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

Questions to guide cancer evolution as a framework for furthering progress in cancer research and sustainable patient outcomes.

We appear to be faced with 'two truths' in cancer-one of major advances and successes and another one of remaining short-comings and significant challenges. Despite decades of research and substantial progress in treating cancer, most patients with metastatic cancer still experience great suffering and poor outcomes. Metastatic cancer, for the vast majority of patients, remains incurable. In the context of advanced disease, many clinical trials report only incremental advances in progression-free and overall survival. At the same time, the breadth and depth of new scientific discoveries in cancer research are staggering. These discoveries are providing increasing mechanistic detail into the inner workings of normal and cancer cells, as well as into cancer-host interactions; however, progress remains frustratingly slow in translating these discoveries into improved diagnostic, prognostic, and therapeutic interventions. Despite enormous advances in cancer research and progress in progression-free survival, or even cures, for certain cancer types-with earlier detection followed by surgical, adjuvant, targeted, or immuno- therapies, we must challenge ourselves to do even better where patients do not respond or experience evolving therapy resistance. We propose that defining cancer evolution as a separate domain of study and integrating the concept of evolvability as a core hallmark of cancer can help position scientific discoveries into a framework that can be more effectively harnessed to improve cancer detection and therapy outcomes and to eventually decrease cancer lethality. In this perspective, we present key questions and suggested areas of study that must be considered-not only by the field of cancer evolution, but by all investigators researching, diagnosing, and treating cancer

Epitope mapping of the U1 small nuclear ribonucleoprotein particle in patients with systemic lupus erythematosus and mixed connective tissue disease

Systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) and mixed connective tissue disease (MCTD) are autoimmune illnesses characterized by the presence of high titers of autoantibodies directed against a wide range of ‘self ’ antigens. Proteins of the U1 small nuclear ribonucleoprotein particle (U1 snRNP) are among the most immunogenic molecules in patients with SLE and MCTD. The recent release of a crystallized U1 snRNP provides a unique opportunity to evaluate the effects of tertiary and quaternary structures on autoantigenicity within the U1 snRNP. In the present study, an epitope map was created using the U1 snRNP crystal structure. A total of 15 peptides were tested in a cohort of 68 patients with SLE, 29 with MCTD and 26 healthy individuals and mapped onto the U1 snRNP structure. Antigenic sites were detected in a variety of structures and appear to include RNA binding domains, but mostly exclude regions necessary for protein–protein interactions. These data suggest that while some autoantibodies may target U1 snRNP proteins as monomers or apoptosis-induced, protease-digested fragments, others may recognize epitopes on assembled protein subcomplexes of the U1 snRNP. Although nearly all of the peptides are strong predictors of autoimmune illness, none were successful at distinguishing between SLE and MCTD. The antigenicity of some peptides significantly correlated with several clinical symptoms. This investigation implicitly highlights the complexities of autoimmune epitopes, and autoimmune illnesses in general, and demonstrates the variability of antigens in patient populations, all of which contribute to difficult clinical diagnoses

Hybrid epithelial/mesenchymal phenotypes promote metastasis and therapy resistance across carcinomas

This work was sponsored by National Science Foundation, United States (Grant NSF PHY-1427654: Center for Theoretical Biological Physics). MKJ is also supported by a training fellowship from the Gulf Coast Consortia, on the Cancer Prevention and Research Institute of Texas, United States (CPRIT Grant No. RP170593: Computational Cancer Biology Training Program at the Gulf Coast Consortia). S.A.B. is supported by grants from the Department of Biotechnology, Government of India, New Delhi (Grant no. BT/PR/11465/MED/30/145/2008 and BT/Indo-Aus/06/03/2011

Distinct routes to metastasis: plasticity-dependent and plasticity-independent pathways.

The cascade that culminates in macrometastases is thought to be mediated by phenotypic plasticity, including epithelial-mesenchymal and mesenchymal-epithelial transitions (EMT and MET). Although there is substantial support for the role of EMT in driving cancer cell invasion and dissemination, much less is known about the importance of MET in the later steps of metastatic colonization. We created novel reporters, which integrate transcriptional and post-transcriptional regulation, to test whether MET is required for metastasis in multiple in vivo cancer models. In a model of carcinosarcoma, metastasis occurred via an MET-dependent pathway; however, in two prostate carcinoma models, metastatic colonization was MET independent. Our results provide evidence for both MET-dependent and MET-independent metastatic pathways