Dendritic Cells and Hepatocytes Use Distinct Pathways to Process Protective Antigen from Plasmodium in vivo

Malaria-protective CD8+ T cells specific for the circumsporozoite (CS) protein are primed by dendritic cells (DCs) after sporozoite injection by infected mosquitoes. The primed cells then eliminate parasite liver stages after recognizing the CS epitopes presented by hepatocytes. To define the in vivo processing of CS by DCs and hepatocytes, we generated parasites carrying a mutant CS protein containing the H-2Kb epitope SIINFEKL, and evaluated the T cell response using transgenic and mutant mice. We determined that in both DCs and hepatocytes CS epitopes must reach the cytosol and use the TAP transporters to access the ER. Furthermore, we used endosomal mutant (3d) and cytochrome c treated mice to address the role of cross-presentation in the priming and effector phases of the T cell response. We determined that in DCs, CS is cross-presented via endosomes while, conversely, in hepatocytes protein must be secreted directly into the cytosol. This suggests that the main targets of protective CD8+ T cells are parasite proteins exported to the hepatocyte cytosol. Surprisingly, however, secretion of the CS protein into hepatocytes was not dependent upon parasite-export (Pexel/VTS) motifs in this protein. Together, these results indicate that the presentation of epitopes to CD8+ T cells follows distinct pathways in DCs when the immune response is induced and in hepatocytes during the effector phase

Epigenetic mechanisms in virus-induced tumorigenesis

About 15–20% of human cancers worldwide have viral etiology. Emerging data clearly indicate that several human DNA and RNA viruses, such as human papillomavirus, Epstein–Barr virus, Kaposi’s sarcoma-associated herpesvirus, hepatitis B virus, hepatitis C virus, and human T-cell lymphotropic virus, contribute to cancer development. Human tumor-associated viruses have evolved multiple molecular mechanisms to disrupt specific cellular pathways to facilitate aberrant replication. Although oncogenic viruses belong to different families, their strategies in human cancer development show many similarities and involve viral-encoded oncoproteins targeting the key cellular proteins that regulate cell growth. Recent studies show that virus and host interactions also occur at the epigenetic level. In this review, we summarize the published information related to the interactions between viral proteins and epigenetic machinery which lead to alterations in the epigenetic landscape of the cell contributing to carcinogenesis

The disruption of proteostasis in neurodegenerative diseases

Cells count on surveillance systems to monitor and protect the cellular proteome which, besides being highly heterogeneous, is constantly being challenged by intrinsic and environmental factors. In this context, the proteostasis network (PN) is essential to achieve a stable and functional proteome. Disruption of the PN is associated with aging and can lead to and/or potentiate the occurrence of many neurodegenerative diseases (ND). This not only emphasizes the importance of the PN in health span and aging but also how its modulation can be a potential target for intervention and treatment of human diseases.info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersio

ICAR: endoscopic skull‐base surgery

n/

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