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

Protein quality control: the who’s who, the where’s and therapeutic escapes

In cells the quality of newly synthesized proteins is monitored in regard to proper folding and correct assembly in the early secretory pathway, the cytosol and the nucleoplasm. Proteins recognized as non-native in the ER will be removed and degraded by a process termed ERAD. ERAD of aberrant proteins is accompanied by various changes of cellular organelles and results in protein folding diseases. This review focuses on how the immunocytochemical labeling and electron microscopic analyses have helped to disclose the in situ subcellular distribution pattern of some of the key machinery proteins of the cellular protein quality control, the organelle changes due to the presence of misfolded proteins, and the efficiency of synthetic chaperones to rescue disease-causing trafficking defects of aberrant proteins

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

Phospholipase D inhibitors reduce human prostate cancer cell proliferation and colony formation

BACKGROUND: Phospholipases D1 and D2 (PLD1/2) hydrolyse cell membrane glycerophospholipids to generate phosphatidic acid, a signalling lipid, which regulates cell growth and cancer progression through effects on mTOR and PKB/Akt. PLD expression and/or activity is raised in breast, colorectal, gastric, kidney and thyroid carcinomas but its role in prostate cancer (PCa), the major cancer of men in the western world, is unclear. METHODS: PLD1 protein expression in cultured PNT2C2, PNT1A, P4E6, LNCaP, PC3, PC3M, VCaP, 22RV1 cell lines and patient-derived PCa cells was analysed by western blotting. PLD1 protein localisation in normal, benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH), and castrate-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC) tissue sections and in a PCa tissue microarray (TMA) was examined by immunohistochemistry. PLD activity in PCa tissue was assayed using an Amplex Red method. The effect of PLD inhibitors on PCa cell viability was measured using MTS and colony forming assays. RESULTS: PLD1 protein expression was low in the luminal prostate cell lines (LNCaP, VCaP, 22RV1) compared with basal lines (PC3 and PC3M). PLD1 protein expression was elevated in BPH biopsy tissue relative to normal and PCa samples. In normal and BPH tissue, PLD1 was predominantly detected in basal cells as well in some stromal cells, rather than in luminal cells. In PCa tissue, luminal cells expressed PLD1. In a PCa TMA, the mean peroxidase intensity per DAB-stained Gleason 6 and 7 tissue section was significantly higher than in sections graded Gleason 9. In CRPC tissue, PLD1 was expressed prominently in the stromal compartment, in luminal cells in occasional glands and in an expanding population of cells that co-expressed chromogranin A and neurone-specific enolase. Levels of PLD activity in normal and PCa tissue samples were similar. A specific PLD1 inhibitor markedly reduced the survival of both prostate cell lines and patient-derived PCa cells compared with two dual PLD1/PLD2 inhibitors. Short-term exposure of PCa cells to the same specific PLD1 inhibitor significantly reduced colony formation. CONCLUSIONS: A new specific inhibitor of PLD1, which is well tolerated in mice, reduces PCa cell survival and thus has potential as a novel therapeutic agent to reduce prostate cancer progression. Increased PLD1 expression may contribute to the hyperplasia characteristic of BPH and in the progression of castrate-resistant PCa, where an expanding population of neuroendocrine-like cells express PLD1.British Journal of Cancer advance online publication, 14 November 2017; doi:10.1038/bjc.2017.391 www.bjcancer.com

Increasing frailty is associated with higher prevalence and reduced recognition of delirium in older hospitalised inpatients: results of a multi-centre study

