Vladimir I. Titorenko

Bio: Vladimir I. Titorenko is an academic researcher from Concordia University. The author has contributed to research in topics: Peroxisome & Saccharomyces cerevisiae. The author has an hindex of 45, co-authored 120 publications receiving 10454 citations. Previous affiliations of Vladimir I. Titorenko include University of Alberta & Concordia University Wisconsin.

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 (4th edition)

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.

The Hansenula polymorpha PER1 Gene Is Essential for Peroxisome Biogenesis and Encodes a Peroxisomal Matrix Protein with Both Carboxy- and Amino-terminal Targeting Signals

Abstract: We describe the cloning of the Hansenula polymorpha PER1 gene and the characterization of the gene and its product, PER1p. The gene was cloned by functional complementation of a per1 mutant of H. polymorpha, which was impaired in the import of peroxisomal matrix proteins (Pim- phenotype). The DNA sequence of PER1 predicts that PER1p is a polypeptide of 650 amino acids with no significant sequence similarity to other known proteins. PER1 expression was low but significant in wild-type H. polymorpha growing on glucose and increased during growth on any one of a number of substrates which induce peroxisome proliferation. PER1p contains both a carboxy- (PTS1) and an amino-terminal (PTS2) peroxisomal targeting signal which both were demonstrated to be capable of directing bacterial beta-lactamase to the organelle. In wild-type H. polymorpha PER1p is a protein of low abundance which was demonstrated to be localized in the peroxisomal matrix. Our results suggest that the import of PER1p into peroxisomes is a prerequisite for the import of additional matrix proteins and we suggest a regulatory function of PER1p on peroxisomal protein support.

The life cycle of the peroxisome

Abstract: Peroxisomes are highly adaptable organelles that carry out oxidative reactions. Distinct cellular machineries act together to coordinate peroxisome formation, growth, division, inheritance, turnover, movement and function. Soluble and membrane-associated components of these machineries form complex networks of physical and functional interactions that provide supramolecular control of the precise dynamics of peroxisome biogenesis.

Mutants of the yeast Yarrowia lipolytica defective in protein exit from the endoplasmic reticulum are also defective in peroxisome biogenesis.

Abstract: Mutations in the SEC238 and SRP54 genes of the yeast Yarrowia lipolytica not only cause temperature-sensitive defects in the exit of the precursor form of alkaline extracellular protease and of other secretory proteins from the endoplasmic reticulum and in protein secretion but also lead to temperature-sensitive growth in oleic acid-containing medium, the metabolism of which requires the assembly of functionally intact peroxisomes. The sec238A and srp54KO mutations at the restrictive temperature significantly reduce the size and number of peroxisomes, affect the import of peroxisomal matrix and membrane proteins into the organelle, and significantly delay, but do not prevent, the exit of two peroxisomal membrane proteins, Pex2p and Pex16p, from the endoplasmic reticulum en route to the peroxisomal membrane. Mutations in the PEX1 and PEX6 genes, which encode members of the AAA family of N-ethylmaleimide-sensitive fusion protein-like ATPases, not only affect the exit of precursor forms of secretory proteins from the endoplasmic reticulum but also prevent the exit of the peroxisomal membrane proteins Pex2p and Pex16p from the endoplasmic reticulum and cause the accumulation of an extensive network of endoplasmic reticulum membranes. None of the peroxisomal matrix proteins tested associated with the endoplasmic reticulum in sec238A, srp54KO, pex1-1, and pex6KO mutant cells. Our data provide evidence that the endoplasmic reticulum is required for peroxisome biogenesis and suggest that in Y. lipolytica, the trafficking of some membrane proteins, but not matrix proteins, to the peroxisome occurs via the endoplasmic reticulum, results in their glycosylation within the lumen of the endoplasmic reticulum, does not involve transport through the Golgi, and requires the products encoded by the SEC238, SRP54, PEX1, and PEX6 genes.

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.

Molecular mechanisms of cell death: recommendations of the Nomenclature Committee on Cell Death 2018.

Abstract: 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.

Molecular definitions of cell death subroutines: recommendations of the Nomenclature Committee on Cell Death 2012

Abstract: In 2009, the Nomenclature Committee on Cell Death (NCCD) proposed a set of recommendations for the definition of distinct cell death morphologies and for the appropriate use of cell death-related terminology, including 'apoptosis', 'necrosis' and 'mitotic catastrophe'. In view of the substantial progress in the biochemical and genetic exploration of cell death, time has come to switch from morphological to molecular definitions of cell death modalities. Here we propose a functional classification of cell death subroutines that applies to both in vitro and in vivo settings and includes extrinsic apoptosis, caspase-dependent or -independent intrinsic apoptosis, regulated necrosis, autophagic cell death and mitotic catastrophe. Moreover, we discuss the utility of expressions indicating additional cell death modalities. On the basis of the new, revised NCCD classification, cell death subroutines are defined by a series of precise, measurable biochemical features.

Senescence-Associated Secretory Phenotypes Reveal Cell-Nonautonomous Functions of Oncogenic RAS and the p53 Tumor Suppressor

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

mTOR Signaling in Growth, Metabolism, and Disease

Abstract: The mechanistic target of rapamycin (mTOR) coordinates eukaryotic cell growth and metabolism with environmental inputs, including nutrients and growth factors. Extensive research over the past two decades has established a central role for mTOR in regulating many fundamental cell processes, from protein synthesis to autophagy, and deregulated mTOR signaling is implicated in the progression of cancer and diabetes, as well as the aging process. Here, we review recent advances in our understanding of mTOR function, regulation, and importance in mammalian physiology. We also highlight how the mTOR signaling network contributes to human disease and discuss the current and future prospects for therapeutically targeting mTOR in the clinic.