Acadesine Kills Chronic Myelogenous Leukemia (CML) Cells through PKC-Dependent Induction of Autophagic Cell Death

CML is an hematopoietic stem cell disease characterized by the t(9;22) (q34;q11) translocation encoding the oncoprotein p210BCR-ABL. The effect of acadesine (AICAR, 5-Aminoimidazole-4-carboxamide-1-β-D-ribofuranoside) a compound with known antileukemic effect on B cell chronic lymphoblastic leukemia (B-CLL) was investigated in different CML cell lines. Acadesine triggered loss of cell metabolism in K562, LAMA-84 and JURL-MK1 and was also effective in killing imatinib-resistant K562 cells and Ba/F3 cells carrying the T315I-BCR-ABL mutation. The anti-leukemic effect of acadesine did not involve apoptosis but required rather induction of autophagic cell death. AMPK knock-down by Sh-RNA failed to prevent the effect of acadesine, indicating an AMPK-independent mechanism. The effect of acadesine was abrogated by GF109203X and Ro-32-0432, both inhibitor of classical and new PKCs and accordingly, acadesine triggered relocation and activation of several PKC isoforms in K562 cells. In addition, this compound exhibited a potent anti-leukemic effect in clonogenic assays of CML cells in methyl cellulose and in a xenograft model of K562 cells in nude mice. In conclusion, our work identifies an original and unexpected mechanism by which acadesine triggers autophagic cell death through PKC activation. Therefore, in addition to its promising effects in B-CLL, acadesine might also be beneficial for Imatinib-resistant CML patients

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