Research in autophagy continues to accelerate,(1) and as a result many new scientists are entering the field. Accordingly, it is important to establish a standard set of criteria for monitoring macroautophagy in different organisms. Recent reviews have described the range of assays that have been used for this purpose.(2,3) There are many useful and convenient methods that can be used to monitor macroautophagy in yeast, but relatively few in other model systems, and there is much confusion regarding acceptable methods to measure macroautophagy in higher eukaryotes. A key point that needs to be emphasized is that there is a difference between measurements that monitor the numbers of autophagosomes versus those that measure flux through the autophagy pathway; thus, a block in macroautophagy that results in autophagosome accumulation needs to be differentiated from fully functional autophagy that includes delivery to, and degradation within, lysosomes (in most higher eukaryotes) or the vacuole (in plants and fungi). Here, we present a set of guidelines for the selection and interpretation of the methods that can be used by investigators who are attempting to examine macroautophagy and related processes, as well as by reviewers who need to provide realistic and reasonable critiques of papers that investigate these processes. This set of guidelines is 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 verify an autophagic response.

No abstract

Bcl-2 was isolated from the t(14;18) chromosomal breakpoint in follicular B-cell lymphoma. Bcl-2 has the unique oncogenic role of extending cell survival by inhibiting a variety of apoptotic deaths. An emerging family of Bcl-2-related proteins share two highly conserved regions referred to here as Bcl-2 homology 1 and 2 (BH1 and BH2) domains (Fig. 1). This includes Bax which heterodimerizes with Bcl-2 and when overexpressed counteracts Bcl-2. We report here that site-specific mutagenesis of Bcl-2 establishes the two domains as novel dimerization motifs. Substitution of Gly 145 in BH1 domain or Trp 188 in BH2 domain completely abrogated Bcl-2's death-repressor activity in interleukin-3 deprivation, gamma-irradiation and glucocorticoid-induced apoptosis. Mutations that affected Bcl-2's function also disrupted its heterodimerization with Bax, yet still permitted Bcl-2 homodimerization. These results establish a functional role for the BH1 and BH2 domains and suggest Bcl-2 exerts its action through heterodimerization with Bax.

The BCL-2 family of proteins consists of both antagonists (e.g., BCL-2) and agonists (e.g., BAX) that regulate apoptosis and compete through dimerization. The BH1 and BH2 domains of BCL-2 are required to heterodimerize with BAX and to repress cell death; conversely, the BH3 domain of BAX is required to heterodimerize with BCL-2 and to promote cell death. To extend this pathway, we used interactive cloning to identify Bid, which encodes a novel death agonist that heterodimerizes with either agonists (BAX) or antagonists (BCL-2). BID possesses only the BH3 domain, lacks a carboxy-terminal signal-anchor segment, and is found in both cytosolic and membrane locations. BID counters the protective effect of BCL-2. Moreover, expression of BID, without another death stimulus, induces ICE-like proteases and apoptosis. Mutagenesis revealed that an intact BH3 domain of BID was required to bind the BH1 domain of either BCL-2 or BAX. A BH3 mutant of BID that still heterodimerized with BCL-2 failed to promote apoptosis, dissociating these activities. In contrast, the only BID BH3 mutant that retained death promoting activity interacted with BAX, but not BCL-2. This BH3-only molecule supports BH3 as a death domain and favors a model in which BID represents a death ligand for the membrane-bound receptor BAX.

Autophagy is an evolutionarily conserved, intracellular self-defense mechanism in which organelles and proteins are sequestered into autophagic vesicles that are subsequently degraded through fusion with lysosomes. Cells, thereby, prevent the toxic accumulation of damaged or unnecessary components, but also recycle these components to sustain metabolic homoeostasis. Heightened autophagy is a mechanism of resistance for cancer cells faced with metabolic and therapeutic stress, revealing opportunities for exploitation as a therapeutic target in cancer. We summarize recent developments in the field of autophagy and cancer and build upon the results presented at the Cancer Therapy Evaluation Program (CTEP) Early Drug Development meeting in March 2010. Herein, we describe our current understanding of the core components of the autophagy machinery and the functional relevance of autophagy within the tumor microenvironment, and we outline how this knowledge has informed preclinical investigations combining the autophagy inhibitor hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) with chemotherapy, targeted therapy, and immunotherapy. Finally, we describe ongoing clinical trials involving HCQ as a first generation autophagy inhibitor, as well as strategies for the development of novel, more potent, and specific inhibitors of autophagy.