Literature DB >> 31383875

Colorectal cancer cells respond differentially to autophagy inhibition in vivo.

Annie Lauzier1,2, Josiann Normandeau-Guimond1,2, Vanessa Vaillancourt-Lavigueur1,2, Vincent Boivin1,3, Martine Charbonneau1,2, Nathalie Rivard1,2, Michelle S Scott1,3, Claire M Dubois1,2, Steve Jean4,5.   

Abstract

Autophagy has both tumor-promoting and -suppressing effects in cancer, including colorectal cancer (CRC), with transformed cells often exhibiting high autophagic flux. In established tumors, autophagy inhibition can lead to opposite responses resulting in either tumor cell death or hyperproliferation. The functional mechanisms underlying these differences are poorly understood. The present study aimed to investigate the relationship between the autophagic capacities of CRC cells and their sensitivities to autophagy inhibition. All studied CRC cell lines showed high basal autophagic flux. However, only HCT116 and Caco-2/15 cells displayed regulated autophagic flux upon starvation. Knockdown of ATG5 (which disrupts autophagosome elongation) or RAB21 (which decreases autophagosome/lysosome fusion) had little effect on CRC cell proliferation in vitro. Nonetheless, inhibition of autophagy in vivo had a substantial cell line-dependent impact on tumor growth, with some cells displaying decreased (HCT116 and Caco-2/15) or increased (SW480 and LoVo) proliferation. RNA sequencing and Western blot analyses in hyperproliferative SW480 tumors revealed that the mTORC2 and AKT pathways were hyperactivated following autophagy impairment. Inhibition of either mTOR or AKT activities rescued the observed hyperproliferation in autophagy-inhibited SW480 and reduced tumor growth. These results highlight that autophagy inhibition can lead, in specific cellular contexts, to compensatory mechanisms promoting tumor growth.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2019        PMID: 31383875      PMCID: PMC6683171          DOI: 10.1038/s41598-019-47659-7

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Sci Rep        ISSN: 2045-2322            Impact factor:   4.379


Introduction

Macro-autophagy (hereafter referred to as autophagy) is defined as the lysosomal degradation and recycling of cytosolic constituents[1]. Autophagy is a multistep process that requires the generation of a double-membrane organelle called the autophagosome[2]. Cytosolic proteins and organelles are targeted inside autophagosomes during their expansion, and once completed, the latter mature to fuse with endolysosomes, where they are degraded and their content recycled[2,3]. Autophagy is an essential homeostatic and stress response mechanism that is conserved across all eukaryotes[4]. As such, it protects cells from nutrient deprivation or oxidative, genotoxic and proteotoxic stresses, amongst others[5]. In accordance with these roles in cell homeostasis and adaptation, autophagic dysfunctions are associated with a wide range of human diseases[6]. In normal cells, autophagy protects against transformation[5,7]. Tumor suppressing capabilities of autophagy are exemplified by the fact that deletions of numerous core autophagy genes lead to increased tumor formation in a variety of tissues in mouse models[5,8-10]. Moreover, in humans, the essential autophagy gene ATG6 is a haplo-insufficient tumor suppressor gene[11]. Autophagy is believed to protect cells from transformation by i) guarding against stress, ii) promoting anti-cancer immunity, iii) enhancing DNA damage responses, iii) minimizing aneuploidy and inflammation and iv) promoting oncogene-induced senescence[5]. Although autophagy is often upregulated in established tumors, its importance in tumor development or as a therapeutic target nevertheless remains more contentious, and is highly context-dependent, depending on the type of cancer and their genetic backgrounds, among other factors[12]. Early studies investigating the role of autophagy in cancer focused predominantly on Ras-driven cancer models[13-15]. Using these models, it was initially proposed that Ras-driven cancers were addicted to autophagy both in vitro and in vivo[14,16]. Recent studies have challenged this model, and it is now acknowledged that autophagy addiction of Ras-driven cancers is restricted to a small subset of cancers[17-19]. Nevertheless, multiple mouse studies have demonstrated that autophagy inhibition results in decreased cancer cell proliferation and enhanced mouse survival[20-23]. At the cellular level, autophagy inhibition leads to metabolic changes culminating in decreased oxidative phosphorylation and improper lipid homeostasis and, in other settings, is associated with governing the balance between apoptosis and necroptosis[24,25]. The genetic background of tumors has also been found to play a key role in tumor responses. As such, in PDAC models, complete TP53 loss was found to promote proliferation of autophagy-deficient cells[26], while loss of TP53 heterozygosity led to an opposite effect, with decreased tumor proliferation[27]. This context-dependent impact of autophagy inhibition in cancer was further exemplified by studies performed in Drosophila, in which diverse oncogenic drivers were shown to be differentially impacted by autophagy inhibition[28]. Finally, non-cell autonomous autophagy in cancer-neighboring cells greatly influence cancer progression[29,30]. These examples highlight the context-dependency of autophagy inhibition in cancer, and the necessity to better define the molecular determinants leading to these differential responses. In colorectal cancer (CRC), the impact of autophagy inhibition has only recently been studied[31]. Various CRC cell lines have shown diverse sensitivities to pharmaceutical autophagy inhibition[32-36], although through CRISPR/Cas9 genome wide screens, most CRC cell lines were shown to be insensitive to genetic ablation of autophagy in normal culture conditions[37]. In contrast, in vivo evidence suggests a role for autophagy during CRC development, with autophagy being active at early stages of CRC formation[20]. In the classical ApcMin/+ mouse model, autophagy inhibition was found to lead to intestinal dysbiosis, which prevented tumor growth through a CD8-mediated immune response[20]. Altogether, these in vivo evidences suggest that autophagy inhibition in CRC could be beneficial in patients. Given the potential benefits of targeting autophagy in CRC patients, we revisited the link between autophagic functions in CRC cells and their response to autophagy inhibition both in vitro and in vivo, with the goal of identifying functional or genetic determinants of cell responses to autophagy inhibition. Results herein reveal that autophagy inhibition did not affect viability of CRC cells under nutrient-rich conditions in culture. However, cell line-specific responses to autophagy inhibition were identified in vivo, which correlated with the ability of cell lines to upregulate or not their autophagic flux. Importantly, mTOR reactivation was identified as an important cellular event leading to hyperproliferation of autophagy-deficient SW480 cells. These findings further highlight the context-dependent effects of autophagy inhibition in cancer cells and the importance of gaining a better understanding of the molecular processes impacted by autophagy inhibition in cancer cells.

Results

Colorectal cancer cells display different autophagic flux

While multiple studies have shown that transformed cells feature high autophagic flux[15,16], the correlation between autophagic flux and cell sensitivity to autophagy inhibition is poorly described, with very few studies having comprehensively compared autophagic flux between human CRC cell lines. Hence, the autophagic flux of various CRC cells with different genetic alterations and TP53 status were compared. To select the various CRC cell lines to test, emphasis was put on driver mutations, (KRAS, BRAF or PI3KCA mutations), p53 status (WT or mutated) and MSI status. Seven cell lines with various and independent alterations in these genes were hence selected (Supplemental Table 1). Autophagic flux was assessed by several complementing approaches[38-40] in order to 1) carefully establish basal autophagy levels and 2) measure the ability of CRC cells to further induce autophagy upon stress. LC3 lipidation was first monitored as a general means to assess autophagy. However, since steady-state LC3-II levels do not correlate with autophagic activity[41], autophagic flux was blocked with Bafilomycin A1 (a known inhibitor of lysosomal functions) and the accumulation of LC3-II monitored by immunoblotting in both complete nutrient (fed) or glucose-starved conditions and quantified from multiple independent repeats. Although cell lines exhibited different steady-state LC3-II levels under standard growth conditions (Fig. S1A and[42]), all accumulated LC3-II at similar rates, with no statistical differences detected between cell lines after a 16 hours BafA1 treatment (Fig. 1A,B). Importantly, undifferentiated normal human intestinal epithelial cells (HIEC)[42] did not accumulate considerable amounts of LC3 upon BafA1 treatment, compared to CRC cell lines (Fig. 1A,B), indicating that CRC cell lines have higher autophagic flux then normal epithelial cells. These experiments were next repeated under glucose starvation (full starvation being toxic) and, surprisingly, Caco-2/15 and HCT116 cells showed the largest accumulation of LC3-II after 16 hours of Bafilomycin A1 treatment (Fig. 1C,D). As such, Caco-2/15 and HCT116 showed respectively a 17 fold and a 13 fold increase under glucose starvation versus a 3 and a 4 fold increase in full nutrient condition. All other cell lines did not show such striking differences between starved and normal growth conditions. HIEC cells were not monitored given their high sensitivity to glucose starvation. To corroborate the immunoblot analysis, we performed immunofluorescence experiments on endogenous LC3[38,40]. Notably, only Caco-2/15 and HCT116 cells displayed the ability to induce their autophagic flux upon starvation compared to the other cell lines (Figs 1E,F and S1B and C), thus supporting the Western blot data.
Figure 1

Colorectal cancer cells differentially modulate autophagy upon stress. Autophagic functions were measured by anti-LC3 immunoblot analysis of CRC cells treated with Bafilomycin A1 in (A) full media or (C) glucose starvation media. Western blot quantifications of at least three independent experiments in (B) full media or (D) under glucose starvation; mean ± SEM. As can be seen, Caco-2/15 and HCT116 both upregulated autophagosome synthesis upon glucose starvation. (E) Immunofluorescence analysis of endogenous LC3 under fed or glucose starvation with BafilomycinA1 treatment. (F) Per cell quantification of the average number of LC3 punctae (n = at least 41 cells in 3 independent experiments); mean ± SEM. Statistical analysis was performed using (B,D and F) One-way Anova followed by Holm Sidak multiple comparisons test. Images from different gels were separated by spaces (A) or a line (C). Full-length blots are presented in Supplementary Fig. 6.

Colorectal cancer cells differentially modulate autophagy upon stress. Autophagic functions were measured by anti-LC3 immunoblot analysis of CRC cells treated with Bafilomycin A1 in (A) full media or (C) glucose starvation media. Western blot quantifications of at least three independent experiments in (B) full media or (D) under glucose starvation; mean ± SEM. As can be seen, Caco-2/15 and HCT116 both upregulated autophagosome synthesis upon glucose starvation. (E) Immunofluorescence analysis of endogenous LC3 under fed or glucose starvation with BafilomycinA1 treatment. (F) Per cell quantification of the average number of LC3 punctae (n = at least 41 cells in 3 independent experiments); mean ± SEM. Statistical analysis was performed using (B,D and F) One-way Anova followed by Holm Sidak multiple comparisons test. Images from different gels were separated by spaces (A) or a line (C). Full-length blots are presented in Supplementary Fig. 6. To more directly compare autophagic flux in CRC cell lines, GFP:mCherry:LC3 flux reporter studies were performed under fed and glucose starvation conditions. This technique allows discerning between autophagosomes (yellow) and autolysosomes (red) due to the loss of GFP fluorescence at acidic pH. Hence, an increase in the percentage of autolysosomes (red) represents increased flux[38,39]. HT29 and T84 cells were not analyzed given the poor localization of the probe in these cells. This approach highlighted varying ratios of autolysosomes/autophagosomes in the different cell lines. However, it demonstrated an increased flux in starved Caco-2/15 and HCT116 cells, illustrated by the significant increase in red labelled autolysosomes (Fig. 2A,B). Lastly, transmission electron microscopy (TEM) was performed to unequivocally assess the types of autophagic vesicles present in CRC cell lines and to further strengthen the above findings that starved Caco-2/15 and HCT116 cells upregulated their flux. TEM analysis demonstrated that CRC cells exhibited similar numbers of autophagosomes under steady state conditions, although HCT116 cells displayed a smaller number of autophagic structures and autophagosomes in these conditions (Fig. 2C,D, Fig. S1C and D). Nonetheless, after 4 h of glucose starvation, Caco-2/15 and HCT116 cells showed increased autophagic structures, whereas the number of autophagic structures in SW480 and LoVo cells was decreased (Fig. 2C,D, Fig. S1D and E). Collectively, these results show that CRC cell lines harbor comparable and elevated autophagic activities in normal conditions. The data also indicate that two cell lines can differentially adapt their autophagic response to nutrient stress, a characteristic not previously described for CRC cell lines.
Figure 2

Colorectal cancer cells feature different autophagic flux. mCherry:GFP:Atg8 analysis of autophagic flux in the various CRC cell lines. (A) Representative images of mCherry:GFP:Atg8 transfected cells under full media or glucose starvation. (B) Per cell average percentage of autophagosomes and autolysosomes (n = 20 to 65 cells per condition from 3 independent experiments); mean ± SEM. (C) Representative images of TEM analysis in full media or under glucose starvation. Pink highlighted objects represent autophagosomes while yellow highlighted objects are lysosomes/autolysosomes. (D) Number of autophagic vesicles per cell averaged from twelve cells. Only double-membrane vesicles were counted as autophagosomes and electron dense vesicular structures were counted as autolysosomes; mean ± SEM. Statistical analysis was performed using (B) Two-way ANOVA followed by Tukey’s multiple comparison test or (D) One-way ANOVA followed by Kruskal-Wallis multiple comparisons test.

Colorectal cancer cells feature different autophagic flux. mCherry:GFP:Atg8 analysis of autophagic flux in the various CRC cell lines. (A) Representative images of mCherry:GFP:Atg8 transfected cells under full media or glucose starvation. (B) Per cell average percentage of autophagosomes and autolysosomes (n = 20 to 65 cells per condition from 3 independent experiments); mean ± SEM. (C) Representative images of TEM analysis in full media or under glucose starvation. Pink highlighted objects represent autophagosomes while yellow highlighted objects are lysosomes/autolysosomes. (D) Number of autophagic vesicles per cell averaged from twelve cells. Only double-membrane vesicles were counted as autophagosomes and electron dense vesicular structures were counted as autolysosomes; mean ± SEM. Statistical analysis was performed using (B) Two-way ANOVA followed by Tukey’s multiple comparison test or (D) One-way ANOVA followed by Kruskal-Wallis multiple comparisons test.

Colorectal cancer cells are insensitive to autophagy inhibition in vitro

Multiple studies have assessed CRC cell sensitivity to autophagy inhibition[32-36] with most findings concluding that autophagy was required for CRC cell growth. Unfortunately, the majority of these studies relied on the use of chloroquine to reach this conclusion. Given that the effects of chloroquine on cancer cells were recently demonstrated to be independent of its effect on autophagy[17,43], autophagy requirements were therefore revisited herein in various CRC cell lines using genetic approaches. Two approaches of autophagy inhibition were compared, namely blocking autophagosome formation versus blocking autophagosome-lysosome fusion, by respectively targeting ATG5 and RAB21 expression through RNA interference, using previously validated siRNA[44,45]. RAB21 was selected given its ability to mediate the sorting of VAMP8 to endolysosomes[44], the latter being required for autophagosome-lysosome fusion[46]. We first wanted to validate the established role of RAB21[44] in the regulation of autophagy in CRC cell lines. Knockdown of RAB21 by small interfering RNA resulted in LC3-II accumulation in most CRC cell lines (Fig. S2A). LC3-II accumulation was masked by Bafilomycin A1 treatment (Fig. S2A). These results are similar with our previous report[44], and demonstrate the necessity of RAB21 for normal autophagy in CRC cells. Of note, the impact of RAB21 loss of function was similar to VAMP8 depletion, further demonstrating a requirement for RAB21 in autophagosome-lysosome fusion in most CRC cells[44]. However, knockdown of RAB21 had no effect in T84 cells. This could hypothetically be caused by an increased reliance on YKT6/STX7 functions in these cells[47-49]. Thus, T84 cells were not further studied. We next tested the impact of ATG5 or RAB21 depletion on CRC cell viability in normal growth conditions, through a resazurin-based assay. Silencing of RAB21 or ATG5 (Fig. S2B) had no effect on CRC cell viability in normal growth conditions (Fig. S3A) in accordance with other recent studies[17,37], albeit contrary to others[34]. Since CRC cells undergoing various stresses may potentially require autophagy to alleviate these stresses, oxaliplatin and nutrient starvation were therefore used to induce a genotoxic or a nutrient stress, respectively, in CRC cells. Although glucose starvation reduced growth by over 50% in all cell lines (Fig. S3B), the concomitant inhibition of autophagy had minimal additive effect on cell growth (Fig. S3C and D). Similarly, autophagy impairment did not affect cell growth in oxaliplatin-treated CRC cells (Fig. S3B to D), as also demonstrated recently[17]. The effect of autophagy inhibition on the proliferative capacity of CRC cells following stress was further explored using clonogenic survival assays. Again, ATG5 or RAB21 depletion did not reduce the capacity of CRC cell lines to proliferate either alone or in combination with withdrawal of growth factors (Fig. S3E). Glucose starvation was not performed, since it affected cell viability too strongly. Altogether, the above data indicate that CRC cells do not require ATG5 and RAB21 for survival in vitro.

