Targeting AMP-activated kinase impacts hepatocellular cancer stem cells induced by long-term treatment with sorafenib

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is the third leading cause of cancer death worldwide. HCC treatment is hindered by the frequent emergence of chemoresistance to the multikinase inhibitor sorafenib, which has been related to the presence of cancer stem cells (CSCs) that self‐renew and often escape therapy. The key metabolic sensor AMP‐activated kinase (AMPK) has recently been recognized as a tumour growth regulator. In this study, we aimed to elucidate the role of AMPK in the development of a stem cell phenotype in HCC cells. To this end, we enriched the CSC population in HCC cell lines that showed increased expression of drug resistance (ALDH1A1, ABCB1A) and stem cell (CD133, Nanog, Oct4, alpha fetoprotein) markers and demonstrated their stemness phenotype. These cells were refractory to sorafenib‐induced cell death. We report that sorafenib‐resistant cells had lower levels of total and phosphorylated AMPK as well as its downstream substrate, ACC, compared with the parental cells. Interestingly, AMPK knockdown with siRNA or inhibition with dorsomorphin increased the expression of stem cell markers in parental cells and blocked sorafenib‐induced cell death. Conversely, the upregulation of AMPK, either by transfection or by pharmacological activation with A‐769662, decreased the expression of ALDH1A1, ABCB1A, CD133, Nanog, Oct4, and alpha fetoprotein, and restored sensitivity to sorafenib. Analysis of the underlying mechanism points to hypoxia‐inducible factor HIF‐1α as a regulator of stemness. In vivo studies in a xenograft mouse model demonstrated that stem‐like cells have greater tumourigenic capacity. AMPK activation reduced xenograft tumour growth and decreased the expression of stem cell markers. Taken together, these results indicate that AMPK may serve as a novel target to overcome chemoresistance in HCC

Up-regulated expression of LAMP2 and autophagy activity during neuroendocrine differentiation of prostate cancer LNCaP cells

Neuroendocrine (NE) prostate cancer (PCa) is a highly aggressive subtype of prostate cancer associated with resistance to androgen ablation therapy. In this study, we used LNCaP prostate cancer cells cultured in a serum-free medium for 6 days as a NE model of prostate cancer. Serum deprivation increased the expression of NE markers such as neuron-specific enolase (NSE) and βIII tubulin (βIII tub) and decreased the expression of the androgen receptor protein in LNCaP cells. Using cDNA microarrays, we compared gene expression profiles of NE cells and non-differentiated LNCaP cells. We identified up-regulation of 155 genes, among them LAMP2, a lysosomal membrane protein involved in lysosomal stability and autophagy. We then confirmed up-regulation of LAMP2 in NE cells by qRT-PCR, Western blot and confocal microscopy assays, showing that mRNA up-regulation correlated with increased levels of LAMP2 protein. Subsequently, we determined autophagy activity in NE cells by assessing the protein levels of SQSTM/p62 and LC3 by Western blot and LC3 and Atg5 mRNAs content by qRT-PCR. The decreased levels of SQSTM/p62 was accompanied by an enhanced expression of LC3 and ATG5, suggesting activation of autophagy in NE cells. Blockage of autophagy with 1μM AKT inhibitor IV, or by silencing Beclin 1 and Atg5, prevented NE cell differentiation, as revealed by decreased levels of the NE markers. In addition, AKT inhibitor IV as well as Beclin1 and Atg5 kwockdown attenuated LAMP2 expression in NE cells. On the other hand, LAMP2 knockdown by siRNA led to a marked blockage of autophagy, prevention of NE differentiation and decrease of cell survival. Taken together, these results suggest that LAMP2 overexpression assists NE differentiation of LNCaP cells induced by serum deprivation and facilitates autophagy activity in order to attain the NE phenotype and cell survival. LAMP2 could thus be a potential biomarker and potential target for NE prostate cancer

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