Reactive oxygen species and small-conductance calcium-dependent potassium channels are key mediators of inflammation-induced hypotension and shock

Septic shock is associated with life-threatening vasodilation and hypotension. To cause vasodilation, vascular endothelium may release nitric oxide (NO), prostacyclin (PGI2), and the elusive endothelium-derived hyperpolarizing factor (EDHF). Although NO is critical in controlling vascular tone, inhibiting NO in septic shock does not improve outcome, on the contrary, precipitating the search for alternative therapeutic targets. Using a hyperacute tumor necrosis factor (TNF)-induced shock model in mice, we found that shock can develop independently of the known vasodilators NO, cGMP, PGI2, or epoxyeicosatrienoic acids. However, the antioxidant tempol efficiently prevented hypotension, bradycardia, hypothermia, and mortality, indicating the decisive involvement of reactive oxygen species (ROS) in these phenomena. Also, in classical TNF or lipopolysaccharide-induced shock models, tempol protected significantly. Experiments with (cell-permeable) superoxide dismutase or catalase, N-acetylcysteine and apocynin suggest that the ROS-dependent shock depends on intracellular \documentclass[12pt]{minimal} \usepackage{amsmath} \usepackage{wasysym} \usepackage{amsfonts} \usepackage{amssymb} \usepackage{amsbsy} \usepackage{mathrsfs} \usepackage{upgreek} \setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt} \begin{document}$$^\bullet {\hbox{OH}}$$\end{document} radicals. Potassium channels activated by ATP (KATP) or calcium (KCa) are important mediators of vascular relaxation. While NO and PGI2-induced vasodilation involves KATP and large-conductance BKCa channels, small-conductance SKCa channels mediate vasodilation induced by EDHF. Interestingly, also SKCa inhibition completely prevented the ROS-dependent shock. Our data thus indicate that intracellular \documentclass[12pt]{minimal} \usepackage{amsmath} \usepackage{wasysym} \usepackage{amsfonts} \usepackage{amssymb} \usepackage{amsbsy} \usepackage{mathrsfs} \usepackage{upgreek} \setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt} \begin{document}$$^\bullet {\hbox{OH}}$$\end{document} and SKCa channels represent interesting new therapeutic targets for inflammatory shock. Moreover, they may also explain why antioxidants other than tempol fail to provide survival benefit during shock

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