ATG5 and RAB21 depletion in CRC cells differentially affects tumor growth

Implantation of cells in chicken chorioallantoic membrane (CAM) have successfully been used as an in vivo system to study tumorigenesis in a variety of cancer models, including CRC[50]. We therefore tested the capacity of autophagy-inhibited CRC cell lines to form tumors after grafting on CAM. siRNA-transfected CRC cells were implanted 48 hours following transfection, in which gene knockdown was validated for all experiments (Fig. S2B). All CRC cell lines transfected with control siRNA were able to develop tumor masses, visible at 3 days post-grafting, when deposited on the CAM (Fig. 3A to D and S4A to C). These tumor masses were fairly similar in size within each cell line, although were histologically different between cell lines (Fig. S5A). Contrary to results obtained in vitro, depletion of either ATG5 or RAB21 markedly affected tumor growth (Fig. 3A to D). HCT116 and Caco-2/15 cells, both of which exhibited high autophagic flux under glucose starvation in vitro, were sensitive to autophagy inhibition and showed a 50% decreased tumor growth upon ATG5 or RAB21 depletion (Fig. 3A,B). Surprisingly, knockdown of ATG5 and RAB21 in SW480 and LoVo resulted in increased tumor growth (Fig. 3C,D), whereas SW620 and HT29 cell lines were non-responsive to autophagy inhibition and grew to similar extents whether in control or treated conditions (Fig. S4A to C). Of note, although knockdown efficiencies were variable between cell lines (Fig. S2B) and did not persist over the full time course of tumor growth, increased p62 staining was observed in ATG5- and RAB21-depleted CRC tumors, suggesting that autophagy was impaired, in our CAM model (Fig. S4D to G). Collectively, these results indicate that ATG5 or RAB21 depletion in CRC cells can either inhibit or promote tumor growth.
Figure 3

Autophagy differentially affects tumor growth in vivo. Tumor formation of various autophagy-inhibited CRC cell lines in chicken chorioallantoic membranes (CAM). Images of (A) HCT116 and Caco-2/15 or (C) SW480 and LoVo, treated with scramble, ATG5 and RAB21 siRNA implanted in CAMs and grown for 7 days post-implantation. (B) Quantification of tumor growth depicted in A (n = at least 13 tumors from 3 independent experiments); mean ± SEM. (D) Quantification of tumor growth depicted in C (n = at least 14 tumors from 3 independent experiments); mean ± SEM. Apoptosis was not strongly induced in ATG5 and RAB21 knockdown CRC cells grown in CAMs. (E) Immunoblot analysis of cleaved PARP and cleaved Caspase 3 in individual tumors generated with various CRC cell lines depleted for ATG5 and RAB21. Proliferation was increased in autophagy-inhibited SW480 cell tumors generated in CAMs. (F) Representative immunohistochemistry images of the proliferation marker KI67 in HCT116 and SW480 tumors extracted 5 days post-implantation. Slides were counterstained with hematoxylin/eosin. (G) Quantification of KI67-positive cells from four random fields in 2 to 5 tumors per condition; mean ± SEM. Statistical analysis (B,D and G) was performed using One-way ANOVA followed by Kruskal-Wallis multiple comparisons test. Full-length blots are presented in Supplementary Fig. 6.

Autophagy differentially affects tumor growth in vivo. Tumor formation of various autophagy-inhibited CRC cell lines in chicken chorioallantoic membranes (CAM). Images of (A) HCT116 and Caco-2/15 or (C) SW480 and LoVo, treated with scramble, ATG5 and RAB21 siRNA implanted in CAMs and grown for 7 days post-implantation. (B) Quantification of tumor growth depicted in A (n = at least 13 tumors from 3 independent experiments); mean ± SEM. (D) Quantification of tumor growth depicted in C (n = at least 14 tumors from 3 independent experiments); mean ± SEM. Apoptosis was not strongly induced in ATG5 and RAB21 knockdown CRC cells grown in CAMs. (E) Immunoblot analysis of cleaved PARP and cleaved Caspase 3 in individual tumors generated with various CRC cell lines depleted for ATG5 and RAB21. Proliferation was increased in autophagy-inhibited SW480 cell tumors generated in CAMs. (F) Representative immunohistochemistry images of the proliferation marker KI67 in HCT116 and SW480 tumors extracted 5 days post-implantation. Slides were counterstained with hematoxylin/eosin. (G) Quantification of KI67-positive cells from four random fields in 2 to 5 tumors per condition; mean ± SEM. Statistical analysis (B,D and G) was performed using One-way ANOVA followed by Kruskal-Wallis multiple comparisons test. Full-length blots are presented in Supplementary Fig. 6.

Increased proliferation is observed in SW480 autophagy-deficient cells

There were no major macroscopic differences between control and ATG5- or RAB21-depleted tumors for all cell types (Fig. S5A), suggesting that the varying tumor sizes could be due to the modulation of apoptosis or proliferation. The status of apoptosis was therefore verified in individual tumors by Western blot analysis. No significant changes were observed in PARP or Caspase 3 cleavage between control and ATG5- or RAB21- depleted cells (Fig. 3E), indicating that apoptosis induction was not responsible for the decreased tumor size in HCT116 cells. However, KI-67 positive cells, a marker strongly associated with proliferating cells, were significantly more abundant in SW480-depleted tumors (Fig. 3F,G). Conversely, HCT116 cells showed a trend toward lower levels of KI-67-positive cells in ATG5- and RAB21-depleted tumors (Fig. 3F,G). These results suggest that larger tumor masses were attributable to increased proliferation, as seen in SW480, while decreased tumor size, as in HCT116, could not be linked to apoptosis activation, but potentially to increased necroptosis or to metabolic reprogramming as observed in other systems[25,51,52].

Different pathways are modulated by RAB21 depletion in HCT116 and SW480 cells

Given the contrasting effects of autophagy inhibition on tumor growth in HCT116 and SW480 cells, and given the fact that both are driven by oncogenic KRAS mutations, we next investigated the global cellular processes modulating this opposite cellular response. A large-scale transcriptome analysis (RNA-Seq) of tumors formed in CAM from RAB21-depleted HCT116 and SW480 cells (Suppl. Table 2) revealed that RAB21 knockdown resulted in highly different gene expression profiles compared to scramble control cells, this in both cell lines (Fig. 4A, only top 60 differentially expressed genes are displayed). A functional enrichment analysis of the differentially expressed genes was next performed using GSEA against the Reactome database. In HCT116, multiple NOTCH-mediated processes were upregulated in RAB21-depleted cells (Fig. 4B), which could explain the observed decrease in cell proliferation given the role of Notch in intestinal epithelial cell differentiation. Moreover, a large number of gene sets related to proliferation and to mitochondrial functions were also decreased in knocked-down HCT116 (Fig. 4D). This finding is in keeping with the known metabolic reprogramming observed in cells in which ATG5 or ATG7 inhibition affected tumor formation[22]. No differences were observed at the level of apoptotic gene expression[52], which was consistent with the lack of increased apoptotic protein processing (Fig. 3E). To the contrary, multiple growth promoting pathways were upregulated in RAB21-depleted SW480 cells (Fig. 4C,F). A leading-edge analysis of the twenty most enriched pathways in SW480 tumors highlighted a large degree of overlap between the various gene sets. This was particularly evident with PI3K, at the level of AKT and mTOR signaling cascades (Fig. 4G). These observations thus highlight strikingly different responses to RAB21-depletion in HCT116 and SW480 cells, these differences being consistent with the growth characteristics of the respective tumor masses.
Figure 4

RAB21 depletion differentially affects gene expression in HCT116 and SW480 cells. (A) Clustered heatmap of the top 60 most differentially expressed genes in RAB21-depleted HCT116 and SW480 cells. (B to E) Most up/down regulated differentially expressed Reactome Gene Sets (RGS) between control and RAB21-depleted cells generated through a GSEA analysis and classified according to their normalized enrichment score NES score in HCT116 and SW480. All represented GSEA pathways had False Discovery Rate values inferior to 0.003. (F) Representative enrichment plot of RAB21-depleted SW480 cells. (G) Leading Edge analysis of the twenty most differentially upregulated pathways in RAB21-depleted SW480 cells.

RAB21 depletion differentially affects gene expression in HCT116 and SW480 cells. (A) Clustered heatmap of the top 60 most differentially expressed genes in RAB21-depleted HCT116 and SW480 cells. (B to E) Most up/down regulated differentially expressed Reactome Gene Sets (RGS) between control and RAB21-depleted cells generated through a GSEA analysis and classified according to their normalized enrichment score NES score in HCT116 and SW480. All represented GSEA pathways had False Discovery Rate values inferior to 0.003. (F) Representative enrichment plot of RAB21-depleted SW480 cells. (G) Leading Edge analysis of the twenty most differentially upregulated pathways in RAB21-depleted SW480 cells.

Autophagy inhibition in SW480 results in ectopic mTOR activation

Molecular changes occurring in cancer cells sensitive to autophagy inhibition have been thoroughly characterized in different contexts and often involve metabolic reprogramming and increased sensitivity to apoptosis or necroptosis[12,51]. However, mechanisms utilized by cells harboring increased proliferation upon autophagy inhibition remain to be defined. In order to further explore the mechanisms leading to SW480 overproliferation, the phosphorylation status of 43 kinases was examined in three independent ATG5- and RAB21-depleted SW480 tumors using the Proteome Profiler Human Phospho-Kinase Array Kit. Proliferation cues generally transit through cells via two main signaling nodes, the RAS/RAF/MEK/ERK or the PI3K/AKT signaling pathways. No shared changes in phosphorylation levels of ERK1/2, RSK1/2/3, MSK1/2, p38alpha, JNK1/2/3 or c-Jun were found between control and ATG5 or RAB21-depleted tumors (Fig. S5B). On the other hand, similar trends showing increased phosphorylation of AKT1/2/3 on serine 473, as well as PRAS40 and GSK3a/b, two direct targets of the RAC-alpha serine/threonine-protein kinase (AKT), were observed in most tumors following both ATG5 and RAB21 knockdowns (Fig. 5A). This suggests the possible involvement of the PI3K/AKT pathway in the observed increased proliferation of SW480 following autophagy inhibition, consistent with the RNA-Seq GSEA analysis.
Figure 5

AKT expression is increased in autophagy-inhibited SW480 cells. A variety of signaling kinases were differentially phosphorylated upon autophagy inhibition. (A) Phosphoarray normalized ratios from three independent ATG5- and RAB21-tumors normalized to pooled scrambled control tumors. Each bar represents duplicates for each tumor. Statistical significance was determined using one sample T-test. (B) Immunoblot analysis of total AKT1/2/3 and tubulin from multiple SW480 tumors extracted five days post-implantation in CAMs. (C) Ratio of AKT1/2/3 integrated densities to Tubulin for all tumors; mean ± SEM (n ≥ 22). (D) Immunoblot analysis of various phosphorylation sites on AKT, SGK1S422 and total AKT1/2/3 and Tubulin expression from multiple independent SW480 tumors extracted five days post-implantation in CAMs. (E) Ratio of phosphorylated AKT or SGK1 integrated densities to Tubulin for all tumors; mean ± SEM (n ≥ 4). Statistical significance was determined using One-way ANOVA followed by Kruskal-Wallis multiple comparisons test. Full-length blots are presented in Supplementary Fig. 6.

AKT expression is increased in autophagy-inhibited SW480 cells. A variety of signaling kinases were differentially phosphorylated upon autophagy inhibition. (A) Phosphoarray normalized ratios from three independent ATG5- and RAB21-tumors normalized to pooled scrambled control tumors. Each bar represents duplicates for each tumor. Statistical significance was determined using one sample T-test. (B) Immunoblot analysis of total AKT1/2/3 and tubulin from multiple SW480 tumors extracted five days post-implantation in CAMs. (C) Ratio of AKT1/2/3 integrated densities to Tubulin for all tumors; mean ± SEM (n ≥ 22). (D) Immunoblot analysis of various phosphorylation sites on AKT, SGK1S422 and total AKT1/2/3 and Tubulin expression from multiple independent SW480 tumors extracted five days post-implantation in CAMs. (E) Ratio of phosphorylated AKT or SGK1 integrated densities to Tubulin for all tumors; mean ± SEM (n ≥ 4). Statistical significance was determined using One-way ANOVA followed by Kruskal-Wallis multiple comparisons test. Full-length blots are presented in Supplementary Fig. 6. An important effector of AKT on cell growth is the mTORC1 complex. A small increase in the phosphorylation of mTOR was observed, particularly in the ATG5-depleted tumors (Fig. 5A). Only one downstream target of mTOR, namely p70S6K, was represented in the array, and its phosphorylation status increased upon ATG5 knockdown (Fig. 5A). To complement the above phospho-kinase array results, the expression and phosphorylation status of components of the AKT/mTOR pathway were analyzed by Western blot on proteins from a wider panel of control and siRNA-depleted SW480 tumors. In agreement with the GSEA analysis in which PI3K/AKT pathways were highly represented, a strong increase in basal pan-AKT protein levels was observed in ATG5- and RAB21-depleted tumors (Fig. 5B,C). This finding was consistent with the observed increase in AKT transcripts demonstrated by RNA-Seq (Fig. 4). The increased AKT protein level, however, did not translate into a dependable activity increase, as no increase in phosphorylation was observed on three major AKT sites in ATG5- and RAB21-depleted cells (Fig. 5D,E). Given that multiple pathways and regulatory feedback loops affect AKT activity[53], potentially leading to a rapid phosphorylation status turnover, the analysis window on AKT may have prevented observing enhanced AKT phosphorylation. Although an increased mTOR mRNA level (Suppl. Table 2) and a slight hyperphosphorylation of the protein in the kinase array were observed, there was no consistent variation in its protein level or phosphorylation status by Western blotting in a large number of ATG5- and RAB21-depleted tumors (Fig. 6A,B). Since mTOR phosphorylation does not represent the best readout of mTOR activity[54], well-characterized mTORC1 and mTORC2 targets were therefore monitored to more accurately assess mTORC activity. While mTORC1-associated protein RAPTOR levels did not vary, S6K1 (p70RSK) and 4E-BP1 were significantly hyper-phosphorylated upon autophagy inhibition in the vast majority of tumors (Fig. 6C,D), suggesting mTORC1 activation. PRAS40, which can be phosphorylated by both AKT and mTORC1, also showed an increased phosphorylation trend upon ATG5 and RAB21 knockdown (Fig. 6C,D), as observed in the phosphoprotein array results.
Figure 6

Autophagy inhibition in SW480 increases mTORC1 and mTORC2 signaling. Rictor is strongly upregulated in ATG5 and RAB21 knockdown SW480 tumors. (A) Immunoblot analysis of phosphorylated mTOR at Serine 2448 and of total mTOR, Rictor, Raptor and Tubulin from multiple independent SW480 tumors extracted five days post-implantation in CAMs. (B) Ratio of various integrated densities of phosphorylated and total proteins to Tubulin for at least 7 tumors per cell lines; mean ± SEM. mTORC1 activity was increased in autophagy-inefficient SW480 tumors. (C) Immunoblot analysis of phosphorylated S6K1Thr389, 4E-BP1T37/46, PRAST246 AKT1/2/3 and GAPDH from multiple SW480 tumors extracted five days post-implantation in CAMs. (D) Ratio of integrated densities of phosphorylated proteins to GAPDH for all tumors; mean ± SEM (n ≥ 11). (E) Immunoblot analysis of phosphorylated NRDG1T346 and Tubulin expression from multiple SW480 tumors extracted five days post-implantation in CAMs. (F) Ratio of integrated densities of phosphorylated NRDG1 to Tubulin for all tumors; mean ± SEM (n ≥ 8). Statistical analysis was performed using Unpaired T Test followed by Holm Sidak multiple comparisons test. Full-length blots are presented in Supplementary Fig. 6.

