Éditeur(s) : HAL CCSD Nature Publishing Group
Résumé : International audience
Most tumors undergo metabolic reprogramming towards glycolysis, the so-called Warburg effect, to support growth and survival. Overexpression of IF1, the physiological inhibitor of the F0F1ATPase, has been related to this phenomenon and appears to be a relevant marker in cancer. Environmental contributions to cancer development are now widely accepted but little is known about the underlying intracellular mechanisms. Among the environmental pollutants humans are commonly exposed to, benzo[a]pyrene (B[a]P), the prototype molecule of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs), is a well-known human carcinogen. Besides apoptotic signals, B[a]P can also induce survival signals in liver cells, both likely involved in cancer promotion. Our previous works showed that B[a]P elicited a Warburg-like effect, thus favoring cell survival. The present study aimed at further elucidating the molecular mechanisms involved in the B[a]P-induced metabolic reprogramming, by testing the possible involvement of IF1. We presently demonstrate, both in vitro and in vivo, that PAHs, especially B[a]P, strongly increase IF1 expression. Such an increase, which might rely on β2-adrenergic receptor activation, notably participates to the B[a]P-induced glycolytic shift and cell survival in liver cells. By identifying IF1 as a target of PAHs, this study provides new insights about how environmental factors may contribute to related carcinogenesis.
ISSN: 2045-2322

hal-01518808
https://hal-univ-rennes1.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-01518808
https://hal-univ-rennes1.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-01518808/document
https://hal-univ-rennes1.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-01518808/file/Hardonni%C3%A8re%20et%20al%202017.pdf
DOI : 10.1038/s41598-017-00269-7

Éditeur(s) : HAL CCSD Nature Publishing Group
Résumé : International audience
Cancer cells display alterations in many cellular processes. One core hallmark of cancer is the Warburg effect which is a glycolytic reprogramming that allows cells to survive and proliferate. Although the contributions of environmental contaminants to cancer development are widely accepted, the underlying mechanisms have to be clarified. Benzo[a]pyrene (B[a]P), the prototype of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, exhibits genotoxic and carcinogenic effects, and it is a human carcinogen according to the International Agency for Research on Cancer. In addition to triggering apoptotic signals, B[a]P may induce survival signals, both of which are likely to be involved in cancer promotion. We previously suggested that B[a]P-induced mitochondrial dysfunctions, especially membrane hyperpolarization, might trigger cell survival signaling in rat hepatic epithelial F258 cells. Here, we further characterized these dysfunctions by focusing on energy metabolism. We found that B[a]P promoted a metabolic reprogramming. Cell respiration decreased and lactate production increased. These changes were associated with alterations in the tricarboxylic acid cycle which likely involve a dysfunction of the mitochondrial complex II. The glycolytic shift relied on activation of the Na+/H+ exchanger 1 (NHE1) and appeared to be a key feature in B[a]P-induced cell survival related to changes in cell phenotype (epithelial-to-mesenchymal transition and cell migration).
ISSN: 2045-2322

Droits : http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/
hal-01359569
https://hal-univ-rennes1.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-01359569
https://hal-univ-rennes1.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-01359569/document
https://hal-univ-rennes1.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-01359569/file/The%20environmental%20carcinogen-CCBY%20%281%29.pdf
DOI : 10.1038/srep30776

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