다중혈관 관상동맥 환자에서 y-문합을 이용하여 양쪽 내흉동맥만을 사용한 우회술의 조기 성적

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)

Autophagy and apoptosis control the turnover of organelles and proteins within cells, and of cells within organisms, respectively, and many stress pathways sequentially elicit autophagy, and apoptosis within the same cell. Generally autophagy blocks the induction of apoptosis, and apoptosis-associated caspase activation shuts off the autophagic process. However, in special cases, autophagy or autophagy-relevant proteins may help to induce apoptosis or necrosis, and autophagy has been shown to degrade the cytoplasm excessively, leading to 'autophagic cell death'. The dialogue between autophagy and cell death pathways influences the normal clearance of dying cells, as well as immune recognition of dead cell antigens. Therefore, the disruption of the relationship between autophagy and apoptosis has important pathophysiological consequences.

Self-consumption: the interplay of autophagy and apoptosis

Autophagy is a highly conserved catabolic process induced under various conditions of cellular stress, which prevents cell damage and promotes survival in the event of energy or nutrient shortage and responds to various cytotoxic insults. Thus, autophagy has primarily cytoprotective functions and needs to be tightly regulated to respond correctly to the different stimuli that cells experience, thereby conferring adaptation to the ever-changing environment. It is now apparent that autophagy is deregulated in the context of various human pathologies, including cancer and neurodegeneration, and its modulation has considerable potential as a therapeutic approach.

Mechanism and medical implications of mammalian autophagy

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.

Guidelines for the use and interpretation of assays for monitoring autophagy (4th edition)

Mechanisms by which autophagy promotes cell survival or death are unclear. We provide evidence that C(18)-pyridinium ceramide treatment or endogenous C(18)-ceramide generation by ceramide synthase 1 (CerS1) expression mediates autophagic cell death, independent of apoptosis in human cancer cells. C(18)-ceramide-induced lethal autophagy was regulated via microtubule-associated protein 1 light chain 3 β-lipidation, forming LC3B-II, and selective targeting of mitochondria by LC3B-II-containing autophagolysosomes (mitophagy) through direct interaction between ceramide and LC3B-II upon Drp1-dependent mitochondrial fission, leading to inhibition of mitochondrial function and oxygen consumption. Accordingly, expression of mutant LC3B with impaired ceramide binding, as predicted by molecular modeling, prevented CerS1-mediated mitochondrial targeting, recovering oxygen consumption. Moreover, knockdown of CerS1 abrogated sodium selenite-induced mitophagy, and stable LC3B knockdown protected against CerS1- and C(18)-ceramide-dependent mitophagy and blocked tumor suppression in vivo. Thus, these data suggest a new receptor function of ceramide for anchoring LC3B-II autophagolysosomes to mitochondrial membranes, defining a key mechanism for the induction of lethal mitophagy.

/pdf/ceramide-targets-autophagosomes-to-mitochondria-and-induces-1chgfzxovs.pdf

Ceramide targets autophagosomes to mitochondria and induces lethal mitophagy

Autophagy paradox and ceramide

Histone deacetylases (HDACs) and microRNAs (miRs) have pro-survival roles, but the mechanism behind this is unclear. Repression of ceramide synthase 1 (CerS1), altering C(18) -ceramide generation, was linked to drug resistance and metastasis. Here we report that the CerS1 promoter was repressed by HDAC1-dependent inhibition of Sp1 recruitment to two specific GC-boxes spanning the -177 and -139 region. Moreover, an alternatively spliced variant CerS1 mRNA (CerS1-2) was detected mainly in cancer cells or primary tumour tissues compared to controls, which was targeted by miR-574-5p for degradation. A specific 3'UTR-targeting site, localized within the retained intron between exons 6 and 7, was identified, and its mutation, or miR-574-5p knockdown prevented the degradation of CerS1-2 mRNA. Interference with HDAC1 and miR-574-5p reconstituted CerS1-2 expression and C(18) -ceramide generation in multiple human cancer cell lines, which subsequently inhibited proliferation and anchorage-independent growth. Accordingly, knockdown of CerS1 partially protected cancer cells from MS-275/miR-574-5p siRNA-mediated growth inhibition. Thus, these data suggest that the HDAC1/miR-574-5p axis might provide a novel therapeutic target to reconstitute tumour suppressor CerS1/ceramide signalling.

https://www.embopress.org/doi/pdf/10.1002/emmm.201100189

Concerted functions of HDAC1 and microRNA-574-5p repress alternatively spliced ceramide synthase 1 expression in human cancer cells

In a recent study, characterization of novel mechanisms that regulate lethal autophagy revealed that C18-ceramide stress mediates LC3B-II-ceramide binding on mitochondrial membranes to target autophagosomes for mitophagy induction and tumor suppression.

Wenhui Jiang

Papers

Ceramide targets autophagosomes to mitochondria and induces lethal mitophagy

Autophagy paradox and ceramide

Concerted functions of HDAC1 and microRNA-574-5p repress alternatively spliced ceramide synthase 1 expression in human cancer cells

Ceramide stress in survival versus lethal autophagy paradox: ceramide targets autophagosomes to mitochondria and induces lethal mitophagy.