Autophagy inhibition in SW480 increases mTORC1 and mTORC2 signaling. Rictor is strongly upregulated in ATG5 and RAB21 knockdown SW480 tumors. (A) Immunoblot analysis of phosphorylated mTOR at Serine 2448 and of total mTOR, Rictor, Raptor and Tubulin from multiple independent SW480 tumors extracted five days post-implantation in CAMs. (B) Ratio of various integrated densities of phosphorylated and total proteins to Tubulin for at least 7 tumors per cell lines; mean ± SEM. mTORC1 activity was increased in autophagy-inefficient SW480 tumors. (C) Immunoblot analysis of phosphorylated S6K1Thr389, 4E-BP1T37/46, PRAST246 AKT1/2/3 and GAPDH from multiple SW480 tumors extracted five days post-implantation in CAMs. (D) Ratio of integrated densities of phosphorylated proteins to GAPDH for all tumors; mean ± SEM (n ≥ 11). (E) Immunoblot analysis of phosphorylated NRDG1T346 and Tubulin expression from multiple SW480 tumors extracted five days post-implantation in CAMs. (F) Ratio of integrated densities of phosphorylated NRDG1 to Tubulin for all tumors; mean ± SEM (n ≥ 8). Statistical analysis was performed using Unpaired T Test followed by Holm Sidak multiple comparisons test. Full-length blots are presented in Supplementary Fig. 6. A marked increase in RICTOR protein levels, a component of the mTORC2 complex, was also noted in knocked down tumors. Although targets of mTORC2 complex have been less studied than those of mTORC1, they include AKT, SGK1 and the SGK1 substrate NRDG1[55]. As outlined above, AKT phosphorylation on S473 was not consistently increased in autophagy-depleted tumors, with the same trend observed for SGK1 phosphorylation (Fig. 5D,E). Again, given the multiple feedback loops regulating AKT and SGK1, phosphorylation of NRDG1 was monitored, the latter being a robust indicator of mTORC2 activity[55]. Phosphorylation of NRDG1 at T346 was increased in ATG5 and RAB21 knocked down tumors, indicating hyperactivated mTORC2 activity (Fig. 6E,F). Collectively, these results support the RNA-Seq findings which showed an overrepresentation of the AKT/mTOR pathway following RAB21 depletion. Results of the kinase array and Western blot analyses hence indicate that both ATG5 and RAB21 depletion leads to reactivation of mTORC1 and mTORC2 signaling in SW480 cells tumors.

AKT and mTOR inhibition rescues SW480 overproliferation-mediated by ATG5 or RAB21 knockdown

Given the increased levels of AKT and the activation of the mTOR pathways in autophagy-deficient SW480 cells, we next determined whether inhibition of these pathways in conjunction with autophagy impairment could potentially slow tumor growth in our system. The allosteric AKT inhibitor MK2206 and the mTOR inhibitors Torin2 and Rapamycin, which target both mTORC1 and 2 and mTORC1 respectively, were tested. The effectiveness of these inhibitors was first confirmed in SW480 cells in culture. As expected, MK2206 reduced PRAS40 phosphorylation in a dose-dependent manner (Fig. 7A). Similarly, both Torin2 and Rapamycin prevented phosphorylation of S6K1T389 at all concentrations tested (Fig. 7B, upper band). The toxicity of these compounds was next tested on SW480 growth in CAM. Wild type SW480 cells were able to form tumors in the presence of the AKT and mTOR inhibitors at the selected concentrations (Fig. 7C). Surprisingly, a significant increase in tumor growth was observed upon MK2206 and Rapamycin treatments, while Torin2 treatment caused an increased trend in growth. Conversely, treatment of autophagy-deficient cells with MK2206 or Torin2 efficiently reduced tumor sizes to control levels (Fig. 7D). Rapamycin treatment also reduced tumor growth, although less effectively and was moreover ineffective in RAB21-depleted cells. These results demonstrate that AKT and mTORC2 strongly contribute to autophagy-deficient SW480 hyperproliferation, while mTORC1 activity does not play a major role and is not essential, at least in RAB21-depleted cells.
Figure 7

AKT and mTORC inhibition blocks SW480 hyperproliferation observed in ATG5- and RAB21-depleted cells. Efficiency validation of AKT and mTOR inhibitors. (A) Immunoblot analysis of phosphorylated PRAS40T246 upon addition of increasing concentrations of MK2206. (B) Immunoblot analysis of phosphorylated S6K1T389 upon addition of increasing concentrations of Rapamycin and Torin 2. Treatments were performed for 48 hours. (C) Quantification of SW480 tumor growth treated with different inhibitors. The dotplot graph depicts tumor sizes 5 days post-implantation in CAMs with drug treatments in at least 3 independent experiments; mean ± SEM. (D) Quantification of SW480 tumor growth treated with different inhibitors and transfected with scrambled, ATG5 or RAB21 siRNA. The dotplot graph depicts tumor sizes 5 days post-implantation in CAMs with drug treatments in at least 3 independent experiments; mean ± SEM. Statistical significance was determined using One-way ANOVA followed by Kruskal-Wallis multiple comparisons test. Full-length blots are presented in Supplementary Fig. 6.

AKT and mTORC inhibition blocks SW480 hyperproliferation observed in ATG5- and RAB21-depleted cells. Efficiency validation of AKT and mTOR inhibitors. (A) Immunoblot analysis of phosphorylated PRAS40T246 upon addition of increasing concentrations of MK2206. (B) Immunoblot analysis of phosphorylated S6K1T389 upon addition of increasing concentrations of Rapamycin and Torin 2. Treatments were performed for 48 hours. (C) Quantification of SW480 tumor growth treated with different inhibitors. The dotplot graph depicts tumor sizes 5 days post-implantation in CAMs with drug treatments in at least 3 independent experiments; mean ± SEM. (D) Quantification of SW480 tumor growth treated with different inhibitors and transfected with scrambled, ATG5 or RAB21 siRNA. The dotplot graph depicts tumor sizes 5 days post-implantation in CAMs with drug treatments in at least 3 independent experiments; mean ± SEM. Statistical significance was determined using One-way ANOVA followed by Kruskal-Wallis multiple comparisons test. Full-length blots are presented in Supplementary Fig. 6.

Discussion

Autophagy inhibition was proposed as a promising approach to decrease cancer cell proliferation, especially in RAS-driven cancers[7,13]. However, recent findings have demonstrated that inhibiting autophagy can lead to tumor cell hyperproliferation[26,28]. This hyperproliferation was linked to the TP53 status of cancer cells[26] or to the type of oncogenic drivers[28]. In the present study, we carefully monitored autophagic flux of multiple CRC cell lines and demonstrated that these cells do not all display similar autophagic flux. Notably, HCT116 and Caco-2/15 cells were found to substantially increase their autophagic flux upon nutrient stress, compared to other CRC cells tested. Our findings, in accordance with others[17,37], show that autophagy inhibition does not affect CRC proliferation in vitro. However, we show that CRC cells differentially responded to autophagy inhibition in vivo, with Caco-2/15 and HCT116 cells being sensitive to autophagy inhibition whereas SW480 and LoVo cells displayed increased tumor growth. Genomic and phosphoprotein analyses revealed that the hyperproliferation observed in SW480 was caused by ectopic activation of the AKT and mTOR pathways. Significantly, this hyperproliferation was mainly dependent on AKT and mTORC2 signaling, and to a lesser extent on mTORC1 signaling. Our results are coherent with recent studies indicating that RAS-driven cancers are not all sensitive to autophagy inhibition[17,37]. As such, we did not observe growth defects in vitro, even under starvation or genotoxic stresses. In order to assess the in vivo requirements of autophagy in CRC tumor formation in multiple cell lines, we turned to chicken chorioallantoic membrane assays. Significantly, we were able to uncover differential responses to autophagy inhibition in this setting. To genetically affect autophagosome/lysosome fusion, we targeted RAB21[44]. RAB21 has been implicated in other cellular functions[56,57]. Hence, its effect on tumor cell growth in CAM, could be caused by its other cellular roles, and we cannot rule out this possibility. However, RAB21 and ATG5 shared all the same growth phenotypes and most signaling pathways analyzed were also similarly affected, indicating that RAB21 autophagic functions must be critical for the observed effects. All cell lines used herein were previously shown by others to be sensitive to chloroquine treatments in vitro[32-36], and thus were inferred to be sensitive to autophagy inhibition. Our results show that genetic manipulation of autophagy through ATG5 and RAB21 RNAi does not affect CRC cell growth in vitro, while yielding different results in vivo. Since autophagy was not entirely abrogated in ATG5- or RAB21-depleted cells, the discrepancy between in vitro and in vivo responses could potentially be attributed to incomplete knockdowns, which could be insufficient to give rise to in vitro effects. We do not believe this to be the case, given that recent CRISPR/Cas9 genome wide screens did not identify autophagic genes to be required for viabilities of more than 500 cell lines of different origins in vitro[37]. Moreover, autophagy-deficient HCT116 knockouts have been generated in various contexts and, as observed in our work, did not show in vitro growth defects[17]. Hence, the observed in vivo phenotypes most likely represent higher requirements for autophagy in this setting. One caveat of the siRNA approach used here, is that knockdowns were not observed seven days post implantation. Hence, the observed growth phenotypes most probably result from early effects of ATG5 and RAB21 depletion on tumor growth and would presumably be stronger in the context of a prolonged knockdown (or knockout). Regardless of that limitation, autophagic flux was still reduced five days post implantation, given the increased p62 staining (Fig. S4D to G). We believe that the siRNA approach in CAMs more closely mimics autophagy inhibition in clinical settings, where autophagy would most likely not be completely abolished by drug treatments. How exactly the CAM microenvironment leads to differences in growth of autophagy-defective tumors is unknown. We believe that a combination of multiple tumor microenvironment factors is responsible for the observed changes, given that modulating nutrient or growth factors concentrations in vitro was not sufficient to phenocopy the CAM results. CRC are highly heterogeneous and associated with various genomic mutations. Recent genomic efforts have allowed the classification of CRC tumors and cell lines into biologically relevant subtypes[58-62]. The cell lines used in the present study were previously assigned to various consensus molecular subtypes (CMS)[63]: CMS1 (LoVo), CMS3 (HT29) and CMS4 (HCT116, SW480, SW620, Caco-2). LoVo and HCT116 cells have the hypermutator phenotype (MSI) while the other cell lines do not. None of these associations explains the cells’ responsiveness to autophagy inhibition, nor the previously documented mutations in critical cancer-associated genes. Both cell lines in which autophagy inhibition amplified proliferation have a wild type PIK3CA gene, although this feature is also shared by SW620 and Caco-2/15, which respond differently. The sensitivity of cells to autophagy disruption was also independent of TP53 status. For example, HCT116 cells have a wild type TP53 while Caco-2/15 express mutated TP53. Others have reported that FOXO3a-mediated expression of the pro-apoptotic protein BBC3/PUMA increases sensitization of autophagy-deficient HCT116 cells to MDM2 inhibition[52]. However, our RNA-Seq data did not identify an increased expression of PUMA in HCT116 cells. This could be due to the stage at which the present samples were collected or the fact that the hypomorphic phenotypes followed in the CAM assays did not lead to FOXO3a accumulation. Finally, STAT3 regulation by autophagy was previously found to confer sensitivity to autophagy blockade in triple-negative breast cancer cells[64]. Again, the impact of autophagy inhibition on STAT3 in HCT116 and SW480 cells herein did not explain their responses. The only common feature potentially associated with the different groups of responders was their different capacity to regulate their autophagic flux. Interestingly, the ability to induce autophagy upon MEK1/2 inhibition was recently associated with sensitivity to autophagy inhibition[39]. Our findings in HCT116 and Caco-2/15 cells demonstrate that autophagy blockade was effective at decreasing tumor growth, as shown previously[52]. In KRAS driven lung cancer mouse models, deletion of Atg7 or Atg5 reduces cell proliferation, increases cellular death and reduces tumor burden[13]. Some of these effects were related to the release of p53 suppression, although tumor growth was also affected by Atg7 deletion in the absence of TP53, suggesting p53 independent mechanisms[13]. Lung cancer cells are highly dependent on glutamine for growth and it was hypothesized that protein degradation by autophagy was necessary to replenish TCA cycle intermediates[24]. Interestingly, in autophagy-impaired HCT116 tumors, translation and TCA cycle related genes were the most downregulated clusters. Furthermore, HCT116 cells have previously been shown to display lower Spare Respiratory Capacity (SRC) when compared to SW480[65], results successfully replicated herein for Caco-2/15 and LoVo (not shown). SRC represents the extra capacity available in cells to produce energy in response to increased stress or work[66,67], while low SRC is indicative of mitochondrial dysfunction. Therefore, differences in metabolic adaptations to the tumor microenvironment in the absence of autophagy could contribute to the opposite tumor growth characteristics of the various CRC cell lines. Few studies have analyzed the molecular mechanisms driving cancer cell hyperproliferation under autophagy inhibition. In autophagy-impaired SW480, we observed a strong increase in AKT and RICTOR protein levels. To our knowledge, this is the first example of a feedback loop leading to increased AKT and mTOR activity upon autophagy inhibition. Both AKT and RICTOR transcripts were upregulated in autophagy-deficient cells. The FOXO1 gene has been shown to induce RICTOR expression and to regulate AKT activity[68]. Similarly to FOXO3, FOXO1 may also be degraded by autophagy and hence autophagy inhibition could lead to increased FOXO1 levels and RICTOR expression in SW480. Other studies have shown that autophagy was required for ERK phosphorylation in NIH3T3 cells[69] or for optimal receptor tyrosine kinase signaling in CRC cells[70]. Hence, modulation of these pathways may also potentially affect RICTOR expression. This is unlikely, however, given that no modulation of ERK or other MAPK was observed in the present phosphoarray analysis. However, GSK3-inhibiting phosphorylation was increased in the present phosphoarray and RICTOR can be targeted to proteasomal degradation by GSK3-dependent phosphorylation[71]. Hence, lower GSK3 activity could also promote increased RICTOR levels. Higher mTORC2 activity mediated by increased RICTOR expression may also lead to the observed AKT increase[72]. While no increase in mTORC1 components was observed in SW480 cells, two downstream targets of mTORC1 were nonetheless found to be hyperphosphorylated, suggesting higher mTORC1 activity. Interestingly, p62 regulates the mTORC1 complex and p62 overexpression is sufficient to increase mTORC1 activity[73]. p62 accumulation was observed upon autophagy inhibition in both HCT116 and SW480 cells. However, HCT116 cells have high basal mTORC1 activity[74], while SW480 and LoVo, on the contrary, display low basal mTORC1 activity[74]. Hence, small differences in p62 levels could hypothetically translate into a significant effect on mTORC1 activity in these two cell lines. One drawback of our study is that it solely used SW480 cells to define the role of ATG5 and RAB21 in cancer cell hyperproliferation. Nonetheless, we believe that our findings provide a conceptual framework that could be tested in a broader scope of cell lines. While our study focused on colorectal cancer cells, the effects observed here might be applicable to other types of cancers, has demonstrated for the synergistic effects of MEK and autophagy inhibition in multiple types of cancer[39]. From an autophagy and cancer standpoint, the present study conveys two important elements. First, colorectal cancer cell responses to autophagy inhibition cannot be predicted from their driver mutations, nor from their molecular subtypes[63], but could potentially be based on their ability to upregulate autophagy upon stress. Second, cell hyperproliferation observed in autophagy-inhibited cells requires AKT and mTORC2 activity. Given that high expression levels of RICTOR are associated with poor prognosis in CRC[75] as well as a variety of other cancers, our findings have clinical implications since therapeutic autophagy inhibition in cancer clinical trials is currently ongoing. Although the genetic determinants leading to such a response remain to be defined, our work highlights that including catalytic mTOR inhibitors in such trials could help generalize the impact of autophagy inhibition.

