СТРУКТУРНО-ФУНКЦІОНАЛЬНІ ОСОБЛИВОСТІ ЛІМФОЦИТІВ У ХВОРИХ НА ХРОНІЧНУ ХВОРОБУ НИРОК, ГЛОМЕРУЛОНЕФРИТ

Необходимо разрабатывать маркеры генетического скрининга, которые позволят диагностировать мультифакторные заболевания на начальных стадиях и определять эффективность их лечения. Целью данной работы стало изучение особенностей структурно-функционального состояния хроматина и ядер лимфоцитов периферической крови пациентов с хронической болезнью почек, гломерулонефритом. Обследовано 75 больных. Для цитологического исследования изготавливали мазки периферической крови и проводили анализ интерфазных ядер лимфоцитов. Выявлены изменения компактизации хроматина, активности ядрышкового аппарата и морфологически измененных ядер, которые отражают состояние транскрипционно-трансляционного процесса в клетке. Установлены особенности структурно-функциональных показателей метаболизма лимфоцитов в зависимости от пола пациентов и синдрома заболевания. Исследованные цитологические маркеры можно использовать для диагностики этой патологии на начальных стадиях и с целью оценки эффективности проводимого лечения

Thiazolidinone motif in anticancer drug discovery. Experience of DH LNMU medicinal chemistry scientific group

The aim was analysis of 4-thiazolidinones and related heterocyclic systems anticancer activity data and formation of some rational design directions of potential anticancer agents. Synthetic research carried out in Danylo Halytsky Lviv National Medical University (DH LNMU) allowed us to propose a whole number of new molecular design directions of biological active 4-thiazolidinones and related heterocyclic systems, as well as obtain directed library that numbers over 5000 of novel compounds. At the present time in vitro anticancer activity screening was carried out for more than 1000 compounds (US NCI protocol (Developmental Therapeutic Program), among them 167 compounds showed high antitumor activity level. For the purpose of optimization and rational design of highly active molecules with optimal «drug-like» characteristics and discovering of possible mechanism of action SAR, QSAR analysis and molecular docking were carried out. The ultimate aim of the project is creating of innovative synthetic drug with special mechanism of action and sufficient pharmacological and toxicological features. Some aspects of structure–activity relationships were determined and structure design directions were proposed. The series of active compounds with high anticancer activity and/or selectivity levels were selected. Key words: synthesis, 4-thia(imida)zolidinones, thiopyrano[2,3-d]thiazoles, anticancer activity, (Q)SAR.Метою роботи був аналіз результатів дослідження протипухлинної активності 4-азолідонів і споріднених гетероциклічних сполук та формування деяких напрямків раціонального дизайну потенційних протипухлинних агентів. Синтетичні дослідження, проведені у ЛНМУ імені Данила Галицького, дозволили запропонувати низку нових спрямувань молекулярного дизайну біологічно активних 4-тіазолідинонів та споріднених гетероциклічних систем, а також одержати сфокусовану бібліотеку, яка нараховує понад 5000 нових сполук. На цей час здійснено in vitro скринінг протипухлинної активності понад 1000 сполук (US NCI протокол Developmental Therapeutic Program), з-поміж яких 167 ідентифіковано як такі, що мають високу протиракову активність. Для оптимізації і раціонального дизайну високоактивних молекул з оптимальними «лікоподібними» характеристиками та визначення можливого механізму біологічної дії проведено SAR- і QSAR-аналіз і молекулярний докінг. Кінцевою метою проекту є створення інноваційного синтетичного лікарського препарату з оригінальним механізмом дії та достатнім фармакологічним і токсикологічним профілем. Ключові слова: синтез, 4-тіа(іміда)золідинони, тіопірано[2, 3-d]тіазоли, протипухлинна активність, (Q)SAR.Цель работы состояла в анализе результатов исследования противоопухолевой активности 4-азолидонов и родственных гетероциклических систем и формировании некоторых направлений рационального дизайна потенциалных противоопухолевых агентов. Синтетические исследования, проведенные в ЛНМУ имени Данила Галицкого, позволили предложить ряд новых направлений молекулярного дизайна биологически активных 4-тиазолидинонов и родственных гетероциклических систем, а также получить сфокусированную библиотеку, насчитывающую более 5000 новых соединений. На данный момент осуществлен in vitro скрининг противоопухолевой активности (US NCI протокол Developmental Therapeutic Program) более 1000 соединений, позволивший идентифицировать 167 соединений с высоким противораковым эффектом. Для оптимизации и рационального дизайна высокоактивных молекул с оптимальными «drug-like» характеристиками и установления вероятного механизма биологического действия проведен SAR- и QSAR-анализ и молекулярный докинг. Конечная цель проекта – создание инновацинного синтетического лекарственного сресдтва с оригинальным механизмом действия, достаточным фармакологическим и токсикологическим профилем. Ключевые слова: синтез, 4-тиа(имида)золидиноны, тиопирано[2,3-d]тиазолы, противоопухолевая активность, (Q)SAR

Quinacrine upregulates p21/p27 independent of p53 through autophagy-mediated downregulation of p62-Skp2 axis in ovarian cancer

Abstract We have previously shown that the anti-malarial compound Quinacrine (QC) inhibits ovarian cancer (OC) growth by modulating autophagy. In the present study we extended these studies to identify the molecular pathways regulated by QC to promote apoptosis independent of p53 status in OC. QC exhibited strong anti-cancer properties in OC cell lines in contrast to other anti-malarial autophagy inhibiting drugs. QC treatment selectively upregulated cell cycle inhibitor p21, and downregulated F box protein Skp2 and p62/SQSTM1 expression independent of p53 status. Genetic downregulation of key autophagy protein ATG5 abolished QC-mediated effects on both cell cycle protein p21/Skp2 as well as autophagic cargo protein p62. Furthermore, genetic silencing of p62/SQSTM1 resulted in increased sensitivity to QC-mediated apoptosis, downregulated Skp2 mRNA and increased accumulation of p21 expression. Likewise, genetic knockdown of Skp2 resulted in the upregulation of p21 and p27 and increased sensitivity of OC cells to QC treatment. In contrast, transient overexpression of exogenous p62-HA plasmid rescued the QC-mediated Skp2 downregulation indicating the positive regulation of Skp2 by p62. Collectively, these data indicate that QC-mediated effects on cell cycle proteins p21/Skp2is autophagy-dependent and p53-independent in high grade serious OC cells

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

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

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