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

The Role of MiR-181 Family Members in Endothelial Cell Dysfunction and Tumor Angiogenesis

Endothelial dysfunction plays a critical role in many human angiogenesis-related diseases, including cancer and retinopathies. Small non-coding microRNAs (miRNAs) repress gene expression at the post-transcriptional level. They are critical for endothelial cell gene expression and function and are involved in many pathophysiological processes. The miR-181 family is one of the essential angiogenic regulators. This review summarizes the current state of knowledge of the role of miR-181 family members in endothelial cell dysfunction, with emphasis on their pathophysiological roles in aberrant angiogenesis. The actions of miR-181 members are summarized concerning their targets and associated major angiogenic signaling pathways in a cancer-specific context. Elucidating the underlying functional mechanisms of miR-181 family members that are dysregulated in endothelial cells or cancer cells is invaluable for developing miRNA-based therapeutics for angiogenesis-related diseases such as retinopathies, angiogenic tumors, and cancer. Finally, potential clinical applications of miR-181 family members in anti-angiogenic tumor therapy are discussed

Switchable Lipid Provides pH-Sensitive Properties to Lipid and Hybrid Polymer/Lipid Membranes

Blending amphiphilic copolymers and lipids constitutes a novel approach to combine the advantages of polymersomes and liposomes into a new single hybrid membrane. Efforts have been made to design stimuli-responsive vesicles, in which the membrane’s dynamic is modulated by specific triggers. In this investigation, we proposed the design of pH-responsive hybrid vesicles formulated with poly(dimethylsiloxane)-block-poly(ethylene oxide) backbone (PDMS36-b-PEO23) and cationic switchable lipid (CSL). The latter undergoes a pH-triggered conformational change and induces membrane destabilization. Using confocal imaging and DLS measurements, we interrogated the structural changes in CSL-doped lipid and hybrid polymer/lipid unilamellar vesicles at the micro- and nanometric scale, respectively. Both switchable giant unilamellar lipid vesicles (GUV) and hybrid polymer/lipid unilamellar vesicles (GHUV) presented dynamic morphological changes, including protrusions and fission upon acidification. At the submicron scale, scattered intensity decreased for both switchable large unilamellar vesicles (LUV) and hybrid vesicles (LHUV) under acidic pH. Finally, monitoring the fluorescence leakage of encapsulated calcein, we attested that CSL increased the permeability of GUV and GHUV in a pH-specific fashion. Altogether, these results show that switchable lipids provide a pH-sensitive behavior to hybrid polymer/lipid vesicles that could be exploited for the triggered release of drugs, cell biomimicry studies, or as bioinspired micro/nanoreactors

Survivin silencing improved the cytotoxicity of carboplatin and melphalan in Y79 and primary retinoblastoma cells

International audienceSurvivin stands out as one of the most specific cancer targets discovered to date. Although single inhibition, e.g. through small interfering RNA (siRNA), has shown modest results in clinical trials, its combination with drugs holds promise to sensitize cancer cells to chemotherapeutics. In this study, we propose a sequential treatment of siRNA survivin followed by chemotherapy. Firstly, we demonstrated that siRNA-loaded switchable lipid nanoparticles (siLNP) silence survivin in a panel of cancer cell lines. Subsequently, we selected retinoblastoma (RB) as our model to screen four chemotherapeutic agents: carboplatin, topotecan, melphalan or teniposide. The effect of drugs on survivin expression and caspase-3 was investigated by RT-qPCR. The best drug combination was selected measuring the viability, survivin expression and the selectivity of the treatment. Our stepwise method revealed that siRNA delivery by switchable LNP sensitized Y79, but not the healthy APRE-19 cell line, to carboplatin and melphalan cytotoxicity. This ability was validated on primary human RB cells. Finally, the distinct behavior of the drugs demonstrated that a diligent screening of drugs should be envisioned when looking for synergy with survivin. Our sequential approach highlighted carboplatin and melphalan as agents to be investigated in future survivin-associated in vivo testing to tackle RB

Guidelines for the use and interpretation of assays for monitoring autophagy (4th edition)

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

Guidelines for the use and interpretation of assays for monitoring autophagy (4th edition)

International audienceIn 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