Materials and Methods

Cell culture

All cell lines used in this study were acquired from ATCC, apart from HIEC and Caco-2/15 which were from N. Rivard. CRC cells were grown in Dulbecco’s Modified Eagle Medium (DMEM)(Wisent, St-Bruno, Qc, Canada) or in 50% DMEM/50% Ham’s F12 media (Wisent) for LoVo and T84 cells. Both media were supplemented with 10% Fetal Bovine Serum (Wisent) and cells grown at 37 °C in 5% CO2. Plasmid transfection was performed using JetPRIME (Polyplus transfection, Illkirch, France), following the manufacturer’s instructions. siRNAs were transfected at a final concentration of 20 nM, except in HT29 (10 nM), using Dharmafect 1 and by following the manufacturer’s instructions. siRNAs were purchased from Dharmacon: RAB21(1) (J-009450-05), RAB21(2) (J-009450-08), ATG5 (J-004374-08) and VAMP8 (J-013503-05). Bafilomycin A1 was used at 200 nM in all experiments and cells were incubated either in normal growth media, in full starvation media (EBSS) or in glucose starvation media (DMEM without glucose, supplemented with 10% FBS) for the indicated time.

Chorioallantoic membrane assays

Fertilized eggs from white leghorn chicken were obtained from Public Health Agency of Canada (Nepean, ON, Canada). Ethics approval was obtained from the Ethics Committee on Animal Research of the University of Sherbrooke and all experimental procedures involving embryos were conducted in accordance with the regulations of the Canadian Council on Animal Care. A total of 6 × 106 CRC cells were plated in a 100 mm dish and transfected the following day with control, ATG5 or RAB21 siRNA (both RAB21 siRNA were used independently in CAM assays with similar results). Forty-eight hours after transfection, cells were resuspended at a concentration of 1 × 106 cells per 10 µl and mixed with an equal volume of Matrigel (Corning, NY, USA). MK2206, Torin2, Rapamycin (Cayman Chemical, Ann Arbor, MI, USA) or DMSO was added in the cell/Matrigel mixture when stipulated in the figure. Twenty µl of the final mixture was grafted onto the chorioallantoic membranes of 7-day-old ex ovo chicken embryos. Drug treatment was repeated 72 hours after grafting by dilution in PBS and addition of a 20 µl drop on each tumor. Embryos were maintained at 37 °C for a total of 5 or 7 days after which tumors were removed using surgical forceps. Images of each tumor were acquired with a Leica M80 stereomicroscope coupled to a Leica EC3 digital color camera. Surface measurements were performed by averaging the volume (height*width*width) of each tumor using ImageJ.

Immunohistochemistry

Tumors were fixed in 4% PFA immediately after excision from the CAM. Tumor processing (paraffin embedding, sectioning and hematoxylin/eosin staining) was performed by the Université de Sherbrooke histology core platform. Tissue sections were rehydrated and treated with 0.01 mol/L citrate, pH 6.0, and immunohistochemical staining was performed according to the standard avidin-biotin immunoperoxidase complex technique using anti-KI67 (1:200, GTX16667, Genetex, Irvine, CA, USA) or p62 (1:100, 7695, Cell Signaling Technology, Danvers, MA, USA) primary antibodies or isotype-matched negative controls and diaminobenzidene (Vector Laboratories Inc., Burlingame, CA, USA) as substrate. For quantitative immunohistochemistry, photomicrographs of the tumors were acquired using a Nanozoomer 2.0RS at 20X magnification (Hamamatsu, Shizuoka, Japan) and cells positive for KI67 or p62 staining in four representative areas for each tumor were counted or their intensity measured using CellProfiler.

Cell viability

Cell viability was quantified using the CellTiter-Blue Assay (Promega, Madison, WI, USA) following the manufacturer’s instructions. Briefly, 1 × 105 cells were plated in 96-well black plates. For glucose or oxaliplatin (10 µM) treatments, the drug was added, or starvation was initiated 24 hours following siRNA transfection and cell viability was assessed after 48 hours of treatment. Reagent was added (20 µl/well) and cells were incubated for 3 hours before recording of fluorescence at 560ex/590em on a FlexStation 3 (Molecular Devices, San Jose, CA, USA) plate reader. Data was normalized to scramble controls for each cell lines (ratioed to 1) in Figure S3C and D. Hence, values lower then 1 indicate decreased cell proliferation in ATG5- or RAB21-depleted cells compared to the scramble control under starvation or oxaliplatin treatment.

Colony formation assay

Cells were seeded in order to obtain isolated HCT116 – 500, SW480–1000, Caco-2/15, LoVo and T84–2000 cells in 24-well plates. Clones were imaged on a CloneSelect imager (Molecular Devices) 24 hours and 96 hours’ post-transfection. Colonies (formed by single cells) of more than 10 cells were counted. All experiments were performed in triplicate.

Western blot analysis and Phosphoprotein array

For autophagy measurements, 5 × 105 CRC cells were plated in 6-well plates. Cells were grown for 48 hours prior to treatments. Whole-cell extracts were prepared by lysis in RIPA buffer and proteins analyzed by Western blots. For assessment of protein levels in CAM tumors, tumors were removed and frozen in liquid nitrogen. Tumors were transferred to RIPA buffer and proteins extracted following 2-min homogenization with stainless steel beads at 50 oscillation/sec using a Tissuelyser LT (Qiagen, Hilden, Germany). Protein extracts were sonicated for 10 seconds. Protein concentration was measured with a BCA assay (Thermo Scientific Pierce, Waltham, MA, USA) prior to dilution in 5x Laemmli loading buffer. Equal amounts of proteins were resolved on SDS-PAGE gel and transferred onto PVDF membranes. Membranes were probed using the following antibodies: anti-tubulin DM1a (1:2500, T9026, Sigma-Aldrich, Darmstadt, Germany), anti-p62 (1:1000, sc-28359, Santa Cruz, Santa Cruz, CA, USA), anti-RAB21 (1:2000, R4405, Sigma-Aldrich), and from Cell Signaling: anti-PARP (1:2000, 9542), anti-Caspase3 (1:1000, 9662), anti-LC3B (1:4000, 3868), anti-p-mTOR (S2448) (1:1000, 5536), anti-mTOR (1:1000, 2983), anti-RICTOR (1:1000, 2114), anti-Raptor (1:1000, 2280), anti-p-S6K1 (T389) (1:1000, 9234), anti-p-4E-BP1 (T37/46) (1:1000, 2855), anti-p-AKT (T308) (1:1000, 13038), anti-p-AKT (S473) (1:1000, 9018), anti-p-AKT (T450) (1:1000, 9267), anti-pan-AKT (1:1000, 4691), anti-p-PRAS40 (1:1000, 2997), anti-P-NRDG1 (1:1000, 3217), anti-P-SGK1 (1:1000, 5599), anti-GAPDH:HRP (1:2000, 8884); followed by anti-mouse or anti-rabbit conjugated to horseradish peroxidase (1:20 000, Jackson ImmunoResearch, West Grove, PA, USA) and imaged on a Chemidoc MP (Bio-Rad, Hercules, CA, USA). All uncropped tif files exported from Image Lab for the various immunoblots presented in the manuscript are shown in supplemental Fig. 6. Western blot quantification was performed using the image lab software (Bio-Rad). Multiple independent experiments (Figs 1, S1–S3) or independent tumors (Figs 3, 5, 6 and S4) were quantified for all depicted graphs. Non-saturated bands were utilized for all quantifications. For image representation, all images depicted in the various figure panels were from non-saturated images. Contrasts were adjusted directly and linearly using ImageLab and images were exported in high resolution tiff (600 dpi). Crops were performed in Photoshop CC2019 and figures assembled in Illustrator CC 2019. Crops were done to ease figure presentation. Images from different gels were separated either with a line of were assembled in different blocks in the various figures and noted in the figure legend. For the phosphoprotein array (R&D Systems, Minneapolis, MN, USA), 5-day tumors on CAM were pretreated with a protease inhibitor mixture (85 mM NaF, 35 mM β-glycerophosphate, 35 mM sodium pyrophosphate) for 30 minutes prior to excision. Protein extraction was performed as described above in the manufacturer’s lysis buffer. Protein array was carried out using 500 µg of proteins per condition, according to the manufacturer’s protocol. To assess the role of RAB21 on CRC autophagy, 50 000 cells per well of a 24-well plate were seeded 24 hours before siRNA transfection. Experiments were performed 72 hours following siRNA transfection, and cell lysis was performed as detailed above.

Immunofluorescence, confocal microscopy and image analysis

A total of 100 000 cells were plated on glass coverslips (#1.5) and grown for 24 hours. Bafilomycin A1 (0.2 µM) was added 4 hours prior to fixation. Starvation was performed in EBSS for 1 hour. Cells were fixed for 15 minutes on ice in 100% methanol. Cells were blocked and permeabilized for 60 minutes at room temperature in PBS containing 5% goat serum and 0.3% Triton X-100. Cells were then incubated in anti-LC3B (1:300, 3868, Cell Signaling) overnight at 4 °C in PBS containing 1% BSA, 0.3% Triton X-100. Secondary antibody incubation was performed at room temperature for 1 hour. Coverslips were mounted in DAPI containing mounting media (ThermoFisher) and subsequently imaged. All images were acquired on an LSM880 Zeiss confocal microscope using a 40×/1.4 NA plan Apo oil objective, with a 1.5 x zoom setting. Images were acquired with settings minimizing pixel saturation and analysis was performed on CellProfiler as in[44]. Endogenous LC3 punctae were identified using the identifyprimaryobject module. For the mCherry:GFP:Atg8 analysis, cells were fixed for 15 minutes in PFA 4%, coverslips were mounted in DAPI containing mounting media and red and red/green (orange) objects were counted manually.

Transmission electron microscopy

Cells were pelleted and fixed in 1.5% glutaraldehyde in 0.1 M cacodylate buffer, pH 7.4 for 30 minutes followed by overnight fixation in 2.5% glutaraldehyde in the same buffer at 4 °C. Cells were post-fixed in 1% osmium tetroxide in 0.1 M cacodylate buffer for 1 hour and stained in 1% uranyl acetate for 16 hours at 4 °C. Cells were then dehydrated in ethanol and propylene oxide, embedded in epoxy resin, sectioned at 80 nm and mounted on copper grids. Grids were poststained with 2.7% lead nitrate/3.5% sodium citrate. Images were acquired on a transmission electron microscope (HITACHI H7500). Double membrane structures were counted as autophagosomes, while electron dense structures, with no apparent double membranes were counted as autophagic vesicles (amphisomes or autolysosomes).

RNA-Seq

Three tumors were pooled per condition. Tumors were grinded into a fine powder in liquid nitrogen using a mortar and pestle. RNA was extracted using the RNeasy Mini Plus kit (Qiagen) following the manufacturer’s instructions with the optional on-column DNase digestion. Quality of the extracted RNA samples was assessed using the Agilent Bioanalyzer (Agilent, Santa Clara, CA, USA). All samples had a RNA Integrity Number (RIN) > 8.7. Library preparation and sequencing were performed at the McGill University and Génome Québec Innovation Centre using the NEB/KAPA stranded mRNA lib prep kit and sequenced on an Illumina HiSeq (Illumina, San Diego, CA, USA). Fastq files were verified for quality using FastQC (v0.11.4) and trimmed using Trimmomatic (v0.32) (with TRAILING:30) to remove adaptors and portions of low-quality reads. Read pairs were then aligned to the human genome build hg38 using an annotation file obtained from Ensembl (v 87) with the splice-aware RNA-seq aligner STAR (v2.5.1)[76] using default parameters. Reads were also aligned separately on the Gallus gallus-5.0 genome assembly with the annotation file obtained from Ensembl (v 87) to verify the degree of contamination of the samples with egg tissue. Aligned reads were then assigned to genomic features using featureCounts from Subread (v1.5.2)[77]. FeatureCounts parameters were set to (-C,–largestOverlap, -p, -B, -s1,–minOverlap 10, -M). Count files produced by featureCounts were then compared between controls and knockdowns for SW480 and HCT116 cells separately for differential expression analysis using DESeq. 2 (v1.10.1)[78]. GSEA analyses were performed using the open source software (GSEA, v2.0, Broad Institute, MA, USA)[79].

Statistical analysis

The values are expressed as mean ± SEM. Nonparametric Kruskal-Wallis One-way ANOVA, one sample T test or Unpaired T Test were used to compare experimental groups, as indicated in the figure legends. Grouped data were evaluated by two-way analysis of variance (ANOVA). P values of less than 0.05 were considered to be statistically significant and displayed. All the statistical analyses were assessed using the GraphPad Prism software (V8) on the various graphs. Supplemental figures Supplementary Table 2
  79 in total

Review 1.  Autophagy-mediated tumor promotion.

Authors:  Jessie Yanxiang Guo; Bing Xia; Eileen White
Journal:  Cell       Date:  2013-12-05       Impact factor: 41.582

2.  Chloroquine sensitizes breast cancer cells to chemotherapy independent of autophagy.

Authors:  Paola Maycotte; Suraj Aryal; Christopher T Cummings; Jacqueline Thorburn; Michael J Morgan; Andrew Thorburn
Journal:  Autophagy       Date:  2012-02-01       Impact factor: 16.016

3.  Poor-prognosis colon cancer is defined by a molecularly distinct subtype and develops from serrated precursor lesions.

Authors:  Felipe De Sousa E Melo; Xin Wang; Marnix Jansen; Evelyn Fessler; Anne Trinh; Laura P M H de Rooij; Joan H de Jong; Onno J de Boer; Ronald van Leersum; Maarten F Bijlsma; Hans Rodermond; Maartje van der Heijden; Carel J M van Noesel; Jurriaan B Tuynman; Evelien Dekker; Florian Markowetz; Jan Paul Medema; Louis Vermeulen
Journal:  Nat Med       Date:  2013-04-14       Impact factor: 53.440

4.  Autophagy is required for glucose homeostasis and lung tumor maintenance.

Authors:  Gizem Karsli-Uzunbas; Jessie Yanxiang Guo; Sandy Price; Xin Teng; Saurabh V Laddha; Sinan Khor; Nada Y Kalaany; Tyler Jacks; Chang S Chan; Joshua D Rabinowitz; Eileen White
Journal:  Cancer Discov       Date:  2014-05-29       Impact factor: 39.397

Review 5.  Autophagy in colorectal cancer: An important switch from physiology to pathology.

Authors:  Florin Burada; Elena Raluca Nicoli; Marius Eugen Ciurea; Daniel Constantin Uscatu; Mihai Ioana; Dan Ionut Gheonea
Journal:  World J Gastrointest Oncol       Date:  2015-11-15

6.  Combination of ERK and autophagy inhibition as a treatment approach for pancreatic cancer.

Authors:  Kirsten L Bryant; Clint A Stalnecker; Daniel Zeitouni; Jennifer E Klomp; Sen Peng; Andrey P Tikunov; Venugopal Gunda; Mariaelena Pierobon; Andrew M Waters; Samuel D George; Garima Tomar; Björn Papke; G Aaron Hobbs; Liang Yan; Tikvah K Hayes; J Nathaniel Diehl; Gennifer D Goode; Nina V Chaika; Yingxue Wang; Guo-Fang Zhang; Agnieszka K Witkiewicz; Erik S Knudsen; Emanuel F Petricoin; Pankaj K Singh; Jeffrey M Macdonald; Nhan L Tran; Costas A Lyssiotis; Haoqiang Ying; Alec C Kimmelman; Adrienne D Cox; Channing J Der
Journal:  Nat Med       Date:  2019-03-04       Impact factor: 53.440

Review 7.  Autophagy in the pathogenesis of disease.

Authors:  Beth Levine; Guido Kroemer
Journal:  Cell       Date:  2008-01-11       Impact factor: 41.582

8.  Cathepsin D protects colorectal cancer cells from acetate-induced apoptosis through autophagy-independent degradation of damaged mitochondria.

