Chronic VEGF Blockade Worsens Glomerular Injury in the Remnant Kidney Model

VEGF inhibition can promote renal vascular and parenchymal injury, causing proteinuria, hypertension and thrombotic microangiopathy. The mechanisms underlying these side effects are unclear. We investigated the renal effects of the administration, during 45 days, of sunitinib (Su), a VEGF receptor inhibitor, to rats with 5/6 renal ablation (Nx). Adult male Munich-Wistar rats were distributed among groups S+V, sham-operated rats receiving vehicle only; S+Su, S rats given Su, 4 mg/kg/day; Nx+V, Nx rats receiving V; and Nx+Su, Nx rats receiving Su. Su caused no change in Group S. Seven and 45 days after renal ablation, renal cortical interstitium was expanded, in association with rarefaction of peritubular capillaries. Su did not worsen hypertension, proteinuria or interstitial expansion, nor did it affect capillary rarefaction, suggesting little angiogenic activity in this model. Nx animals exhibited glomerulosclerosis (GS), which was aggravated by Su. This effect could not be explained by podocyte damage, nor could it be ascribed to tuft hypertrophy or hyperplasia. GS may have derived from organization of capillary microthrombi, frequently observed in Group Nx+Su. Treatment with Su did not reduce the fractional glomerular endothelial area, suggesting functional rather than structural cell injury. Chronic VEGF inhibition has little effect on normal rats, but can affect glomerular endothelium when renal damage is already present

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

Is evolvability evolvable?

In recent years, biologists have increasingly been asking whether the ability to evolve — the evolvability — of biological systems, itself evolves, and whether this phenomenon is the result of natural selection or a by-product of other evolutionary processes. The concept of evolvability, and the increasing theoretical and empirical literature that refers to it, may constitute one of several pillars on which an extended evolutionary synthesis will take shape during the next few years, although much work remains to be done on how evolvability comes about