Proteomic analysis reveals KRIT1 as a modulator for the antioxidant effects of valproic acid in human bone-marrow mesenchymal stromal cells

<div><p></p><p>Valproic acid (VPA) protects human bone marrow-mesenchymal stromal cells (hBM-MSCs) against oxidative stress and improves their migratory ability through increasing the secretion of trophic factors. This suggests that VPA may be an excellent candidate for improving stem cell function. However, the molecular mechanisms of VPA in BM-MSCs are not known. In this study, we used a proteomic approach to investigate VPA-associated targets under oxidative stress conditions. Krev/Rap1 interaction Trapped-1 (KRIT1), a modulator for the homeostasis of intracellular reactive oxygen species (ROS), was identified as a target protein by two-dimensional gel electrophoresis and matrix-assisted laser desorption ionization-time-of-flight mass spectrometry (MALDI-TOF-MS) analyses. The up-regulation of KRIT1 and its target proteins (SOD2 and FoxO1) with VPA treatment of hBM-MSCs was revealed by qPCR and immunoblot analysis. Damage from oxidative stress was reduced in VPA-pretreated BM-MSCs, which was also confirmed by qPCR and immunoblot analysis. In addition, increased in intracellular ROS by H₂O₂ were also reduced by VPA pretreatment in BM-MSCs. This suggests that VPA reduces intracellular ROS level by the modulation of KRIT1 and its correlated proteins, FoxO1, SOD2, and cyclin D1. Thus, this study is the first to provide evidence that VPA modulates KRIT1 and intracellular ROS in BM-MSCs.</p></div

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

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