Hypoxia leads to significant changes in alternative splicing and elevated expression of CLK splice factor kinases in PC3 prostate cancer cells

© 2018 The Author(s). Background: Mounting evidence suggests that one of the ways that cells adapt to hypoxia is through alternative splicing. The aim of this study was firstly to examine the effect of hypoxia on the alternative splicing of cancer associated genes using the prostate cancer cell line PC3 as a model. Secondly, the effect of hypoxia on the expression of several regulators of splicing was examined. Methods: PC3 cells were grown in 1% oxygen in a hypoxic chamber for 48 h, RNA extracted and sent for high throughput PCR analysis at the RNomics platform at the University of Sherbrooke, Canada. Genes whose exon inclusion rate PSI (ψ) changed significantly were identified, and their altered exon inclusion rates verified by RT-PCR in three cell lines. The expression of splice factors and splice factor kinases in response to hypoxia was examined by qPCR and western blotting. The splice factor kinase CLK1 was inhibited with the benzothiazole TG003. Results: In PC3 cells the exon inclusion rate PSI (ψ) was seen to change by >25% in 12 cancer-associated genes; MBP, APAF1, PUF60, SYNE2, CDC42BPA, FGFR10P, BTN2A2, UTRN, RAP1GDS1, PTPN13, TTC23 and CASP9 (caspase 9). The expression of the splice factors SRSF1, SRSF2, SRSF3, SAM68, HuR, hnRNPA1, and of the splice factor kinases SRPK1 and CLK1 increased significantly in hypoxia. We also observed that the splice factor kinase CLK3, but not CLK2 and CLK4, was also induced in hypoxic DU145 prostate, HT29 colon and MCF7 breast cancer cell lines. Lastly, we show that the inhibition of CLK1 in PC3 cells with the benzothiazole TG003 increased expression of the anti-apoptotic isoform caspase 9b. Conclusions: Significant changes in alternative splicing of cancer associated genes occur in prostate cancer cells in hypoxic conditions. The expression of several splice factors and splice factor kinases increases during hypoxia, in particular the Cdc-like splice factor kinases CLK1 and CLK3. We suggest that in hypoxia the elevated expression of these regulators of splicing helps cells adapt through alternative splicing of key cancer-associated genes. We suggest that the CLK splice factor kinases could be targeted in cancers in which hypoxia contributes to resistance to therapy

Minimal information for studies of extracellular vesicles 2018 (MISEV2018):a position statement of the International Society for Extracellular Vesicles and update of the MISEV2014 guidelines

The last decade has seen a sharp increase in the number of scientific publications describing physiological and pathological functions of extracellular vesicles (EVs), a collective term covering various subtypes of cell-released, membranous structures, called exosomes, microvesicles, microparticles, ectosomes, oncosomes, apoptotic bodies, and many other names. However, specific issues arise when working with these entities, whose size and amount often make them difficult to obtain as relatively pure preparations, and to characterize properly. The International Society for Extracellular Vesicles (ISEV) proposed Minimal Information for Studies of Extracellular Vesicles (“MISEV”) guidelines for the field in 2014. We now update these “MISEV2014” guidelines based on evolution of the collective knowledge in the last four years. An important point to consider is that ascribing a specific function to EVs in general, or to subtypes of EVs, requires reporting of specific information beyond mere description of function in a crude, potentially contaminated, and heterogeneous preparation. For example, claims that exosomes are endowed with exquisite and specific activities remain difficult to support experimentally, given our still limited knowledge of their specific molecular machineries of biogenesis and release, as compared with other biophysically similar EVs. The MISEV2018 guidelines include tables and outlines of suggested protocols and steps to follow to document specific EV-associated functional activities. Finally, a checklist is provided with summaries of key points

High dose rate and flattening filter free irradiation can be safely implemented in clinical practice

PURPOSE: We hypothesize that flattening filter free (FFF) high dose rate irradiation will decrease cell survival in normal and cancer cells with more pronounced effects in DNA repair deficient cells. Additionally, we hypothesize that removal of the flattening filter will result in an enhanced relative biological effectiveness independent of the dose rate. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Clonogenic survival was assessed after exposure to dose rates of 4 or 24 Gy/min (FFF 10 megavolt [MV] photon beam) using a Varian TrueBeam accelerator. Additionally, cells were exposed to 4 Gy/min with or without flattening filter. Relative biological effectiveness estimations were performed comparing the different beam photon spectra. RESULTS: Cell survival in tumor and normal cell lines was not influenced by high dose rate irradiation. The intrinsic radiation sensitivity of DNA repair deficient cells was not affected by high dose rate compared to normal dose rate. Furthermore, the relative biological effectiveness was not significantly different from unity in any of the cell lines for both FFF and conventional flattened beam exposures. CONCLUSIONS: High dose rate irradiation did not affect long-term survival and DNA repair for cell lines of different tissues. This suggests that high dose rate does not influence treatment outcome or treatment toxicity and could be safely implemented in clinical routine

EGFR signaling and autophagy dependence for growth, survival, and therapy resistance

The epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) is amplified or mutated in various human epithelial tumors. Its expression and activation leads to cell proliferation, differentiation, and survival. Consistently, EGFR amplification or expression of EGFR variant 3 (EGFRvIII) is associated with resistance to conventional cancer therapy through activation of pro-survival signaling and DNA-repair mechanisms. EGFR targeting has successfully been exploited as strategy to increase treatment efficacy. Nevertheless, these targeting strategies have only been proven effective in a limited percentage of human tumors.   Recent knowledge indicates that EGFR deregulated tumors display differences in autophagy and dependence on autophagy for growth and survival and the use of autophagy to increase resistance to EGFR-targeting drugs. In this review the dependency on autophagy and its role in mediating resistance to EGFR-targeting agents will be discussed. Considering the current knowledge, autophagy inhibition could provide a novel strategy to enhance therapy efficacy in treatment of EGFR deregulated tumors

Signals from the lysosome: a control centre for cellular clearance and energy metabolism.

For a long time lysosomes were considered merely to be cellular “incinerators” involved in the degradation and recycling of cellular waste. However, there is now compelling evidence indicating that lysosomes have a much broader function and that they are involved in fundamental processes such as secretion, plasma membrane repair, signaling and energy metabolism. Furthermore, the essential role of lysosomes in the autophagic pathway puts these organelles at the crossroads of several cellular processes, with significant implications for health and disease. The identification of a master gene, transcription factor EB (TFEB), that regulates lysosomal biogenesis and autophagy, has revealed how the lysosome adapts to environmental cues, such as starvation, and suggests novel therapeutic strategies for modulating lysosomal function in human disease

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

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. 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 vs. those that measure flux through the autophagy pathway (i.e., the complete process); thus, a block in macroautophagy that results in autophagosome accumulation needs to be differentiated from stimuli that result in increased autophagic activity, defined as increased autophagy induction coupled with increased delivery to, and degradation within, lysosomes (in most 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 field 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. 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. 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