LARGE Expression Augments the Glycosylation of Glycoproteins in Addition to α-Dystroglycan Conferring Laminin Binding

Mutations in genes encoding glycosyltransferases (and presumed glycosyltransferases) that affect glycosylation and extracellular matrix binding activity of α-dystroglycan (α-DG) cause congenital muscular dystrophies (CMDs) with central nervous system manifestations. Among the identified genes, LARGE is of particular interest because its overexpression rescues glycosylation defects of α-DG in mutations of not only LARGE but also other CMD-causing genes and restores laminin binding activity of α-DG. It is not known whether LARGE protein glycosylates other proteins in addition to α-DG. In this study, we overexpressed LARGE in DG-deficient cells and analyzed glycosylated proteins by Western blot analysis. Surprisingly, overexpression of LARGE in α-DG-deficient cells led to glycosylation dependent IIH6C4 and VIA4-1 immunoreactivity, despite the prevailing view that these antibodies only recognize glycosylated α-DG. Furthermore, the hyperglycosylated proteins in LARGE-overexpressing cells demonstrated the functional capacity to bind the extracellular matrix molecule laminin and promote laminin assembly at the cell surface, an effect that was blocked by IIH6C4 antibodies. These results indicate that overexpression of LARGE catalyzes the glycosylation of at least one other glycoprotein in addition to α-DG, and that this glycosylation(s) promotes laminin binding activity

Transgenic Overexpression of LARGE Induces α-Dystroglycan Hyperglycosylation in Skeletal and Cardiac Muscle

BACKGROUND: LARGE is one of seven putative or demonstrated glycosyltransferase enzymes defective in a common group of muscular dystrophies with reduced glycosylation of α-dystroglycan. Overexpression of LARGE induces hyperglycosylation of α-dystroglycan in both wild type and in cells from dystroglycanopathy patients, irrespective of their primary gene defect, restoring functional glycosylation. Viral delivery of LARGE to skeletal muscle in animal models of dystroglycanopathy has identical effects in vivo, suggesting that the restoration of functional glycosylation could have therapeutic applications in these disorders. Pharmacological strategies to upregulate Large expression are also being explored. METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: In order to asses the safety and efficacy of long term LARGE over-expression in vivo, we have generated four mouse lines expressing a human LARGE transgene. On observation, LARGE transgenic mice were indistinguishable from the wild type littermates. Tissue analysis from young mice of all four lines showed a variable pattern of transgene expression: highest in skeletal and cardiac muscles, and lower in brain, kidney and liver. Transgene expression in striated muscles correlated with α-dystroglycan hyperglycosylation, as determined by immunoreactivity to antibody IIH6 and increased laminin binding on an overlay assay. Other components of the dystroglycan complex and extracellular matrix ligands were normally expressed, and general muscle histology was indistinguishable from wild type controls. Further detailed muscle physiological analysis demonstrated a loss of force in response to eccentric exercise in the older, but not in the younger mice, suggesting this deficit developed over time. However this remained a subclinical feature as no pathology was observed in older mice in any muscles including the diaphragm, which is sensitive to mechanical load-induced damage. CONCLUSIONS/SIGNIFICANCE: This work shows that potential therapies in the dystroglycanopathies based on LARGE upregulation and α-dystroglycan hyperglycosylation in muscle should be safe

Guidelines for the use and interpretation of assays for monitoring autophagy (4th edition)1.

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