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

[Abstract unavailable

Complex genetic and physiological variations as well as environmental factors that drive emergence of chromosomal instability, development of unscheduled cell death, skewed differentiation, and altered metabolism are central to the pathogenesis of human diseases and disorders. Understanding the molecular bases for these processes is important for the development of new diagnostic biomarkers, and for identifying new therapeutic targets. In 1973, a group of non-histone nuclear proteins with high electrophoretic mobility was discovered and termed High-Mobility Group (HMG) proteins. The HMG proteins include three superfamilies termed HMGB, HMGN, and HMGA. High-mobility group box 1 (HMGB1), the most abundant and well-studied HMG protein, senses and coordinates the cellular stress response and plays a critical role not only inside of the cell as a DNA chaperone, chromosome guardian, autophagy sustainer, and protector from apoptotic cell death, but also outside the cell as the prototypic damage associated molecular pattern molecule (DAMP). This DAMP, in conjunction with other factors, thus has cytokine, chemokine, and growth factor activity, orchestrating the inflammatory and immune response. All of these characteristics make HMGB1 a critical molecular target in multiple human diseases including infectious diseases, ischemia, immune disorders, neurodegenerative diseases, metabolic disorders, and cancer. Indeed, a number of emergent strategies have been used to inhibit HMGB1 expression, release, and activity in vitro and in vivo. These include antibodies, peptide inhbitiors, RNAi, anti-coagulants, endogenous hormones, various chemical compounds, HMGB1-receptor and signaling pathway inhibition, artificial DNAs, physical strategies including vagus nerve stimulation and other surgical approaches. Future work further investigating the details of HMGB1 localizationtion, structure, post-translational modification, and identifccation of additional partners will undoubtedly uncover additional secrets regarding HMGB1’s multiple functions.

Ferroptosis is an iron-dependent form of non-apoptotic cell death, but its molecular mechanism remains largely unknown. Here, we demonstrate that heat shock protein beta-1 (HSPB1) is a negative regulator of ferroptotic cancer cell death. Erastin, a specific ferroptosis-inducing compound, stimulates heat shock factor 1 (HSF1)-dependent HSPB1 expression in cancer cells. Knockdown of HSF1 and HSPB1 enhances erastin-induced ferroptosis, whereas heat shock pretreatment and overexpression of HSPB1 inhibits erastin-induced ferroptosis. Protein kinase C-mediated HSPB1 phosphorylation confers protection against ferroptosis by reducing iron-mediated production of lipid reactive oxygen species. Moreover, inhibition of the HSF1-HSPB1 pathway and HSPB1 phosphorylation increases the anticancer activity of erastin in human xenograft mouse tumor models. Our findings reveal an essential role for HSPB1 in iron metabolism with important effects on ferroptosis-mediated cancer therapy.

Increasing evidence suggests the important role of metabolic reprogramming in the regulation of the innate inflammatory response, but the underlying mechanism remains unclear. Here, we provide evidence to support a novel role for the pyruvate kinase M2 (PKM2)-mediated Warburg effect, namely aerobic glycolysis, in the regulation of high mobility group box 1 (HMGB1) release. PKM2 interacts with hypoxia-inducible factor 1α (HIF1α) and activates the HIF-1α-dependent transcription of enzymes necessary for aerobic glycolysis in macrophages. Knockdown of PKM2, HIF1α, and glycolysis-related genes uniformly decreases lactate production and HMGB1 release. Similarly, a potential PKM2 inhibitor, shikonin, reduces serum lactate and HMGB1 levels and protects mice from lethal endotoxemia and sepsis. Collectively, these findings shed light on a novel mechanism for metabolic control of inflammation by regulating HMGB1 release and highlight the importance of targeting aerobic glycolysis in the treatment of sepsis and other inflammatory diseases.