An IRAK1-PIN1 signalling axis drives intrinsic tumour resistance to radiation therapy

Drug-based strategies to overcome tumour resistance to radiotherapy (R-RT) remain limited by the single-agent toxicity of traditional radiosensitizers (for example, platinums) and a lack of targeted alternatives. In a screen for compounds that restore radiosensitivity in p53 mutant zebrafish while tolerated in non-irradiated wild-type animals, we identified the benzimidazole anthelmintic oxfendazole. Surprisingly, oxfendazole acts via the inhibition of IRAK1, a kinase thus far implicated in interleukin-1 receptor (IL-1R) and Toll-like receptor (TLR) immune responses. IRAK1 drives R-RT in a pathway involving IRAK4 and TRAF6 but not the IL-1R/TLR-IRAK adaptor MyD88. Rather than stimulating nuclear factor-κB, radiation-activated IRAK1 prevented apoptosis mediated by the PIDDosome complex (comprising PIDD, RAIDD and caspase-2). Countering this pathway with IRAK1 inhibitors suppressed R-RT in tumour models derived from cancers in which TP53 mutations predict R-RT. Moreover, IRAK1 inhibitors synergized with inhibitors of PIN1, a prolyl isomerase essential for IRAK1 activation in response to pathogens and, as shown here, in response to ionizing radiation. These data identify an IRAK1 radiation-response pathway as a rational chemoradiation therapy target

Effects of p38α/β inhibition on Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia (ALL) proliferation and survival <em>in vivo</em>.

P38α/β has been described as a tumor suppressor controlling cell cycle checkpoints and senescence in epithelial malignancies. However, p38α/β also regulates other cellular processes. Here, we describe a role of p38α/β as a regulator of ALL proliferation and survival in experimental ALL models. We also report first evidence that p38α/β phosphorylation is associated with the occurrence of relapses in TEL-AML1 positive leukemia. First, in vitro experiments show that p38α/β signaling is induced in a cyclical manner upon initiation of proliferation and remains activated during log-phase of cell growth. Next, we provide evidence that growth-permissive signals in the bone marrow activate p38α/β in a novel avian ALL model, in which therapeutic targeting can be tested. We further demonstrate that p38α/β inhibition by small molecules can suppress leukemic expansion and prolong survival of mice bearing ALL cell lines and primary cells. Knockdown of p38α strongly delays leukemogenesis in mice xenografted with cell lines. Finally, we show that in xenografted TEL-AML1 patients, ex vivo p38α/β phosphorylation is associated with an inferior long-term relapse-free survival. We propose p38α/β as a mediator of proliferation and survival in ALL and show first preclinical evidence for p38α/β inhibition as an adjunct approach to conventional therapies

The importance of developing therapies targeting the biological spectrum of metastatic disease

Great progress has been made in cancer therapeutics. However, metastasis remains the predominant cause of death from cancer. Importantly, metastasis can manifest many years after initial treatment of the primary cancer. This is because cancer cells can remain dormant before forming symptomatic metastasis. An important question is whether metastasis research should focus on the early treatment of metastases, before they are clinically evident ("overt"), or on developing treatments to stop overt metastasis (stage IV cancer). In this commentary we want to clarify why it is important that all avenues of treatment for stage IV patients are developed. Indeed, future treatments are expected to go beyond the mere shrinkage of overt metastases and will include strategies that prevent disseminated tumor cells from emerging from dormancy

Guidelines for the use and interpretation of assays for monitoring autophagy

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