Authors:  C S F Oliveira; H Pereira; S Alves; L Castro; F Baltazar; S R Chaves; A Preto; M Côrte-Real
Journal:  Cell Death Dis       Date:  2015-06-18       Impact factor: 8.469

9.  A novel in vitro assay reveals SNARE topology and the role of Ykt6 in autophagosome fusion with vacuoles.

Authors:  Jieqiong Gao; Fulvio Reggiori; Christian Ungermann
Journal:  J Cell Biol       Date:  2018-08-10       Impact factor: 10.539

10.  Guidelines for the use and interpretation of assays for monitoring autophagy (3rd edition).

Authors:  Daniel J Klionsky; Kotb Abdelmohsen; Akihisa Abe; Md Joynal Abedin; Hagai Abeliovich; Abraham Acevedo Arozena; Hiroaki Adachi; Christopher M Adams; Peter D Adams; Khosrow Adeli; Peter J Adhihetty; Sharon G Adler; Galila Agam; Rajesh Agarwal; Manish K Aghi; Maria Agnello; Patrizia Agostinis; Patricia V Aguilar; Julio Aguirre-Ghiso; Edoardo M Airoldi; Slimane Ait-Si-Ali; Takahiko Akematsu; Emmanuel T Akporiaye; Mohamed Al-Rubeai; Guillermo M Albaiceta; Chris Albanese; Diego Albani; Matthew L Albert; Jesus Aldudo; Hana Algül; Mehrdad Alirezaei; Iraide Alloza; Alexandru Almasan; Maylin Almonte-Beceril; Emad S Alnemri; Covadonga Alonso; Nihal Altan-Bonnet; Dario C Altieri; Silvia Alvarez; Lydia Alvarez-Erviti; Sandro Alves; Giuseppina Amadoro; Atsuo Amano; Consuelo Amantini; Santiago Ambrosio; Ivano Amelio; Amal O Amer; Mohamed Amessou; Angelika Amon; Zhenyi An; Frank A Anania; Stig U Andersen; Usha P Andley; Catherine K Andreadi; Nathalie Andrieu-Abadie; Alberto Anel; David K Ann; Shailendra Anoopkumar-Dukie; Manuela Antonioli; Hiroshi Aoki; Nadezda Apostolova; Saveria Aquila; Katia Aquilano; Koichi Araki; Eli Arama; Agustin Aranda; Jun Araya; Alexandre Arcaro; Esperanza Arias; Hirokazu Arimoto; Aileen R Ariosa; Jane L Armstrong; Thierry Arnould; Ivica Arsov; Katsuhiko Asanuma; Valerie Askanas; Eric Asselin; Ryuichiro Atarashi; Sally S Atherton; Julie D Atkin; Laura D Attardi; Patrick Auberger; Georg Auburger; Laure Aurelian; Riccardo Autelli; Laura Avagliano; Maria Laura Avantaggiati; Limor Avrahami; Suresh Awale; Neelam Azad; Tiziana Bachetti; Jonathan M Backer; Dong-Hun Bae; Jae-Sung Bae; Ok-Nam Bae; Soo Han Bae; Eric H Baehrecke; Seung-Hoon Baek; Stephen Baghdiguian; Agnieszka Bagniewska-Zadworna; Hua Bai; Jie Bai; Xue-Yuan Bai; Yannick Bailly; Kithiganahalli Narayanaswamy Balaji; Walter Balduini; Andrea Ballabio; Rena Balzan; Rajkumar Banerjee; Gábor Bánhegyi; Haijun Bao; Benoit Barbeau; Maria D Barrachina; Esther Barreiro; Bonnie Bartel; Alberto Bartolomé; Diane C Bassham; Maria Teresa Bassi; Robert C Bast; Alakananda Basu; Maria Teresa Batista; Henri Batoko; Maurizio Battino; Kyle Bauckman; Bradley L Baumgarner; K Ulrich Bayer; Rupert Beale; Jean-François Beaulieu; George R Beck; Christoph Becker; J David Beckham; Pierre-André Bédard; Patrick J Bednarski; Thomas J Begley; Christian Behl; Christian Behrends; Georg Mn Behrens; Kevin E Behrns; Eloy Bejarano; Amine Belaid; Francesca Belleudi; Giovanni Bénard; Guy Berchem; Daniele Bergamaschi; Matteo Bergami; Ben Berkhout; Laura Berliocchi; Amélie Bernard; Monique Bernard; Francesca Bernassola; Anne Bertolotti; Amanda S Bess; Sébastien Besteiro; Saverio Bettuzzi; Savita Bhalla; Shalmoli Bhattacharyya; Sujit K Bhutia; Caroline Biagosch; Michele Wolfe Bianchi; Martine Biard-Piechaczyk; Viktor Billes; Claudia Bincoletto; Baris Bingol; Sara W Bird; Marc Bitoun; Ivana Bjedov; Craig Blackstone; Lionel Blanc; Guillermo A Blanco; Heidi Kiil Blomhoff; Emilio Boada-Romero; Stefan Böckler; Marianne Boes; Kathleen Boesze-Battaglia; Lawrence H Boise; Alessandra Bolino; Andrea Boman; Paolo Bonaldo; Matteo Bordi; Jürgen Bosch; Luis M Botana; Joelle Botti; German Bou; Marina Bouché; Marion Bouchecareilh; Marie-Josée Boucher; Michael E Boulton; Sebastien G Bouret; Patricia Boya; Michaël Boyer-Guittaut; Peter V Bozhkov; Nathan Brady; Vania Mm Braga; Claudio Brancolini; Gerhard H Braus; José M Bravo-San Pedro; Lisa A Brennan; Emery H Bresnick; Patrick Brest; Dave Bridges; Marie-Agnès Bringer; Marisa Brini; Glauber C Brito; Bertha Brodin; Paul S Brookes; Eric J Brown; Karen Brown; Hal E Broxmeyer; Alain Bruhat; Patricia Chakur Brum; John H Brumell; Nicola Brunetti-Pierri; Robert J Bryson-Richardson; Shilpa Buch; Alastair M Buchan; Hikmet Budak; Dmitry V Bulavin; Scott J Bultman; Geert Bultynck; Vladimir Bumbasirevic; Yan Burelle; Robert E Burke; Margit Burmeister; Peter Bütikofer; Laura Caberlotto; Ken Cadwell; Monika Cahova; Dongsheng Cai; Jingjing Cai; Qian Cai; Sara Calatayud; Nadine Camougrand; Michelangelo Campanella; Grant R Campbell; Matthew Campbell; Silvia Campello; Robin Candau; Isabella Caniggia; Lavinia Cantoni; Lizhi Cao; Allan B Caplan; Michele Caraglia; Claudio Cardinali; Sandra Morais Cardoso; Jennifer S Carew; Laura A Carleton; Cathleen R Carlin; Silvia Carloni; Sven R Carlsson; Didac Carmona-Gutierrez; Leticia Am Carneiro; Oliana Carnevali; Serena Carra; Alice Carrier; Bernadette Carroll; Caty Casas; Josefina Casas; Giuliana Cassinelli; Perrine Castets; Susana Castro-Obregon; Gabriella Cavallini; Isabella Ceccherini; Francesco Cecconi; Arthur I Cederbaum; Valentín Ceña; Simone Cenci; Claudia Cerella; Davide Cervia; Silvia Cetrullo; Hassan Chaachouay; Han-Jung Chae; Andrei S Chagin; Chee-Yin Chai; Gopal Chakrabarti; Georgios Chamilos; Edmond Yw Chan; Matthew Tv Chan; Dhyan Chandra; Pallavi Chandra; Chih-Peng Chang; Raymond Chuen-Chung Chang; Ta Yuan Chang; John C Chatham; Saurabh Chatterjee; Santosh Chauhan; Yongsheng Che; Michael E Cheetham; Rajkumar Cheluvappa; Chun-Jung Chen; Gang Chen; Guang-Chao Chen; Guoqiang Chen; Hongzhuan Chen; Jeff W Chen; Jian-Kang Chen; Min Chen; Mingzhou Chen; Peiwen Chen; Qi Chen; Quan Chen; Shang-Der Chen; Si Chen; Steve S-L Chen; Wei Chen; Wei-Jung Chen; Wen Qiang Chen; Wenli Chen; Xiangmei Chen; Yau-Hung Chen; Ye-Guang Chen; Yin Chen; Yingyu Chen; Yongshun Chen; Yu-Jen Chen; Yue-Qin Chen; Yujie Chen; Zhen Chen; Zhong Chen; Alan Cheng; Christopher Hk Cheng; Hua Cheng; Heesun Cheong; Sara Cherry; Jason Chesney; Chun Hei Antonio Cheung; Eric Chevet; Hsiang Cheng Chi; Sung-Gil Chi; Fulvio Chiacchiera; Hui-Ling Chiang; Roberto Chiarelli; Mario Chiariello; Marcello Chieppa; Lih-Shen Chin; Mario Chiong; Gigi Nc Chiu; Dong-Hyung Cho; Ssang-Goo Cho; William C Cho; Yong-Yeon Cho; Young-Seok Cho; Augustine Mk Choi; Eui-Ju Choi; Eun-Kyoung Choi; Jayoung Choi; Mary E Choi; Seung-Il Choi; Tsui-Fen Chou; Salem Chouaib; Divaker Choubey; Vinay Choubey; Kuan-Chih Chow; Kamal Chowdhury; Charleen T Chu; Tsung-Hsien Chuang; Taehoon Chun; Hyewon Chung; Taijoon Chung; Yuen-Li Chung; Yong-Joon Chwae; Valentina Cianfanelli; Roberto Ciarcia; Iwona A Ciechomska; Maria Rosa Ciriolo; Mara Cirone; Sofie Claerhout; Michael J Clague; Joan Clària; Peter Gh Clarke; Robert Clarke; Emilio Clementi; Cédric Cleyrat; Miriam Cnop; Eliana M Coccia; Tiziana Cocco; Patrice Codogno; Jörn Coers; Ezra Ew Cohen; David Colecchia; Luisa Coletto; Núria S Coll; Emma Colucci-Guyon; Sergio Comincini; Maria Condello; Katherine L Cook; Graham H Coombs; Cynthia D Cooper; J Mark Cooper; Isabelle Coppens; Maria Tiziana Corasaniti; Marco Corazzari; Ramon Corbalan; Elisabeth Corcelle-Termeau; Mario D Cordero; Cristina Corral-Ramos; Olga Corti; Andrea Cossarizza; Paola Costelli; Safia Costes; Susan L Cotman; Ana Coto-Montes; Sandra Cottet; Eduardo Couve; Lori R Covey; L Ashley Cowart; Jeffery S Cox; Fraser P Coxon; Carolyn B Coyne; Mark S Cragg; Rolf J Craven; Tiziana Crepaldi; Jose L Crespo; Alfredo Criollo; Valeria Crippa; Maria Teresa Cruz; Ana Maria Cuervo; Jose M Cuezva; Taixing Cui; Pedro R Cutillas; Mark J Czaja; Maria F Czyzyk-Krzeska; Ruben K Dagda; Uta Dahmen; Chunsun Dai; Wenjie Dai; Yun Dai; Kevin N Dalby; Luisa Dalla Valle; Guillaume Dalmasso; Marcello D'Amelio; Markus Damme; Arlette Darfeuille-Michaud; Catherine Dargemont; Victor M Darley-Usmar; Srinivasan Dasarathy; Biplab Dasgupta; Srikanta Dash; Crispin R Dass; Hazel Marie Davey; Lester M Davids; David Dávila; Roger J Davis; Ted M Dawson; Valina L Dawson; Paula Daza; Jackie de Belleroche; Paul de Figueiredo; Regina Celia Bressan Queiroz de Figueiredo; José de la Fuente; Luisa De Martino; Antonella De Matteis; Guido Ry De Meyer; Angelo De Milito; Mauro De Santi; Wanderley de Souza; Vincenzo De Tata; Daniela De Zio; Jayanta Debnath; Reinhard Dechant; Jean-Paul Decuypere; Shane Deegan; Benjamin Dehay; Barbara Del Bello; Dominic P Del Re; Régis Delage-Mourroux; Lea Md Delbridge; Louise Deldicque; Elizabeth Delorme-Axford; Yizhen Deng; Joern Dengjel; Melanie Denizot; Paul Dent; Channing J Der; Vojo Deretic; Benoît Derrien; Eric Deutsch; Timothy P Devarenne; Rodney J Devenish; Sabrina Di Bartolomeo; Nicola Di Daniele; Fabio Di Domenico; Alessia Di Nardo; Simone Di Paola; Antonio Di Pietro; Livia Di Renzo; Aaron DiAntonio; Guillermo Díaz-Araya; Ines Díaz-Laviada; Maria T Diaz-Meco; Javier Diaz-Nido; Chad A Dickey; Robert C Dickson; Marc Diederich; Paul Digard; Ivan Dikic; Savithrama P Dinesh-Kumar; Chan Ding; Wen-Xing Ding; Zufeng Ding; Luciana Dini; Jörg Hw Distler; Abhinav Diwan; Mojgan Djavaheri-Mergny; Kostyantyn Dmytruk; Renwick Cj Dobson; Volker Doetsch; Karol Dokladny; Svetlana Dokudovskaya; Massimo Donadelli; X Charlie Dong; Xiaonan Dong; Zheng Dong; Terrence M Donohue; Kelly S Doran; Gabriella D'Orazi; Gerald W Dorn; Victor Dosenko; Sami Dridi; Liat Drucker; Jie Du; Li-Lin Du; Lihuan Du; André du Toit; Priyamvada Dua; Lei Duan; Pu Duann; Vikash Kumar Dubey; Michael R Duchen; Michel A Duchosal; Helene Duez; Isabelle Dugail; Verónica I Dumit; Mara C Duncan; Elaine A Dunlop; William A Dunn; Nicolas Dupont; Luc Dupuis; Raúl V Durán; Thomas M Durcan; Stéphane Duvezin-Caubet; Umamaheswar Duvvuri; Vinay Eapen; Darius Ebrahimi-Fakhari; Arnaud Echard; Leopold Eckhart; Charles L Edelstein; Aimee L Edinger; Ludwig Eichinger; Tobias Eisenberg; Avital Eisenberg-Lerner; N Tony Eissa; Wafik S El-Deiry; Victoria El-Khoury; Zvulun Elazar; Hagit Eldar-Finkelman; Chris Jh Elliott; Enzo Emanuele; Urban Emmenegger; Nikolai Engedal; Anna-Mart Engelbrecht; Simone Engelender; Jorrit M Enserink; Ralf Erdmann; Jekaterina Erenpreisa; Rajaraman Eri; Jason L Eriksen; Andreja Erman; Ricardo Escalante; Eeva-Liisa Eskelinen; Lucile Espert; Lorena Esteban-Martínez; Thomas J Evans; Mario Fabri; Gemma Fabrias; Cinzia Fabrizi; Antonio Facchiano; Nils J Færgeman; Alberto Faggioni; W Douglas Fairlie; Chunhai Fan; Daping Fan; Jie Fan; Shengyun Fang; Manolis Fanto; Alessandro Fanzani; Thomas Farkas; Mathias Faure; Francois B Favier; Howard Fearnhead; Massimo Federici; Erkang Fei; Tania C Felizardo; Hua Feng; Yibin Feng; Yuchen Feng; Thomas A Ferguson; Álvaro F Fernández; Maite G Fernandez-Barrena; Jose C Fernandez-Checa; Arsenio Fernández-López; Martin E Fernandez-Zapico; Olivier Feron; Elisabetta Ferraro; Carmen Veríssima Ferreira-Halder; Laszlo Fesus; Ralph Feuer; Fabienne C Fiesel; Eduardo C Filippi-Chiela; Giuseppe Filomeni; Gian Maria Fimia; John H Fingert; Steven Finkbeiner; Toren Finkel; Filomena Fiorito; Paul B Fisher; Marc Flajolet; Flavio Flamigni; Oliver Florey; Salvatore Florio; R Andres Floto; Marco Folini; Carlo Follo; Edward A Fon; Francesco Fornai; Franco Fortunato; Alessandro Fraldi; Rodrigo Franco; Arnaud Francois; Aurélie François; Lisa B Frankel; Iain Dc Fraser; Norbert Frey; Damien G Freyssenet; Christian Frezza; Scott L Friedman; Daniel E Frigo; Dongxu Fu; José M Fuentes; Juan Fueyo; Yoshio Fujitani; Yuuki Fujiwara; Mikihiro Fujiya; Mitsunori Fukuda; Simone Fulda; Carmela Fusco; Bozena Gabryel; Matthias Gaestel; Philippe Gailly; Malgorzata Gajewska; Sehamuddin Galadari; Gad Galili; Inmaculada Galindo; Maria F Galindo; Giovanna Galliciotti; Lorenzo Galluzzi; Luca Galluzzi; Vincent Galy; Noor Gammoh; Sam Gandy; Anand K Ganesan; Swamynathan Ganesan; Ian G Ganley; Monique Gannagé; Fen-Biao Gao; Feng Gao; Jian-Xin Gao; Lorena García Nannig; Eleonora García Véscovi; Marina Garcia-Macía; Carmen Garcia-Ruiz; Abhishek D Garg; Pramod Kumar Garg; Ricardo Gargini; Nils Christian Gassen; Damián Gatica; Evelina Gatti; Julie Gavard; Evripidis Gavathiotis; Liang Ge; Pengfei Ge; Shengfang Ge; Po-Wu Gean; Vania Gelmetti; Armando A Genazzani; Jiefei Geng; Pascal Genschik; Lisa Gerner; Jason E Gestwicki; David A Gewirtz; Saeid Ghavami; Eric Ghigo; Debabrata Ghosh; Anna Maria Giammarioli; Francesca Giampieri; Claudia Giampietri; Alexandra Giatromanolaki; Derrick J Gibbings; Lara Gibellini; Spencer B Gibson; Vanessa Ginet; Antonio Giordano; Flaviano Giorgini; Elisa Giovannetti; Stephen E Girardin; Suzana Gispert; Sandy Giuliano; Candece L Gladson; Alvaro Glavic; Martin Gleave; Nelly Godefroy; Robert M Gogal; Kuppan Gokulan; Gustavo H Goldman; Delia Goletti; Michael S Goligorsky; Aldrin V Gomes; Ligia C Gomes; Hernando Gomez; Candelaria Gomez-Manzano; Rubén Gómez-Sánchez; Dawit Ap Gonçalves; Ebru Goncu; Qingqiu Gong; Céline Gongora; Carlos B Gonzalez; Pedro Gonzalez-Alegre; Pilar Gonzalez-Cabo; Rosa Ana González-Polo; Ing Swie Goping; Carlos Gorbea; Nikolai V Gorbunov; Daphne R Goring; Adrienne M Gorman; Sharon M Gorski; Sandro Goruppi; Shino Goto-Yamada; Cecilia Gotor; Roberta A Gottlieb; Illana Gozes; Devrim Gozuacik; Yacine Graba; Martin Graef; Giovanna E Granato; Gary Dean Grant; Steven Grant; Giovanni Luca Gravina; Douglas R Green; Alexander Greenhough; Michael T Greenwood; Benedetto Grimaldi; Frédéric Gros; Charles Grose; Jean-Francois Groulx; Florian Gruber; Paolo Grumati; Tilman Grune; Jun-Lin Guan; Kun-Liang Guan; Barbara Guerra; Carlos Guillen; Kailash Gulshan; Jan Gunst; Chuanyong Guo; Lei Guo; Ming Guo; Wenjie Guo; Xu-Guang Guo; Andrea A Gust; Åsa B Gustafsson; Elaine Gutierrez; Maximiliano G Gutierrez; Ho-Shin Gwak; Albert