Purpose Delirium is a neuropsychiatric disorder delineated by an acute change in cognition, attention, and consciousness. It is common, particularly in older adults, but poorly recognised. Frailty is the accumulation of deficits conferring an increased risk of adverse outcomes. We set out to determine how severity of frailty, as measured using the CFS, affected delirium rates, and recognition in hospitalised older people in the United Kingdom. Methods Adults over 65 years were included in an observational multi-centre audit across UK hospitals, two prospective rounds, and one retrospective note review. Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS), delirium status, and 30-day outcomes were recorded. Results The overall prevalence of delirium was 16.3% (483). Patients with delirium were more frail than patients without delirium (median CFS 6 vs 4). The risk of delirium was greater with increasing frailty [OR 2.9 (1.8–4.6) in CFS 4 vs 1–3; OR 12.4 (6.2–24.5) in CFS 8 vs 1–3]. Higher CFS was associated with reduced recognition of delirium (OR of 0.7 (0.3–1.9) in CFS 4 compared to 0.2 (0.1–0.7) in CFS 8). These risks were both independent of age and dementia. Conclusion We have demonstrated an incremental increase in risk of delirium with increasing frailty. This has important clinical implications, suggesting that frailty may provide a more nuanced measure of vulnerability to delirium and poor outcomes. However, the most frail patients are least likely to have their delirium diagnosed and there is a significant lack of research into the underlying pathophysiology of both of these common geriatric syndromes

Increasing frailty is associated with higher prevalence and reduced recognition of delirium in older hospitalised inpatients: results of a multi-centre study

Purpose: Delirium is a neuropsychiatric disorder delineated by an acute change in cognition, attention, and consciousness. It is common, particularly in older adults, but poorly recognised. Frailty is the accumulation of deficits conferring an increased risk of adverse outcomes. We set out to determine how severity of frailty, as measured using the CFS, affected delirium rates, and recognition in hospitalised older people in the United Kingdom. Methods: Adults over 65 years were included in an observational multi-centre audit across UK hospitals, two prospective rounds, and one retrospective note review. Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS), delirium status, and 30-day outcomes were recorded. Results: The overall prevalence of delirium was 16.3% (483). Patients with delirium were more frail than patients without delirium (median CFS 6 vs 4). The risk of delirium was greater with increasing frailty [OR 2.9 (1.8–4.6) in CFS 4 vs 1–3; OR 12.4 (6.2–24.5) in CFS 8 vs 1–3]. Higher CFS was associated with reduced recognition of delirium (OR of 0.7 (0.3–1.9) in CFS 4 compared to 0.2 (0.1–0.7) in CFS 8). These risks were both independent of age and dementia. Conclusion: We have demonstrated an incremental increase in risk of delirium with increasing frailty. This has important clinical implications, suggesting that frailty may provide a more nuanced measure of vulnerability to delirium and poor outcomes. However, the most frail patients are least likely to have their delirium diagnosed and there is a significant lack of research into the underlying pathophysiology of both of these common geriatric syndromes

Getting out of mitosis: Spatial and temporal control of mitotic exit and cytokinesis by PP1 and PP2A

Here, we will review the evidence showing that mitotic exit is initiated by regulated proteolysis and then driven by the PPP family of phosphoserine/threonine phosphatases. Rapid APC/CCDC 20 and ubiquitin-dependent proteolysis of cyclin B and securin initiates sister chromatid separation, the first step of mitotic exit. Because proteolysis of Aurora and Polo family kinases dependent on APC/CCDH 1 is relatively slow, this creates a new regulatory state, anaphase, different to G2 and M-phase. We will discuss how the CDK1-counteracting phosphatases PP1 and PP2A-B55, together with Aurora and Polo kinases, contribute to the temporal regulation and order of events in the different stages of mitotic exit from anaphase to cytokinesis. For PP2A-B55, these timing properties are created by the ENSA-dependent inhibitory pathway and differential recognition of phosphoserine and phosphothreonine. Finally, we will discuss how Aurora B and PP2A-B56 are needed for the spatial regulation of anaphase spindle formation and how APC/C-dependent destruction of PLK1 acts as a timer for abscission, the final event of cytokinesis

The immunofluorescent era of membrane traffic

In recent years immunofluorescence microscopy has been increasingly used to study membrane traffic. In this article seven electron microscopists, all with considerable experience in using light microscopy, take a critical look at the immunofluorescence approach and argue that results obtained with this method are often overinterpreted