| 1. |
|
|
| 2. |
|
|
| 3. |
- Klionsky, Daniel J., et al.
(author)
-
Guidelines for the use and interpretation of assays for monitoring autophagy
- 2012
-
In: Autophagy. - : Informa UK Limited. - 1554-8635 .- 1554-8627. ; 8:4, s. 445-544
-
Research review (peer-reviewed)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.
|
|
| 4. |
- Wolzak, K., et al.
(author)
-
Protein disulfide isomerases as CSF biomarkers for the neuronal response to tau pathology
- 2023
-
In: Alzheimers & Dementia. - : Wiley. - 1552-5260 .- 1552-5279. ; 19:8, s. 3563-3574
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- IntroductionCerebrospinal fluid (CSF) biomarkers for specific cellular disease processes are lacking for tauopathies. In this translational study we aimed to identify CSF biomarkers reflecting early tau pathology-associated unfolded protein response (UPR) activation. MethodsWe employed mass spectrometry proteomics and targeted immunoanalysis in a combination of biomarker discovery in primary mouse neurons in vitro and validation in patient CSF from two independent large multicentre cohorts (EMIF-AD MBD, n = 310; PRIDE, n = 771). ResultsFirst, we identify members of the protein disulfide isomerase (PDI) family in the neuronal UPR-activated secretome and validate secretion upon tau aggregation in vitro. Next, we demonstrate that PDIA1 and PDIA3 levels correlate with total- and phosphorylated-tau levels in CSF. PDIA1 levels are increased in CSF from AD patients compared to controls and patients with tau-unrelated frontotemporal and Lewy body dementia (LBD). HighlightsNeuronal unfolded protein response (UPR) activation induces the secretion of protein disulfide isomerases (PDIs) in vitro.PDIA1 is secreted upon tau aggregation in neurons in vitro.PDIA1 and PDIA3 levels correlate with total and phosphorylated tau levels in CSF.PDIA1 levels are increased in CSF from Alzheimer's disease (AD) patients compared to controls.PDIA1 levels are not increased in CSF from tau-unrelated frontotemporal dementia (FTD) and Lewy body dementia (LBD) patients.
|
|
| 5. |
|
|
| 6. |
|
|