Haas; James E Haber; Shinji Hadano; Monica Hagedorn; David R Hahn; Andrew J Halayko; Anne Hamacher-Brady; Kozo Hamada; Ahmed Hamai; Andrea Hamann; Maho Hamasaki; Isabelle Hamer; Qutayba Hamid; Ester M Hammond; Feng Han; Weidong Han; James T Handa; John A Hanover; Malene Hansen; Masaru Harada; Ljubica Harhaji-Trajkovic; J Wade Harper; Abdel Halim Harrath; Adrian L Harris; James Harris; Udo Hasler; Peter Hasselblatt; Kazuhisa Hasui; Robert G Hawley; Teresa S Hawley; Congcong He; Cynthia Y He; Fengtian He; Gu He; Rong-Rong He; Xian-Hui He; You-Wen He; Yu-Ying He; Joan K Heath; Marie-Josée Hébert; Robert A Heinzen; Gudmundur Vignir Helgason; Michael Hensel; Elizabeth P Henske; Chengtao Her; Paul K Herman; Agustín Hernández; Carlos Hernandez; Sonia Hernández-Tiedra; Claudio Hetz; P Robin Hiesinger; Katsumi Higaki; Sabine Hilfiker; Bradford G Hill; Joseph A Hill; William D Hill; Keisuke Hino; Daniel Hofius; Paul Hofman; Günter U Höglinger; Jörg Höhfeld; Marina K Holz; Yonggeun Hong; David A Hood; Jeroen Jm Hoozemans; Thorsten Hoppe; Chin Hsu; Chin-Yuan Hsu; Li-Chung Hsu; Dong Hu; Guochang Hu; Hong-Ming Hu; Hongbo Hu; Ming Chang Hu; Yu-Chen Hu; Zhuo-Wei Hu; Fang Hua; Ya Hua; Canhua Huang; Huey-Lan Huang; Kuo-How Huang; Kuo-Yang Huang; Shile Huang; Shiqian Huang; Wei-Pang Huang; Yi-Ran Huang; Yong Huang; Yunfei Huang; Tobias B Huber; Patricia Huebbe; Won-Ki Huh; Juha J Hulmi; Gang Min Hur; James H Hurley; Zvenyslava Husak; Sabah Na Hussain; Salik Hussain; Jung Jin Hwang; Seungmin Hwang; Thomas Is Hwang; Atsuhiro Ichihara; Yuzuru Imai; Carol Imbriano; Megumi Inomata; Takeshi Into; Valentina Iovane; Juan L Iovanna; Renato V Iozzo; Nancy Y Ip; Javier E Irazoqui; Pablo Iribarren; Yoshitaka Isaka; Aleksandra J Isakovic; Harry Ischiropoulos; Jeffrey S Isenberg; Mohammad Ishaq; Hiroyuki Ishida; Isao Ishii; Jane E Ishmael; Ciro Isidoro; Ken-Ichi Isobe; Erika Isono; Shohreh Issazadeh-Navikas; Koji Itahana; Eisuke Itakura; Andrei I Ivanov; Anand Krishnan V Iyer; José M Izquierdo; Yotaro Izumi; Valentina Izzo; Marja Jäättelä; Nadia Jaber; Daniel John Jackson; William T Jackson; Tony George Jacob; Thomas S Jacques; Chinnaswamy Jagannath; Ashish Jain; Nihar Ranjan Jana; Byoung Kuk Jang; Alkesh Jani; Bassam Janji; Paulo Roberto Jannig; Patric J Jansson; Steve Jean; Marina Jendrach; Ju-Hong Jeon; Niels Jessen; Eui-Bae Jeung; Kailiang Jia; Lijun Jia; Hong Jiang; Hongchi Jiang; Liwen Jiang; Teng Jiang; Xiaoyan Jiang; Xuejun Jiang; Xuejun Jiang; Ying Jiang; Yongjun Jiang; Alberto Jiménez; Cheng Jin; Hongchuan Jin; Lei Jin; Meiyan Jin; Shengkan Jin; Umesh Kumar Jinwal; Eun-Kyeong Jo; Terje Johansen; Daniel E Johnson; Gail Vw Johnson; James D Johnson; Eric Jonasch; Chris Jones; Leo Ab Joosten; Joaquin Jordan; Anna-Maria Joseph; Bertrand Joseph; Annie M Joubert; Dianwen Ju; Jingfang Ju; Hsueh-Fen Juan; Katrin Juenemann; Gábor Juhász; Hye Seung Jung; Jae U Jung; Yong-Keun Jung; Heinz Jungbluth; Matthew J Justice; Barry Jutten; Nadeem O Kaakoush; Kai Kaarniranta; Allen Kaasik; Tomohiro Kabuta; Bertrand Kaeffer; Katarina Kågedal; Alon Kahana; Shingo Kajimura; Or Kakhlon; Manjula Kalia; Dhan V Kalvakolanu; Yoshiaki Kamada; Konstantinos Kambas; Vitaliy O Kaminskyy; Harm H Kampinga; Mustapha Kandouz; Chanhee Kang; Rui Kang; Tae-Cheon Kang; Tomotake Kanki; Thirumala-Devi Kanneganti; Haruo Kanno; Anumantha G Kanthasamy; Marc Kantorow; Maria Kaparakis-Liaskos; Orsolya Kapuy; Vassiliki Karantza; Md Razaul Karim; Parimal Karmakar; Arthur Kaser; Susmita Kaushik; Thomas Kawula; A Murat Kaynar; Po-Yuan Ke; Zun-Ji Ke; John H Kehrl; Kate E Keller; Jongsook Kim Kemper; Anne K Kenworthy; Oliver Kepp; Andreas Kern; Santosh Kesari; David Kessel; Robin Ketteler; Isis do Carmo Kettelhut; Bilon Khambu; Muzamil Majid Khan; Vinoth Km Khandelwal; Sangeeta Khare; Juliann G Kiang; Amy A Kiger; Akio Kihara; Arianna L Kim; Cheol Hyeon Kim; Deok Ryong Kim; Do-Hyung Kim; Eung Kweon Kim; Hye Young Kim; Hyung-Ryong Kim; Jae-Sung Kim; Jeong Hun Kim; Jin Cheon Kim; Jin Hyoung Kim; Kwang Woon Kim; Michael D Kim; Moon-Moo Kim; Peter K Kim; Seong Who Kim; Soo-Youl Kim; Yong-Sun Kim; Yonghyun Kim; Adi Kimchi; Alec C Kimmelman; Tomonori Kimura; Jason S King; Karla Kirkegaard; Vladimir Kirkin; Lorrie A Kirshenbaum; Shuji Kishi; Yasuo Kitajima; Katsuhiko Kitamoto; Yasushi Kitaoka; Kaio Kitazato; Rudolf A Kley; Walter T Klimecki; Michael Klinkenberg; Jochen Klucken; Helene Knævelsrud; Erwin Knecht; Laura Knuppertz; Jiunn-Liang Ko; Satoru Kobayashi; Jan C Koch; Christelle Koechlin-Ramonatxo; Ulrich Koenig; Young Ho Koh; Katja Köhler; Sepp D Kohlwein; Masato Koike; Masaaki Komatsu; Eiki Kominami; Dexin Kong; Hee Jeong Kong; Eumorphia G Konstantakou; Benjamin T Kopp; Tamas Korcsmaros; Laura Korhonen; Viktor I Korolchuk; Nadya V Koshkina; Yanjun Kou; Michael I Koukourakis; Constantinos Koumenis; Attila L Kovács; Tibor Kovács; Werner J Kovacs; Daisuke Koya; Claudine Kraft; Dimitri Krainc; Helmut Kramer; Tamara Kravic-Stevovic; Wilhelm Krek; Carole Kretz-Remy; Roswitha Krick; Malathi Krishnamurthy; Janos Kriston-Vizi; Guido Kroemer; Michael C Kruer; Rejko Kruger; Nicholas T Ktistakis; Kazuyuki Kuchitsu; Christian Kuhn; Addanki Pratap Kumar; Anuj Kumar; Ashok Kumar; Deepak Kumar; Dhiraj Kumar; Rakesh Kumar; Sharad Kumar; Mondira Kundu; Hsing-Jien Kung; Atsushi Kuno; Sheng-Han Kuo; Jeff Kuret; Tino Kurz; Terry Kwok; Taeg Kyu Kwon; Yong Tae Kwon; Irene Kyrmizi; Albert R La Spada; Frank Lafont; Tim Lahm; Aparna Lakkaraju; Truong Lam; Trond Lamark; Steve Lancel; Terry H Landowski; Darius J R Lane; Jon D Lane; Cinzia Lanzi; Pierre Lapaquette; Louis R Lapierre; Jocelyn Laporte; Johanna Laukkarinen; Gordon W Laurie; Sergio Lavandero; Lena Lavie; Matthew J LaVoie; Betty Yuen Kwan Law; Helen Ka-Wai Law; Kelsey B Law; Robert Layfield; Pedro A Lazo; Laurent Le Cam; Karine G Le Roch; Hervé Le Stunff; Vijittra Leardkamolkarn; Marc Lecuit; Byung-Hoon Lee; Che-Hsin Lee; Erinna F Lee; Gyun Min Lee; He-Jin Lee; Hsinyu Lee; Jae Keun Lee; Jongdae Lee; Ju-Hyun Lee; Jun Hee Lee; Michael Lee; Myung-Shik Lee; Patty J Lee; Sam W Lee; Seung-Jae Lee; Shiow-Ju Lee; Stella Y Lee; Sug Hyung Lee; Sung Sik Lee; Sung-Joon Lee; Sunhee Lee; Ying-Ray Lee; Yong J Lee; Young H Lee; Christiaan Leeuwenburgh; Sylvain Lefort; Renaud Legouis; Jinzhi Lei; Qun-Ying Lei; David A Leib; Gil Leibowitz; Istvan Lekli; Stéphane D Lemaire; John J Lemasters; Marius K Lemberg; Antoinette Lemoine; Shuilong Leng; Guido Lenz; Paola Lenzi; Lilach O Lerman; Daniele Lettieri Barbato; Julia I-Ju Leu; Hing Y Leung; Beth Levine; Patrick A Lewis; Frank Lezoualc'h; Chi Li; Faqiang Li; Feng-Jun Li; Jun Li; Ke Li; Lian Li; Min Li; Min Li; Qiang Li; Rui Li; Sheng Li; Wei Li; Wei Li; Xiaotao Li; Yumin Li; Jiqin Lian; Chengyu Liang; Qiangrong Liang; Yulin Liao; Joana Liberal; Pawel P Liberski; Pearl Lie; Andrew P Lieberman; Hyunjung Jade Lim; Kah-Leong Lim; Kyu Lim; Raquel T Lima; Chang-Shen Lin; Chiou-Feng Lin; Fang Lin; Fangming Lin; Fu-Cheng Lin; Kui Lin; Kwang-Huei Lin; Pei-Hui Lin; Tianwei Lin; Wan-Wan Lin; Yee-Shin Lin; Yong Lin; Rafael Linden; Dan Lindholm; Lisa M Lindqvist; Paul Lingor; Andreas Linkermann; Lance A Liotta; Marta M Lipinski; Vitor A Lira; Michael P Lisanti; Paloma B Liton; Bo Liu; Chong Liu; Chun-Feng Liu; Fei Liu; Hung-Jen Liu; Jianxun Liu; Jing-Jing Liu; Jing-Lan Liu; Ke Liu; Leyuan Liu; Liang Liu; Quentin Liu; Rong-Yu Liu; Shiming Liu; Shuwen Liu; Wei Liu; Xian-De Liu; Xiangguo Liu; Xiao-Hong Liu; Xinfeng Liu; Xu Liu; Xueqin Liu; Yang Liu; Yule Liu; Zexian Liu; Zhe Liu; Juan P Liuzzi; Gérard Lizard; Mila Ljujic; Irfan J Lodhi; Susan E Logue; Bal L Lokeshwar; Yun Chau Long; Sagar Lonial; Benjamin Loos; Carlos López-Otín; Cristina López-Vicario; Mar Lorente; Philip L Lorenzi; Péter Lõrincz; Marek Los; Michael T Lotze; Penny E Lovat; Binfeng Lu; Bo Lu; Jiahong Lu; Qing Lu; She-Min Lu; Shuyan Lu; Yingying Lu; Frédéric Luciano; Shirley Luckhart; John Milton Lucocq; Paula Ludovico; Aurelia Lugea; Nicholas W Lukacs; Julian J Lum; Anders H Lund; Honglin Luo; Jia Luo; Shouqing Luo; Claudio Luparello; Timothy Lyons; Jianjie Ma; Yi Ma; Yong Ma; Zhenyi Ma; Juliano Machado; Glaucia M Machado-Santelli; Fernando Macian; Gustavo C MacIntosh; Jeffrey P MacKeigan; Kay F Macleod; John D MacMicking; Lee Ann MacMillan-Crow; Frank Madeo; Muniswamy Madesh; Julio Madrigal-Matute; Akiko Maeda; Tatsuya Maeda; Gustavo Maegawa; Emilia Maellaro; Hannelore Maes; Marta Magariños; Kenneth Maiese; Tapas K Maiti; Luigi Maiuri; Maria Chiara Maiuri; Carl G Maki; Roland Malli; Walter Malorni; Alina Maloyan; Fathia Mami-Chouaib; Na Man; Joseph D Mancias; Eva-Maria Mandelkow; Michael A Mandell; Angelo A Manfredi; Serge N Manié; Claudia Manzoni; Kai Mao; Zixu Mao; Zong-Wan Mao; Philippe Marambaud; Anna Maria Marconi; Zvonimir Marelja; Gabriella Marfe; Marta Margeta; Eva Margittai; Muriel Mari; Francesca V Mariani; Concepcio Marin; Sara Marinelli; Guillermo Mariño; Ivanka Markovic; Rebecca Marquez; Alberto M Martelli; Sascha Martens; Katie R Martin; Seamus J Martin; Shaun Martin; Miguel A Martin-Acebes; Paloma Martín-Sanz; Camille Martinand-Mari; Wim Martinet; Jennifer Martinez; Nuria Martinez-Lopez; Ubaldo Martinez-Outschoorn; Moisés Martínez-Velázquez; Marta Martinez-Vicente; Waleska Kerllen Martins; Hirosato Mashima; James A Mastrianni; Giuseppe Matarese; Paola Matarrese; Roberto Mateo; Satoaki Matoba; Naomichi Matsumoto; Takehiko Matsushita; Akira Matsuura; Takeshi Matsuzawa; Mark P Mattson; Soledad Matus; Norma Maugeri; Caroline Mauvezin; Andreas Mayer; Dusica Maysinger; Guillermo D Mazzolini; Mary Kate McBrayer; Kimberly McCall; Craig McCormick; Gerald M McInerney; Skye C McIver; Sharon McKenna; John J McMahon; Iain A McNeish; Fatima Mechta-Grigoriou; Jan Paul Medema; Diego L Medina; Klara Megyeri; Maryam Mehrpour; Jawahar L Mehta; Yide Mei; Ute-Christiane Meier; Alfred J Meijer; Alicia Meléndez; Gerry Melino; Sonia Melino; Edesio Jose Tenorio de Melo; Maria A Mena; Marc D Meneghini; Javier A Menendez; Regina Menezes; Liesu Meng; Ling-Hua Meng; Songshu Meng; Rossella Menghini; A Sue Menko; Rubem Fs Menna-Barreto; Manoj B Menon; Marco A Meraz-Ríos; Giuseppe Merla; Luciano Merlini; Angelica M Merlot; Andreas Meryk; Stefania Meschini; Joel N Meyer; Man-Tian Mi; Chao-Yu Miao; Lucia Micale; Simon Michaeli; Carine Michiels; Anna Rita Migliaccio; Anastasia Susie Mihailidou; Dalibor Mijaljica; Katsuhiko Mikoshiba; Enrico Milan; Leonor Miller-Fleming; Gordon B Mills; Ian G Mills; Georgia Minakaki; Berge A Minassian; Xiu-Fen Ming; Farida Minibayeva; Elena A Minina; Justine D Mintern; Saverio Minucci; Antonio Miranda-Vizuete; Claire H Mitchell; Shigeki Miyamoto; Keisuke Miyazawa; Noboru Mizushima; Katarzyna Mnich; Baharia Mograbi; Simin Mohseni; Luis Ferreira Moita; Marco Molinari; Maurizio Molinari; Andreas Buch Møller; Bertrand Mollereau; Faustino Mollinedo; Marco Mongillo; Martha M Monick; Serena Montagnaro; Craig Montell; Darren J Moore; Michael N Moore; Rodrigo Mora-Rodriguez; Paula I Moreira; Etienne Morel; Maria Beatrice Morelli; Sandra Moreno; Michael J Morgan; Arnaud Moris; Yuji Moriyasu; Janna L Morrison; Lynda A Morrison; Eugenia Morselli; Jorge Moscat; Pope L Moseley; Serge Mostowy; Elisa Motori; Denis Mottet; Jeremy C Mottram; Charbel E-H Moussa; Vassiliki E Mpakou; Hasan Mukhtar; Jean M Mulcahy Levy; Sylviane Muller; Raquel Muñoz-Moreno; Cristina Muñoz-Pinedo; Christian Münz; Maureen E Murphy; James T Murray; Aditya Murthy; Indira U Mysorekar; Ivan R Nabi; Massimo Nabissi; Gustavo A Nader; Yukitoshi Nagahara; Yoshitaka Nagai; Kazuhiro Nagata; Anika Nagelkerke; Péter Nagy; Samisubbu R Naidu; Sreejayan Nair; Hiroyasu Nakano; Hitoshi Nakatogawa; Meera Nanjundan; Gennaro Napolitano; Naweed I Naqvi; Roberta Nardacci; Derek P Narendra; Masashi Narita; Anna Chiara Nascimbeni; Ramesh Natarajan; Luiz C Navegantes; Steffan T Nawrocki; Taras Y Nazarko; Volodymyr Y Nazarko; Thomas Neill; Luca M Neri; Mihai G Netea; Romana T Netea-Maier; Bruno M Neves; Paul A Ney; Ioannis P Nezis; Hang Tt Nguyen; Huu Phuc Nguyen; Anne-Sophie Nicot; Hilde Nilsen; Per Nilsson; Mikio Nishimura; Ichizo Nishino; Mireia Niso-Santano; Hua Niu; Ralph A Nixon; Vincent Co Njar; Takeshi Noda; Angelika A Noegel; Elsie Magdalena Nolte; Erik Norberg; Koenraad K Norga; Sakineh Kazemi Noureini; Shoji Notomi; Lucia Notterpek; Karin Nowikovsky; Nobuyuki Nukina; Thorsten Nürnberger; Valerie B O'Donnell; Tracey O'Donovan; Peter J O'Dwyer; Ina Oehme; Clara L Oeste; Michinaga Ogawa; Besim Ogretmen; Yuji Ogura; Young J Oh; Masaki Ohmuraya; Takayuki Ohshima; Rani Ojha; Koji Okamoto; Toshiro Okazaki; F Javier Oliver; Karin Ollinger; Stefan Olsson; Daniel P Orban; Paulina Ordonez; Idil Orhon; Laszlo Orosz; Eyleen J O'Rourke; Helena Orozco; Angel L Ortega; Elena Ortona; Laura D Osellame; Junko Oshima; Shigeru Oshima; Heinz D Osiewacz; Takanobu Otomo; Kinya Otsu; Jing-Hsiung James Ou; Tiago F Outeiro; Dong-Yun Ouyang; Hongjiao Ouyang; Michael Overholtzer; Michelle A Ozbun; P Hande Ozdinler; Bulent Ozpolat; Consiglia Pacelli; Paolo Paganetti; Guylène Page; Gilles Pages; Ugo Pagnini; Beata Pajak; Stephen C Pak; Karolina Pakos-Zebrucka; Nazzy Pakpour; Zdena Palková; Francesca Palladino; Kathrin Pallauf; Nicolas Pallet; Marta Palmieri; Søren R Paludan; Camilla Palumbo; Silvia Palumbo; Olatz Pampliega; Hongming Pan; Wei Pan; Theocharis Panaretakis; Aseem Pandey; Areti Pantazopoulou; Zuzana Papackova; Daniela L Papademetrio; Issidora Papassideri; Alessio Papini; Nirmala Parajuli; Julian Pardo; Vrajesh V Parekh; Giancarlo Parenti; Jong-In Park; Junsoo Park; Ohkmae K Park; Roy Parker; Rosanna Parlato; Jan B Parys; Katherine R Parzych; Jean-Max Pasquet; Benoit Pasquier; Kishore Bs Pasumarthi; Daniel Patschan; Cam Patterson; Sophie