Signal transduction pathways involved in proteolysis-inducing factor induced proteasome expression in murine myotubes

The proteolysis-inducing factor (PIF) is produced by cachexia-inducing tumours and initiates protein catabolism in skeletal muscle. The potential signalling pathways linking the release of arachidonic acid (AA) from membrane phospholipids with increased expression of the ubiquitin-proteasome proteolytic pathway by PIF has been studied using C2C12 murine myotubes as a surrogate model of skeletal muscle. The induction of proteasome activity and protein degradation by PIF was blocked by quinacrine, a nonspecific phospholipase A2 (PLA2) inhibitor and trifluroacetyl AA, an inhibitor of cytosolic PLA2. PIF was shown to increase the expression of calcium-independent cytosolic PLA2, determined by Western blotting, at the same concentrations as those inducing maximal expression of 20S proteasome α-subunits and protein degradation. In addition, both U-73122, which inhibits agonist-induced phospholipase C (PLC) activation and D609, a specific inhibitor of phosphatidylcholine-specific PLC also inhibited PIF-induced proteasome activity. This suggests that both PLA 2 and PLC are involved in the release of AA in response to PIF, and that this is important in the induction of proteasome expression. The two tyrosine kinase inhibitors genistein and tryphostin A23 also attenuated PIF-induced proteasome expression, implicating tyrosine kinase in this process. PIF induced phosphorylation of p44/42 mitogen-activated protein kinase (MAPK) at the same concentrations as that inducing proteasome expression, and the effect was blocked by PD98059, an inhibitor of MAPK kinase, as was also the induction of proteasome expression, suggesting a role for MAPK activation in PIF-induced proteasome expression. © 2003 Cancer Research UK

Canagliflozin and Renal Outcomes in Type 2 Diabetes and Nephropathy

BACKGROUND Type 2 diabetes mellitus is the leading cause of kidney failure worldwide, but few effective long-term treatments are available. In cardiovascular trials of inhibitors of sodium–glucose cotransporter 2 (SGLT2), exploratory results have suggested that such drugs may improve renal outcomes in patients with type 2 diabetes. METHODS In this double-blind, randomized trial, we assigned patients with type 2 diabetes and albuminuric chronic kidney disease to receive canagliflozin, an oral SGLT2 inhibitor, at a dose of 100 mg daily or placebo. All the patients had an estimated glomerular filtration rate (GFR) of 30 to 300 to 5000) and were treated with renin–angiotensin system blockade. The primary outcome was a composite of end-stage kidney disease (dialysis, transplantation, or a sustained estimated GFR of <15 ml per minute per 1.73 m 2), a doubling of the serum creatinine level, or death from renal or cardiovascular causes. Prespecified secondary outcomes were tested hierarchically. RESULTS The trial was stopped early after a planned interim analysis on the recommendation of the data and safety monitoring committee. At that time, 4401 patients had undergone randomization, with a median follow-up of 2.62 years. The relative risk of the primary outcome was 30% lower in the canagliflozin group than in the placebo group, with event rates of 43.2 and 61.2 per 1000 patient-years, respectively (hazard ratio, 0.70; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.59 to 0.82; P=0.00001). The relative risk of the renal-specific composite of end-stage kidney disease, a doubling of the creatinine level, or death from renal causes was lower by 34% (hazard ratio, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.53 to 0.81; P<0.001), and the relative risk of end-stage kidney disease was lower by 32% (hazard ratio, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.54 to 0.86; P=0.002). The canagliflozin group also had a lower risk of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, or stroke (hazard ratio, 0.80; 95% CI, 0.67 to 0.95; P=0.01) and hospitalization for heart failure (hazard ratio, 0.61; 95% CI, 0.47 to 0.80; P<0.001). There were no significant differences in rates of amputation or fracture. CONCLUSIONS In patients with type 2 diabetes and kidney disease, the risk of kidney failure and cardiovascular events was lower in the canagliflozin group than in the placebo group at a median follow-up of 2.62 years

Guidelines for the use and interpretation of assays for monitoring autophagy (3rd edition)

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. For example, 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 versus those that measure fl ux through the autophagy pathway (i.e., the complete process including the amount and rate of cargo sequestered and degraded). In particular, a block in macroautophagy that results in autophagosome accumulation must be differentiated from stimuli that increase autophagic activity, defi ned as increased autophagy induction coupled with increased delivery to, and degradation within, lysosomes (inmost 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 fi eld 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. It is worth emphasizing here that lysosomal digestion is a stage of autophagy and evaluating its competence is a crucial part of the evaluation of autophagic flux, or complete autophagy. 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. Along these lines, because of the potential for pleiotropic effects due to blocking autophagy through genetic manipulation it is imperative to delete or knock down more than one autophagy-related gene. In addition, some individual Atg proteins, or groups of proteins, are involved in other cellular pathways so not all Atg proteins can be used as a specific marker for an autophagic process. 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

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

Synergistic effect of capsaicin and docetaxel in prostate cancer cells through AMP-activated kinase

Data used to generate figures of the paper “Combination of the natural product capsaicin and docetaxel synergistically kills human prostate cancer cells through the metabolic regulator AMP-activated kinase” Sánchez BG, Bort A, Mateos-Gómez PA, Rodríguez-Henche N, Díaz-Laviada I. Cancer Cell Int. 2019 Mar 8;19:54. doi: 10.1186/s12935-019-0769-2. eCollection 2019. In this study we demonstrate that the spicy ingredient of peepers, capsaicin, sensitizes prostate cancer cell to docetaxel. The metabolic regulator AMPK plays a pivotal role

Synergistic effect of capsaicin and docetaxel in prostate cancer cells through AMP-activated kinase

Data used to generate figures of the paper “Combination of the natural product capsaicin and docetaxel synergistically kills human prostate cancer cells through the metabolic regulator AMP-activated kinase” Sánchez BG, Bort A, Mateos-Gómez PA, Rodríguez-Henche N, Díaz-Laviada I. Cancer Cell Int. 2019 Mar 8;19:54. doi: 10.1186/s12935-019-0769-2. eCollection 2019. In this study we demonstrate that the spicy ingredient of peepers, capsaicin, sensitizes prostate cancer cell to docetaxel. The metabolic regulator AMPK plays a pivotal role

The Natural Chemotherapeutic Capsaicin Activates AMPK through LKB1 Kinase and TRPV1 Receptors in Prostate Cancer Cells

Analysis and data used to generate graphs in the figures 1-7THIS DATASET IS ARCHIVED AT DANS/EASY, BUT NOT ACCESSIBLE HERE. TO VIEW A LIST OF FILES AND ACCESS THE FILES IN THIS DATASET CLICK ON THE DOI-LINK ABOV