scispace - formally typeset
Search or ask a question
Author

Zhong Chen

Bio: Zhong Chen is an academic researcher from Zhejiang Chinese Medical University. The author has contributed to research in topics: Epilepsy & Histamine. The author has an hindex of 46, co-authored 300 publications receiving 12212 citations. Previous affiliations of Zhong Chen include State Administration of Traditional Chinese Medicine of the People's Republic of China & Zhejiang University.


Papers
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
Daniel J. Klionsky1, Kotb Abdelmohsen2, Akihisa Abe3, Joynal Abedin4  +2519 moreInstitutions (695)
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors present a set of guidelines for the selection and interpretation of methods for use by investigators who aim to examine macro-autophagy and related processes, as well as for reviewers who need to provide realistic and reasonable critiques of papers that are focused on these processes.
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.

5,187 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this article, the authors 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.
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.

1,129 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: Autophagy was activated in the reperfusion phase, as revealed in both mice with middle cerebral artery occlusion and oxygen-glucose deprived cortical neurons in culture, and the protective role of autophagy during reperfusions may be attributable to mitophagy-related mitochondrial clearance and inhibition of downstream apoptosis.
Abstract: Cerebral ischemia-reperfusion (I-R) is a complex pathological process. Although autophagy can be evoked by ischemia, its involvement in the reperfusion phase after ischemia and its contribution to the fate of neurons remains largely unknown. In the present investigation, we found that autophagy was activated in the reperfusion phase, as revealed in both mice with middle cerebral artery occlusion and oxygen-glucose deprived cortical neurons in culture. Interestingly, in contrast to that in permanent ischemia, inhibition of autophagy (by 3-methyladenine, bafilomycin A 1, Atg7 knockdown or in atg5(-/-) MEF cells) in the reperfusion phase reinforced, rather than reduced, the brain and cell injury induced by I-R. Inhibition of autophagy either with 3-methyladenine or Atg7 knockdown enhanced the I-R-induced release of cytochrome c and the downstream activation of apoptosis. Moreover, MitoTracker Red-labeled neuronal mitochondria increasingly overlapped with GFP-LC3-labeled autophagosomes during reperfusion, suggesting the presence of mitophagy. The mitochondrial clearance in I-R was reversed by 3-methyladenine and Atg7 silencing, further suggesting that mitophagy underlies the neuroprotection by autophagy. In support, administration of the mitophagy inhibitor mdivi-1 in the reperfusion phase aggravated the ischemia-induced neuronal injury both in vivo and in vitro. PARK2 translocated to mitochondria during reperfusion and Park2 knockdown aggravated ischemia-induced neuronal cell death. In conclusion, the results indicated that autophagy plays different roles in cerebral ischemia and subsequent reperfusion. The protective role of autophagy during reperfusion may be attributable to mitophagy-related mitochondrial clearance and inhibition of downstream apoptosis. PARK2 may be involved in the mitophagy process.

384 citations

Posted ContentDOI
09 Apr 2020-bioRxiv
TL;DR: The results reveal an outline of ACE2/Ace2 distribution in the human and mouse brain, which indicates the brain infection of SARS-CoV-2 may be capable of inducing central nervous system symptoms in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients.
Abstract: By engaging angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE2 or Ace2), the novel pathogenic SARS-coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) may invade host cells in many organs, including the brain. However, the distribution of ACE2 in the brain is still obscure. Here we investigated the ACE2 expression in the brain by analyzing data from publicly available brain transcriptome databases. According to our spatial distribution analysis, ACE2 was relatively highly expressed in some important brain areas, such as the substantia nigra and brain ventricles. According to our cell-type distribution analysis, the expression of ACE2 were found in many neurons (both excitatory and inhibitory neurons) and some non-neuron cells (mainly astrocytes and oligodendrocytes) in human middle temporal gyrus and posterior cingulate cortex, but the ACE2-expressing cells was none in the prefrontal cortex and very few in the hippocampus. Except for the additional high expression of Ace2 in the olfactory bulb areas for spatial distribution as well as in the pericytes and endothelial cells for cell-type distribution, the distribution of Ace2 in mouse brain was similar to that in the human brain. Thus, our results reveal an outline of ACE2/Ace2 distribution in the human and mouse brain, which indicates the brain infection of SARS-CoV-2 may be capable to result in serious central nervous system symptoms in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients.

281 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this article, the authors investigated the ACE2 expression in the brain by analyzing data from publicly available brain transcriptome databases and revealed an outline of ACE2/Ace2 distribution in the human and mouse brains, which indicates that the brain infection of SARS-CoV-2 may be capable of inducing central nervous system symptoms in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients.
Abstract: By engaging angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE2 or Ace2), the novel pathogenic severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) invades host cells and affects many organs, including the brain. However, the distribution of ACE2 in the brain is still obscure. Here, we investigated the ACE2 expression in the brain by analyzing data from publicly available brain transcriptome databases. According to our spatial distribution analysis, ACE2 was relatively highly expressed in some brain locations, such as the choroid plexus and paraventricular nuclei of the thalamus. According to cell-type distribution analysis, nuclear expression of ACE2 was found in many neurons (both excitatory and inhibitory neurons) and some non-neuron cells (mainly astrocytes, oligodendrocytes, and endothelial cells) in the human middle temporal gyrus and posterior cingulate cortex. A few ACE2-expressing nuclei were found in a hippocampal dataset, and none were detected in the prefrontal cortex. Except for the additional high expression of Ace2 in the olfactory bulb areas for spatial distribution as well as in the pericytes and endothelial cells for cell-type distribution, the distribution of Ace2 in the mouse brain was similar to that in the human brain. Thus, our results reveal an outline of ACE2/Ace2 distribution in the human and mouse brains, which indicates that the brain infection of SARS-CoV-2 may be capable of inducing central nervous system symptoms in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients. Potential species differences should be considered when using mouse models to study the neurological effects of SARS-CoV-2 infection.

254 citations


Cited by
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
Lorenzo Galluzzi1, Lorenzo Galluzzi2, Ilio Vitale3, Stuart A. Aaronson4  +183 moreInstitutions (111)
TL;DR: The Nomenclature Committee on Cell Death (NCCD) has formulated guidelines for the definition and interpretation of cell death from morphological, biochemical, and functional perspectives.
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.

3,301 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: A functional classification of cell death subroutines is proposed that applies to both in vitro and in vivo settings and includes extrinsic apoptosis, caspase-dependent or -independent intrinsic programmed cell death, regulated necrosis, autophagic cell death and mitotic catastrophe.
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.

2,238 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: A way forward is suggested for the effective targeting of autophagy by understanding the context-dependent roles of autophile and by capitalizing on modern approaches to clinical trial design.
Abstract: Autophagy is a mechanism by which cellular material is delivered to lysosomes for degradation, leading to the basal turnover of cell components and providing energy and macromolecular precursors. Autophagy has opposing, context-dependent roles in cancer, and interventions to both stimulate and inhibit autophagy have been proposed as cancer therapies. This has led to the therapeutic targeting of autophagy in cancer to be sometimes viewed as controversial. In this Review, we suggest a way forwards for the effective targeting of autophagy by understanding the context-dependent roles of autophagy and by capitalizing on modern approaches to clinical trial design.

1,606 citations