Pattingre; Scott Pattison; Arnim Pause; Hermann Pavenstädt; Flaminia Pavone; Zully Pedrozo; Fernando J Peña; Miguel A Peñalva; Mario Pende; Jianxin Peng; Fabio Penna; Josef M Penninger; Anna Pensalfini; Salvatore Pepe; Gustavo Js Pereira; Paulo C Pereira; Verónica Pérez-de la Cruz; María Esther Pérez-Pérez; Diego Pérez-Rodríguez; Dolores Pérez-Sala; Celine Perier; Andras Perl; David H Perlmutter; Ida Perrotta; Shazib Pervaiz; Maija Pesonen; Jeffrey E Pessin; Godefridus J Peters; Morten Petersen; Irina Petrache; Basil J Petrof; Goran Petrovski; James M Phang; Mauro Piacentini; Marina Pierdominici; Philippe Pierre; Valérie Pierrefite-Carle; Federico Pietrocola; Felipe X Pimentel-Muiños; Mario Pinar; Benjamin Pineda; Ronit Pinkas-Kramarski; Marcello Pinti; Paolo Pinton; Bilal Piperdi; James M Piret; Leonidas C Platanias; Harald W Platta; Edward D Plowey; Stefanie Pöggeler; Marc Poirot; Peter Polčic; Angelo Poletti; Audrey H Poon; Hana Popelka; Blagovesta Popova; Izabela Poprawa; Shibu M Poulose; Joanna Poulton; Scott K Powers; Ted Powers; Mercedes Pozuelo-Rubio; Krisna Prak; Reinhild Prange; Mark Prescott; Muriel Priault; Sharon Prince; Richard L Proia; Tassula Proikas-Cezanne; Holger Prokisch; Vasilis J Promponas; Karin Przyklenk; Rosa Puertollano; Subbiah Pugazhenthi; Luigi Puglielli; Aurora Pujol; Julien Puyal; Dohun Pyeon; Xin Qi; Wen-Bin Qian; Zheng-Hong Qin; Yu Qiu; Ziwei Qu; Joe Quadrilatero; Frederick Quinn; Nina Raben; Hannah Rabinowich; Flavia Radogna; Michael J Ragusa; Mohamed Rahmani; Komal Raina; Sasanka Ramanadham; Rajagopal Ramesh; Abdelhaq Rami; Sarron Randall-Demllo; Felix Randow; Hai Rao; V Ashutosh Rao; Blake B Rasmussen; Tobias M Rasse; Edward A Ratovitski; Pierre-Emmanuel Rautou; Swapan K Ray; Babak Razani; Bruce H Reed; Fulvio Reggiori; Markus Rehm; Andreas S Reichert; Theo Rein; David J Reiner; Eric Reits; Jun Ren; Xingcong Ren; Maurizio Renna; Jane Eb Reusch; Jose L Revuelta; Leticia Reyes; Alireza R Rezaie; Robert I Richards; Des R Richardson; Clémence Richetta; Michael A Riehle; Bertrand H Rihn; Yasuko Rikihisa; Brigit E Riley; Gerald Rimbach; Maria Rita Rippo; Konstantinos Ritis; Federica Rizzi; Elizete Rizzo; Peter J Roach; Jeffrey Robbins; Michel Roberge; Gabriela Roca; Maria Carmela Roccheri; Sonia Rocha; Cecilia Mp Rodrigues; Clara I Rodríguez; Santiago Rodriguez de Cordoba; Natalia Rodriguez-Muela; Jeroen Roelofs; Vladimir V Rogov; Troy T Rohn; Bärbel Rohrer; Davide Romanelli; Luigina Romani; Patricia Silvia Romano; M Isabel G Roncero; Jose Luis Rosa; Alicia Rosello; Kirill V Rosen; Philip Rosenstiel; Magdalena Rost-Roszkowska; Kevin A Roth; Gael Roué; Mustapha Rouis; Kasper M Rouschop; Daniel T Ruan; Diego Ruano; David C Rubinsztein; Edmund B Rucker; Assaf Rudich; Emil Rudolf; Ruediger Rudolf; Markus A Ruegg; Carmen Ruiz-Roldan; Avnika Ashok Ruparelia; Paola Rusmini; David W Russ; Gian Luigi Russo; Giuseppe Russo; Rossella Russo; Tor Erik Rusten; Victoria Ryabovol; Kevin M Ryan; Stefan W Ryter; David M Sabatini; Michael Sacher; Carsten Sachse; Michael N Sack; Junichi Sadoshima; Paul Saftig; Ronit Sagi-Eisenberg; Sumit Sahni; Pothana Saikumar; Tsunenori Saito; Tatsuya Saitoh; Koichi Sakakura; Machiko Sakoh-Nakatogawa; Yasuhito Sakuraba; María Salazar-Roa; Paolo Salomoni; Ashok K Saluja; Paul M Salvaterra; Rosa Salvioli; Afshin Samali; Anthony Mj Sanchez; José A Sánchez-Alcázar; Ricardo Sanchez-Prieto; Marco Sandri; Miguel A Sanjuan; Stefano Santaguida; Laura Santambrogio; Giorgio Santoni; Claudia Nunes Dos Santos; Shweta Saran; Marco Sardiello; Graeme Sargent; Pallabi Sarkar; Sovan Sarkar; Maria Rosa Sarrias; Minnie M Sarwal; Chihiro Sasakawa; Motoko Sasaki; Miklos Sass; Ken Sato; Miyuki Sato; Joseph Satriano; Niramol Savaraj; Svetlana Saveljeva; Liliana Schaefer; Ulrich E Schaible; Michael Scharl; Hermann M Schatzl; Randy Schekman; Wiep Scheper; Alfonso Schiavi; Hyman M Schipper; Hana Schmeisser; Jens Schmidt; Ingo Schmitz; Bianca E Schneider; E Marion Schneider; Jaime L Schneider; Eric A Schon; Miriam J Schönenberger; Axel H Schönthal; Daniel F Schorderet; Bernd Schröder; Sebastian Schuck; Ryan J Schulze; Melanie Schwarten; Thomas L Schwarz; Sebastiano Sciarretta; Kathleen Scotto; A Ivana Scovassi; Robert A Screaton; Mark Screen; Hugo Seca; Simon Sedej; Laura Segatori; Nava Segev; Per O Seglen; Jose M Seguí-Simarro; Juan Segura-Aguilar; Ekihiro Seki; Christian Sell; Iban Seiliez; Clay F Semenkovich; Gregg L Semenza; Utpal Sen; Andreas L Serra; Ana Serrano-Puebla; Hiromi Sesaki; Takao Setoguchi; Carmine Settembre; John J Shacka; Ayesha N Shajahan-Haq; Irving M Shapiro; Shweta Sharma; Hua She; C-K James Shen; Chiung-Chyi Shen; Han-Ming Shen; Sanbing Shen; Weili Shen; Rui Sheng; Xianyong Sheng; Zu-Hang Sheng; Trevor G Shepherd; Junyan Shi; Qiang Shi; Qinghua Shi; Yuguang Shi; Shusaku Shibutani; Kenichi Shibuya; Yoshihiro Shidoji; Jeng-Jer Shieh; Chwen-Ming Shih; Yohta Shimada; Shigeomi Shimizu; Dong Wook Shin; Mari L Shinohara; Michiko Shintani; Takahiro Shintani; Tetsuo Shioi; Ken Shirabe; Ronit Shiri-Sverdlov; Orian Shirihai; Gordon C Shore; Chih-Wen Shu; Deepak Shukla; Andriy A Sibirny; Valentina Sica; Christina J Sigurdson; Einar M Sigurdsson; Puran Singh Sijwali; Beata Sikorska; Wilian A Silveira; Sandrine Silvente-Poirot; Gary A Silverman; Jan Simak; Thomas Simmet; Anna Katharina Simon; Hans-Uwe Simon; Cristiano Simone; Matias Simons; Anne Simonsen; Rajat Singh; Shivendra V Singh; Shrawan K Singh; Debasish Sinha; Sangita Sinha; Frank A Sinicrope; Agnieszka Sirko; Kapil Sirohi; Balindiwe Jn Sishi; Annie Sittler; Parco M Siu; Efthimios Sivridis; Anna Skwarska; Ruth Slack; Iva Slaninová; Nikolai Slavov; Soraya S Smaili; Keiran Sm Smalley; Duncan R Smith; Stefaan J Soenen; Scott A Soleimanpour; Anita Solhaug; Kumaravel Somasundaram; Jin H Son; Avinash Sonawane; Chunjuan Song; Fuyong Song; Hyun Kyu Song; Ju-Xian Song; Wei Song; Kai Y Soo; Anil K Sood; Tuck Wah Soong; Virawudh Soontornniyomkij; Maurizio Sorice; Federica Sotgia; David R Soto-Pantoja; Areechun Sotthibundhu; Maria João Sousa; Herman P Spaink; Paul N Span; Anne Spang; Janet D Sparks; Peter G Speck; Stephen A Spector; Claudia D Spies; Wolfdieter Springer; Daret St Clair; Alessandra Stacchiotti; Bart Staels; Michael T Stang; Daniel T Starczynowski; Petro Starokadomskyy; Clemens Steegborn; John W Steele; Leonidas Stefanis; Joan Steffan; Christine M Stellrecht; Harald Stenmark; Tomasz M Stepkowski; Stęphan T Stern; Craig Stevens; Brent R Stockwell; Veronika Stoka; Zuzana Storchova; Björn Stork; Vassilis Stratoulias; Dimitrios J Stravopodis; Pavel Strnad; Anne Marie Strohecker; Anna-Lena Ström; Per Stromhaug; Jiri Stulik; Yu-Xiong Su; Zhaoliang Su; Carlos S Subauste; Srinivasa Subramaniam; Carolyn M Sue; Sang Won Suh; Xinbing Sui; Supawadee Sukseree; David Sulzer; Fang-Lin Sun; Jiaren Sun; Jun Sun; Shi-Yong Sun; Yang Sun; Yi Sun; Yingjie Sun; Vinod Sundaramoorthy; Joseph Sung; Hidekazu Suzuki; Kuninori Suzuki; Naoki Suzuki; Tadashi Suzuki; Yuichiro J Suzuki; Michele S Swanson; Charles Swanton; Karl Swärd; Ghanshyam Swarup; Sean T Sweeney; Paul W Sylvester; Zsuzsanna Szatmari; Eva Szegezdi; Peter W Szlosarek; Heinrich Taegtmeyer; Marco Tafani; Emmanuel Taillebourg; Stephen Wg Tait; Krisztina Takacs-Vellai; Yoshinori Takahashi; Szabolcs Takáts; Genzou Takemura; Nagio Takigawa; Nicholas J Talbot; Elena Tamagno; Jerome Tamburini; Cai-Ping Tan; Lan Tan; Mei Lan Tan; Ming Tan; Yee-Joo Tan; Keiji Tanaka; Masaki Tanaka; Daolin Tang; Dingzhong Tang; Guomei Tang; Isei Tanida; Kunikazu Tanji; Bakhos A Tannous; Jose A Tapia; Inmaculada Tasset-Cuevas; Marc Tatar; Iman Tavassoly; Nektarios Tavernarakis; Allen Taylor; Graham S Taylor; Gregory A Taylor; J Paul Taylor; Mark J Taylor; Elena V Tchetina; Andrew R Tee; Fatima Teixeira-Clerc; Sucheta Telang; Tewin Tencomnao; Ba-Bie Teng; Ru-Jeng Teng; Faraj Terro; Gianluca Tettamanti; Arianne L Theiss; Anne E Theron; Kelly Jean Thomas; Marcos P Thomé; Paul G Thomes; Andrew Thorburn; Jeremy Thorner; Thomas Thum; Michael Thumm; Teresa Lm Thurston; Ling Tian; Andreas Till; Jenny Pan-Yun Ting; Vladimir I Titorenko; Lilach Toker; Stefano Toldo; Sharon A Tooze; Ivan Topisirovic; Maria Lyngaas Torgersen; Liliana Torosantucci; Alicia Torriglia; Maria Rosaria Torrisi; Cathy Tournier; Roberto Towns; Vladimir Trajkovic; Leonardo H Travassos; Gemma Triola; Durga Nand Tripathi; Daniela Trisciuoglio; Rodrigo Troncoso; Ioannis P Trougakos; Anita C Truttmann; Kuen-Jer Tsai; Mario P Tschan; Yi-Hsin Tseng; Takayuki Tsukuba; Allan Tsung; Andrey S Tsvetkov; Shuiping Tu; Hsing-Yu Tuan; Marco Tucci; David A Tumbarello; Boris Turk; Vito Turk; Robin Fb Turner; Anders A Tveita; Suresh C Tyagi; Makoto Ubukata; Yasuo Uchiyama; Andrej Udelnow; Takashi Ueno; Midori Umekawa; Rika Umemiya-Shirafuji; Benjamin R Underwood; Christian Ungermann; Rodrigo P Ureshino; Ryo Ushioda; Vladimir N Uversky; Néstor L Uzcátegui; Thomas Vaccari; Maria I Vaccaro; Libuše Váchová; Helin Vakifahmetoglu-Norberg; Rut Valdor; Enza Maria Valente; Francois Vallette; Angela M Valverde; Greet Van den Berghe; Ludo Van Den Bosch; Gijs R van den Brink; F Gisou van der Goot; Ida J van der Klei; Luc Jw van der Laan; Wouter G van Doorn; Marjolein van Egmond; Kenneth L van Golen; Luc Van Kaer; Menno van Lookeren Campagne; Peter Vandenabeele; Wim Vandenberghe; Ilse Vanhorebeek; Isabel Varela-Nieto; M Helena Vasconcelos; Radovan Vasko; Demetrios G Vavvas; Ignacio Vega-Naredo; Guillermo Velasco; Athanassios D Velentzas; Panagiotis D Velentzas; Tibor Vellai; Edo Vellenga; Mikkel Holm Vendelbo; Kartik Venkatachalam; Natascia Ventura; Salvador Ventura; Patrícia St Veras; Mireille Verdier; Beata G Vertessy; Andrea Viale; Michel Vidal; Helena L A Vieira; Richard D Vierstra; Nadarajah Vigneswaran; Neeraj Vij; Miquel Vila; Margarita Villar; Victor H Villar; Joan Villarroya; Cécile Vindis; Giampietro Viola; Maria Teresa Viscomi; Giovanni Vitale; Dan T Vogl; Olga V Voitsekhovskaja; Clarissa von Haefen; Karin von Schwarzenberg; Daniel E Voth; Valérie Vouret-Craviari; Kristina Vuori; Jatin M Vyas; Christian Waeber; Cheryl Lyn Walker; Mark J Walker; Jochen Walter; Lei Wan; Xiangbo Wan; Bo Wang; Caihong Wang; Chao-Yung Wang; Chengshu Wang; Chenran Wang; Chuangui Wang; Dong Wang; Fen Wang; Fuxin Wang; Guanghui Wang; Hai-Jie Wang; Haichao Wang; Hong-Gang Wang; Hongmin Wang; Horng-Dar Wang; Jing Wang; Junjun Wang; Mei Wang; Mei-Qing Wang; Pei-Yu Wang; Peng Wang; Richard C Wang; Shuo Wang; Ting-Fang Wang; Xian Wang; Xiao-Jia Wang; Xiao-Wei Wang; Xin Wang; Xuejun Wang; Yan Wang; Yanming Wang; Ying Wang; Ying-Jan Wang; Yipeng Wang; Yu Wang; Yu Tian Wang; Yuqing Wang; Zhi-Nong Wang; Pablo Wappner; Carl Ward; Diane McVey Ward; Gary Warnes; Hirotaka Watada; Yoshihisa Watanabe; Kei Watase; Timothy E Weaver; Colin D Weekes; Jiwu Wei; Thomas Weide; Conrad C Weihl; Günther Weindl; Simone Nardin Weis; Longping Wen; Xin Wen; Yunfei Wen; Benedikt Westermann; Cornelia M Weyand; Anthony R White; Eileen White; J Lindsay Whitton; Alexander J Whitworth; Joëlle Wiels; Franziska Wild; Manon E Wildenberg; Tom Wileman; Deepti Srinivas Wilkinson; Simon Wilkinson; Dieter Willbold; Chris Williams; Katherine Williams; Peter R Williamson; Konstanze F Winklhofer; Steven S Witkin; Stephanie E Wohlgemuth; Thomas Wollert; Ernst J Wolvetang; Esther Wong; G William Wong; Richard W Wong; Vincent Kam Wai Wong; Elizabeth A Woodcock; Karen L Wright; Chunlai Wu; Defeng Wu; Gen Sheng Wu; Jian Wu; Junfang Wu; Mian Wu; Min Wu; Shengzhou Wu; William Kk Wu; Yaohua Wu; Zhenlong Wu; Cristina Pr Xavier; Ramnik J Xavier; Gui-Xian Xia; Tian Xia; Weiliang Xia; Yong Xia; Hengyi Xiao; Jian Xiao; Shi Xiao; Wuhan Xiao; Chuan-Ming Xie; Zhiping Xie; Zhonglin Xie; Maria Xilouri; Yuyan Xiong; Chuanshan Xu; Congfeng Xu; Feng Xu; Haoxing Xu; Hongwei Xu; Jian Xu; Jianzhen Xu; Jinxian Xu; Liang Xu; Xiaolei Xu; Yangqing Xu; Ye Xu; Zhi-Xiang Xu; Ziheng Xu; Yu Xue; Takahiro Yamada; Ai Yamamoto; Koji Yamanaka; Shunhei Yamashina; Shigeko Yamashiro; Bing Yan; Bo Yan; Xianghua Yan; Zhen Yan; Yasuo Yanagi; Dun-Sheng Yang; Jin-Ming Yang; Liu Yang; Minghua Yang; Pei-Ming Yang; Peixin Yang; Qian Yang; Wannian Yang; Wei Yuan Yang; Xuesong Yang; Yi Yang; Ying Yang; Zhifen Yang; Zhihong Yang; Meng-Chao Yao; Pamela J Yao; Xiaofeng Yao; Zhenyu Yao; Zhiyuan Yao; Linda S Yasui; Mingxiang Ye; Barry Yedvobnick; Behzad Yeganeh; Elizabeth S Yeh; Patricia L Yeyati; Fan Yi; Long Yi; Xiao-Ming Yin; Calvin K Yip; Yeong-Min Yoo; Young Hyun Yoo; Seung-Yong Yoon; Ken-Ichi Yoshida; Tamotsu Yoshimori; Ken H Young; Huixin Yu; Jane J Yu; Jin-Tai Yu; Jun Yu; Li Yu; W Haung Yu; Xiao-Fang Yu; Zhengping Yu; Junying Yuan; Zhi-Min Yuan; Beatrice Yjt Yue; Jianbo Yue; Zhenyu Yue; David N Zacks; Eldad Zacksenhaus; Nadia Zaffaroni; Tania Zaglia; Zahra Zakeri; Vincent Zecchini; Jinsheng Zeng; Min Zeng; Qi Zeng; Antonis S Zervos; Donna D Zhang; Fan Zhang; Guo Zhang; Guo-Chang Zhang; Hao Zhang; Hong Zhang; Hong Zhang; Hongbing Zhang; Jian Zhang; Jian Zhang; Jiangwei Zhang; Jianhua Zhang; Jing-Pu Zhang; Li Zhang; Lin Zhang; Lin Zhang; Long Zhang; Ming-Yong Zhang; Xiangnan Zhang; Xu Dong Zhang; Yan Zhang; Yang Zhang; Yanjin Zhang; Yingmei Zhang; Yunjiao Zhang; Mei Zhao; Wei-Li Zhao; Xiaonan Zhao; Yan G Zhao; Ying Zhao; Yongchao Zhao; Yu-Xia Zhao; Zhendong Zhao; Zhizhuang J Zhao; Dexian Zheng; Xi-Long Zheng; Xiaoxiang Zheng; Boris Zhivotovsky; Qing Zhong; Guang-Zhou Zhou; Guofei Zhou; Huiping Zhou; Shu-Feng Zhou; Xu-Jie Zhou; Hongxin Zhu; Hua Zhu; Wei-Guo Zhu; Wenhua Zhu; Xiao-Feng Zhu; Yuhua Zhu; Shi-Mei Zhuang; Xiaohong Zhuang; Elio Ziparo; Christos E Zois; Teresa Zoladek; Wei-Xing Zong; Antonio Zorzano; Susu M Zughaier
Journal:  Autophagy       Date:  2016       Impact factor: 16.016

