Ulk1, a homologue of yeast ATG1. Under glucose starvation, AMPK promotes autophagy by directly activating Ulk1 through phosphorylation of Ser 317 and Ser 777. Under nutrient sufficiency, high mTOR activity prevents Ulk1 activation by phosphorylating Ulk1 Ser 757 and disrupting the interaction between Ulk1 and AMPK. This coordinated phosphorylation is important for Ulk1 in autophagy induction. Our study has revealed a signalling mechanism for Ulk1 regulation and autophagy induction in response to nutrient signalling.

/pdf/ampk-and-mtor-regulate-autophagy-through-direct-14wqsz16ke.pdf

AMPK and mTOR regulate autophagy through direct phosphorylation of Ulk1

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)

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.

/pdf/guidelines-for-the-use-and-interpretation-of-assays-for-28d1pi1jvo.pdf

Guidelines for the use and interpretation of assays for monitoring autophagy

Methods in Mammalian Autophagy Research

Macroautophagy or autophagy is a degradative pathway terminating in the lysosomal compartment after the formation of a cytoplasmic vacuole that engulfs macromolecules and organelles. During the last decade, progress made in our understanding of the molecular controls of autophagy has uncovered the importance of tumor suppressor molecules in the stimulation of autophagy. Downexpression of autophagy is an early event during tumorigenesis. However, the relation between autophagy and tumor progression seems to be more complex because cancer cells are able to trigger autophagy in response to various situations including changes in their extracellular environment and cancer treatments. The role of autophagy in cancer cells balances between two apparently opposite outcomes. Autophagy as a stress response mechanism can protect cancer cells from various insults. But autophagy can eliminate cancer cells by triggering autophagic cell death. These two aspects of autophagy will be discussed in this review.

Autophagy and Autophagic Cell Death

G-quadruplex (G4) ligands have shown anti-tumor activity by stabilizing G4 structures. We recently reported that the G4 ligand 20A promotes senescence in cancer cells through Ataxia Telangiectasia Mutated (ATM) and autophagy activation. Inhibition of both pathways directs cells to apoptosis, positioning ATM/autophagy axis as a linchpin between senescence and apoptosis.

Activation of the Ataxia Telangiectasia Mutated/Autophagy pathway by a G-quadruplex ligand links senescence with apoptosis

The homeostasis between the oxidant and antioxidant levels in cells is altered in several diseases including cancer, neurodegenerative diseases, and inflammatory disorders. Macroautophagy (hereafter referred to as autophagy) is a redox (reduction/oxidation)-sensitive process that results in degradation of cellular constituents such as proteins, lipids, and mitochondria through the lysosomal pathway. There is a complex and mutual relationship between pathways that control levels of reactive oxygen species (ROS) and autophagy. Autophagy is activated by various stimuli in cells and ROS are one of these autophagy inducers. The accumulation of ROS induces autophagy both by direct effect on the core autophagy machinery and by indirect influence on the components of the autophagy-regulatory signaling pathway. In turn, autophagy regulates the abundance of ROS in cells by promoting the clearance of damaged mitochondria and oxidized cellular substrates and by modulating activity of the detoxifying antioxidant systems. ROS are also involved in the initiation of inflammation, a process that required the secretion of several inflammatory mediators. Here, we will discuss the regulation of inflammatory responses by autophagy as a consequence of the interplay of autophagy and ROS signaling pathways.

The Complex Crosstalk Between Autophagy and ROS Signalling Pathways

ABSTRACT Guanine-quadruplex structures (G4) are unusual nucleic acid conformations formed by guanine-rich DNA and RNA sequences and known to control gene expression mechanisms, from transcription to protein synthesis. So far, a number of molecules that recognize G4 have been developed for potential therapeutic applications in human pathologies, including cancer and infectious diseases. These molecules are called G4 ligands. When the biological effects of G4 ligands are studied, the analysis is often limited to nucleic acid targets. However, recent evidence indicates that G4 ligands may target other cellular components and compartments such as lysosomes and mitochondria. Here, we summarize our current knowledge of the regulation of lysosome by G4 ligands, underlying their potential functional impact on lysosome biology and autophagic flux, as well as on the transcriptional regulation of lysosomal genes. We outline the consequences of these effects on cell fate decisions and we systematically analyzed G4-prone sequences within the promoter of 435 lysosome-related genes. Finally, we propose some hypotheses about the mechanisms involved in the regulation of lysosomes by G4 ligands.

Mojgan Djavaheri-Mergny

Papers

Autophagy and Autophagic Cell Death

Activation of the Ataxia Telangiectasia Mutated/Autophagy pathway by a G-quadruplex ligand links senescence with apoptosis

The Complex Crosstalk Between Autophagy and ROS Signalling Pathways

G-quadruplex ligands as potent regulators of lysosomes

R53: Rôle de l’autophagie dans la différenciation des cellules leucémiques par l’acide rétinoïque