Éditeur(s) : HAL CCSD
Résumé : International audience
We used K562 cells sensitive or generated resistant to imatinib or nilotinib to investigate their response to mycophenolic acid (MPA). MPA induced DNA damage leading to cell death with a minor contribution of apoptosis, as revealed by annexin V labeling (up to 25%). In contrast, cell cycle arrest and positive staining for senescence-associated β-galactosidase activity were detected for a large cell population (80%). MPA-induced cell death was potentialized by the inhibition of autophagy and this is associated to the upregulation of apoptosis. In contrast, senescence was neither decreased nor abrogated in autophagy deficient K562 cells. Primary CD34 cells from CML patients sensitive or resistant to imatinib or nilotinib respond to MPA although apoptosis is mainly detected. These results show that MPA is an interesting tool to overcome resistance in vitro and in vivo mainly in the evolved phase of the disease.
Leukemia Research and Treatment

hal-00846103
https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-00846103
https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-00846103/document
https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-00846103/file/Mycophenolic_Acid_Overcomes-accepted.pdf
PUBMED : 23213550

Éditeur(s) : HAL CCSD Landes Bioscience
Résumé : International audience
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.
Autophagy

hal-00735751
https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-00735751
PUBMED : 22966490