View more
  16 in total

1.  Cyclic GMP-AMP synthase contributes to epithelial homeostasis in intestinal inflammation via Beclin-1-mediated autophagy.

Authors:  Sidrah Khan; Heather L Mentrup; Elizabeth A Novak; Vei Shaun Siow; Qian Wang; Erin C Crawford; Corinne Schneider; Thomas E Comerford; Brian Firek; Matt B Rogers; Patricia Loughran; Michael J Morowitz; Kevin P Mollen
Journal:  FASEB J       Date:  2022-05       Impact factor: 5.834

2.  Rab21 in enterocytes participates in intestinal epithelium maintenance.

Authors:  Sonya Nassari; Camille Lacarrière-Keïta; Dominique Lévesque; François-Michel Boisvert; Steve Jean
Journal:  Mol Biol Cell       Date:  2022-02-16       Impact factor: 3.612

Review 3.  The immune response to infection in the bladder.

Authors:  Livia Lacerda Mariano; Molly A Ingersoll
Journal:  Nat Rev Urol       Date:  2020-07-13       Impact factor: 16.430

Review 4.  Energy Restriction and Colorectal Cancer: A Call for Additional Research.

Authors:  Maria Castejón; Adrian Plaza; Jorge Martinez-Romero; Pablo Jose Fernandez-Marcos; Rafael de Cabo; Alberto Diaz-Ruiz
Journal:  Nutrients       Date:  2020-01-01       Impact factor: 5.717

Review 5.  The Role of Noncoding RNAs in the Regulation of Anoikis and Anchorage-Independent Growth in Cancer.

Authors:  Han Yeoung Lee; Seung Wan Son; Sokviseth Moeng; Soo Young Choi; Jong Kook Park
Journal:  Int J Mol Sci       Date:  2021-01-10       Impact factor: 5.923

Review 6.  Pro-Tumoral Functions of Autophagy Receptors in the Modulation of Cancer Progression.

Authors:  Cristóbal Cerda-Troncoso; Manuel Varas-Godoy; Patricia V Burgos
Journal:  Front Oncol       Date:  2021-02-01       Impact factor: 6.244

7.  Cutaneous and hepatic vascular lesions due to a recurrent somatic GJA4 mutation reveal a pathway for vascular malformation.

Authors:  Nelson Ugwu; Lihi Atzmony; Katharine T Ellis; Gauri Panse; Dhanpat Jain; Christine J Ko; Naiem Nassiri; Keith A Choate
Journal:  HGG Adv       Date:  2021-03-01

8.  Transcriptional Enhancer Factor Domain Family member 4 Exerts an Oncogenic Role in Hepatocellular Carcinoma by Hippo-Independent Regulation of Heat Shock Protein 70 Family Members.

Authors:  Mairene Coto-Llerena; Nadia Tosti; Stephanie Taha-Mehlitz; Venkatesh Kancherla; Viola Paradiso; John Gallon; Gaia Bianco; Andrea Garofoli; Souvik Ghosh; Fengyuan Tang; Caner Ercan; Gerhard M Christofori; Matthias S Matter; Raoul A Droeser; Mihaela Zavolan; Savas D Soysal; Markus von Flüe; Otto Kollmar; Luigi M Terracciano; Charlotte K Y Ng; Salvatore Piscuoglio
Journal:  Hepatol Commun       Date:  2021-01-20

9.  Adenylosuccinate lyase is oncogenic in colorectal cancer by causing mitochondrial dysfunction and independent activation of NRF2 and mTOR-MYC-axis.

Authors:  Stephanie Taha-Mehlitz; Gaia Bianco; Mairene Coto-Llerena; Venkatesh Kancherla; Glenn R Bantug; John Gallon; Caner Ercan; Federica Panebianco; Serenella Eppenberger-Castori; Marco von Strauss; Sebastian Staubli; Martin Bolli; Ralph Peterli; Matthias S Matter; Luigi M Terracciano; Markus von Flüe; Charlotte K Y Ng; Savas D Soysal; Otto Kollmar; Salvatore Piscuoglio
Journal:  Theranostics       Date:  2021-02-15       Impact factor: 11.556

Review 10.  Molecular Mechanisms Underlying Autophagy-Mediated Treatment Resistance in Cancer.

Authors:  Cally J Ho; Sharon M Gorski
Journal:  Cancers (Basel)       Date:  2019-11-11       Impact factor: 6.639

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.