| 1. |
- Klionsky, Daniel J., et al.
(författare)
-
Guidelines for the use and interpretation of assays for monitoring autophagy
- 2012
-
Ingår i: Autophagy. - : Informa UK Limited. - 1554-8635 .- 1554-8627. ; 8:4, s. 445-544
-
Forskningsöversikt (refereegranskat)abstract
- 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.
|
|
| 3. |
- Koukourakis, Michael I., et al.
(författare)
-
C2028T polymorphism in exon 12 and dinucleotide repeat polymorphism in intron 13 of the HIF-1 alpha gene define HIF-1 alpha protein expression in non-small cell lung cancer
- 2006
-
Ingår i: Lung Cancer. - : Elsevier BV. - 1872-8332 .- 0169-5002. ; 53:3, s. 257-262
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Objectives: In this study, we investigated whether polymorphisms of the HIF-1 alpha gene may account for the patterns of HIF-1 alpha protein expression in non-small cell lung carcinomas (NSCLC) and the expression of HIF-1 alpha down-stream proteins. Methods: Specific HIF-1 alpha polymorphisms were assessed in a series of patients with NSCLC: (a) the C to T transition at nucleotide 1744 (position 2028 according to sequence with accession number NM_001530, which gives rise to Pro/Ser variation at codon 582), (b) the G to A nucleotide substitution at point 1790 (position 2046 according to sequence with accession number NM_001530, which gives rise to Ala/Thr variation at codon 588), and (c) the dinucleotide GT repeat polymorphism in intron 13. Immunohistochemistry for HIF-1 alpha and down-stream proteins (VEGF, LDH-5, GLUT-1) was also performed in tumor material. Results: A strong association of the P582S polymorphism and of GT repeat polymorphism higher than 14/14 with increased HIF-1 alpha expression was noted. HIF-1 alpha polymorphism did not relate to the expression of the HIF-1 alpha downstream proteins analysed, but significant association of HIF-1 alpha expression with LDH-5 was confirmed (p=0.008). Conclusions: HIF-1 alpha polymorphisms may have an important impact on HIF-protein stability and, eventually, function. (C) 2006 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.
|
|
