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

Key Points• The myeloid Syk-coupled C-type lectin 5A (CLEC5A) is critical for dengue virusinduced NALP3 inflammasome activation.• Inflammatory macrophage is distinct from resting macrophage in inflammasome activation by dengue virus and other pathogens.

TL1A is a member of the tumor necrosis factor superfamily and plays an important role in regulating endothelial cell apoptosis. A previous study shows TL1A is able to interact with death receptor 3 and decoy receptor 3 (DcR3). Here, we demonstrate that DcR3 is able to induce angiogenesis in human umbilical vein endothelial cells (HUVECs). DcR3 promotes HUVEC proliferation and migration and up-regulates matrix metalloproteinase-2 mRNA expression and enzyme activity. Furthermore, DcR3 enhances EC differentiation into cord vascular-like structures in vitro, as well as neovascularization in vivo. The effects of DcR3 on HUVECs are also mimicked by anti-TL1A and antideath receptor 3 antibodies. In contrast, human aortic endothelial cells, which do not express TL1A, are not responsive to DcR3 treatment, including cell proliferation, migration, and angiogenic differentiation. These data demonstrate DcR3 might not only help tumor cells to escape immune surveillance but also induce angiogenesis by blocking TL1A action in endothelial cells. The pathological role of DcR3 in promoting cancer progress raises the possibility to target DcR3 for antiangiogenic therapy in the future.

Decoy receptor 3 (DcR3), a soluble receptor for FasL, LIGHT and TL1A, is highly expressed in cancer cells. We show that pretreatment of HUVECs with DcR3 enhances the adhesion of THP-1 and U937 cells and primary monocytes. A similar stimulatory effect of DcR3 on THP-1 adhesion was also observed in human microvascular endothelial cells (HMVECs). Flow cytometry and ELISA showed that DcR3-treated HUVECs exhibited significant increases in ICAM-1 and VCAM-1 expression. We also demonstrate the ability of DcR3 to stimulate the secretion of IL-8 by HUVECs. RT-PCR and reporter assays revealed that the expression of adhesion molecules and IL-8 are regulated at the level of gene transcription. Experiments with pyrrolidine dithiocarbamate indicated the involvement of an NF-κB signaling pathway. DcR3 was found to induce IκB kinase activation, IκB degradation, p65 nuclear translocation, and NF-κB DNA-binding activity. The enhancement by DcR3 of cell adhesion to HUVECs was not mimicked by the TL1A-Ab, which has been shown in our previous work to be a neutralizing Ab against TL1A, thereby inducing HUVECs angiogenesis. Moreover, DcR3-induced cell adhesion could be detected in human aortic endothelial cells (ECs) in which TL1A expression is lacking. Together, our data demonstrate that DcR3 increases monocyte adhesion to ECs via NF-κB activation, leading to the transcriptional up-regulation of adhesion molecules and IL-8 in ECs. This novel action appears not to be due to TL1A neutralization, but occurs through an as yet undefined target(s). This study implicates DcR3 in the relationship between inflammation and cancer development.