The Nonpsychoactive Cannabinoid Cannabidiol Inhibits 5-Hydroxytryptamine3A Receptor-Mediated Currents in Xenopus laevis Oocytes

The effect of the plant-derived nonpsychotropic cannabinoid, cannabidiol (CBD), on the function of hydroxytryptamine (5-HT)3A receptors expressed in Xenopus laevis oocytes was investigated using two-electrode voltage-clamp techniques. CBD reversibly inhibited 5-HT (1 μM)-evoked currents in a concentration-dependent manner (IC50 = 0.6 μM). CBD (1 μM) did not alter specific binding of the 5-HT3A antagonist [3H]3-(5-methyl-1H-imidazol-4-yl)-1-(1-methylindol-3-yl)propan-1-one (GR65630), in oocytes expressing 5-HT3A receptors. In the presence of 1 μM CBD, the maximal 5-HT-induced currents were also inhibited. The EC50 values were 1.2 and 1.4 μM, in the absence and presence of CBD, indicating that CBD acts as a noncompetitive antagonist of 5-HT3 receptors. Neither intracellular BAPTA injection nor pertussis toxin pretreatment (5 μg/ml) altered the CBD-evoked inhibition of 5-HT-induced currents. CBD inhibition was inversely correlated with 5-HT3A expression levels and mean 5-HT3 receptor current density. Pretreatment with actinomycin D, which inhibits protein transcription, decreased the mean 5-HT3 receptor current density and increased the magnitude of CBD inhibition. These data demonstrate that CBD is an allosteric inhibitor of 5-HT3 receptors expressed in X. laevis oocytes. They further suggest that allosteric inhibition of 5-HT3 receptors by CBD may contribute to its physiological roles in the modulation of nociception and emesis

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

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

Longer breast-feeding and protection against childhood leukaemia and lymphomas

The role of breast-feeding in protecting against childhood acute leukaemia and lymphomas is uncertain. We investigated this issue in a case-control study comprising 117 patients, aged 2-14 years, with acute lymphocytic leukaemia (ALL), Hodgkin's (HL) and non-Hodgkin's lymphoma (NHL), as well as 117 controls matched for age, sex and ethnicity. Information was collected via a telephone interview of the mothers. The median duration of breast-feeding among patients was significantly shorter than among controls, 7 (range 0-23) and 10 (range 0-20) months, respectively (P < 0.0001). Breast-feeding of 0-6 months' duration, when compared with feeding of longer than 6 months, was associated with increased odds ratios (OR) for ALL (OR = 2.47, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.17-5.25), HL (OR = 3.75, 95% CI 0.80-18.69), NHL (OR = 4.06, 95% CI 0.82-22.59), and overall (OR = 2.79, 95% CI 1.54-5.05). In the patient group, there were a significantly higher number of children and people per family, and patients were of a higher birth order than controls. In multivariate analysis, breast-feeding duration continues to be an independent predictor of lymphoid malignancies (P = 0.015). In conclusion, breast-feeding lasting longer than 6 months may protect against childhood acute leukaemia and lymphomas. (C) 2001 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved