Refine
Document Type
- Article (8)
Language
- English (8) (remove)
Has Fulltext
- yes (8)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (8) (remove)
Keywords
- autophagy (8) (remove)
Institute
- Medizin (8) (remove)
Highlights
• USP32 deubiquitinates the Ragulator complex subunit LAMTOR1 at lysine (K) 20
• LAMTOR1 K20 ubiquitination impairs its binding to the vacuolar H+-ATPase
• USP32 knockout reduces mTORC1 activity and elevates autophagic flux
• Depletion of USP32 in Caenorhabditis elegans inhibits mTOR and induces autophagy
Summary
The endosomal-lysosomal system is a series of organelles in the endocytic pathway that executes trafficking and degradation of proteins and lipids and mediates the internalization of nutrients and growth factors to ensure cell survival, growth, and differentiation. Here, we reveal regulatory, non-proteolytic ubiquitin signals in this complex system that are controlled by the enigmatic deubiquitinase USP32. Knockout (KO) of USP32 in primary hTERT-RPE1 cells results among others in hyperubiquitination of the Ragulator complex subunit LAMTOR1. Accumulation of LAMTOR1 ubiquitination impairs its interaction with the vacuolar H+-ATPase, reduces Ragulator function, and ultimately limits mTORC1 recruitment. Consistently, in USP32 KO cells, less mTOR kinase localizes to lysosomes, mTORC1 activity is decreased, and autophagy is induced. Furthermore, we demonstrate that depletion of USP32 homolog CYK-3 in Caenorhabditis elegans results in mTOR inhibition and autophagy induction. In summary, we identify a control mechanism of the mTORC1 activation cascade at lysosomes via USP32-regulated LAMTOR1 ubiquitination.
Autophagy is a highly conserved catabolic process cells use to maintain their homeostasis by degrading misfolded, damaged and excessive proteins, nonfunctional organelles, foreign pathogens and other cellular components. Hence, autophagy can be nonselective, where bulky portions of the cytoplasm are degraded upon stress, or a highly selective process, where preselected cellular components are degraded. To distinguish between different cellular components, autophagy employs selective autophagy receptors, which will link the cargo to the autophagy machinery, thereby sequestering it in the autophagosome for its subsequent degradation in the lysosome. Autophagy receptors undergo post-translational and structural modifications to fulfil their role in autophagy, or upon executing their role, for their own degradation. We highlight the four most prominent protein modifications – phosphorylation, ubiquitination, acetylation and oligomerisation – that are essential for autophagy receptor recruitment, function and turnover. Understanding the regulation of selective autophagy receptors will provide deeper insights into the pathway and open up potential therapeutic avenues.
Autophagy is a highly conserved catabolic process cells use to maintain their homeostasis by degrading misfolded, damaged and excessive proteins, nonfunctional organelles, foreign pathogens and other cellular components. Hence, autophagy can be nonselective, where bulky portions of the cytoplasm are degraded upon stress, or a highly selective process, where preselected cellular components are degraded. To distinguish between different cellular components, autophagy employs selective autophagy receptors, which will link the cargo to the autophagy machinery, thereby sequestering it in the autophagosome for its subsequent degradation in the lysosome. Autophagy receptors undergo post-translational and structural modifications to fulfil their role in autophagy, or upon executing their role, for their own degradation. We highlight the four most prominent protein modifications – phosphorylation, ubiquitination, acetylation and oligomerisation – that are essential for autophagy receptor recruitment, function and turnover. Understanding the regulation of selective autophagy receptors will provide deeper insights into the pathway and open up potential therapeutic avenues.
Autophagy is a highly conserved catabolic process through which defective or otherwise harmful cellular components are targeted for degradation via the lysosomal route. Regulatory pathways, involving post-translational modifications such as phosphorylation, play a critical role in controlling this tightly orchestrated process. Here, we demonstrate that TBK1 regulates autophagy by phosphorylating autophagy modifiers LC3C and GABARAP-L2 on surface-exposed serine residues (LC3C S93 and S96; GABARAP-L2 S87 and S88). This phosphorylation event impedes their binding to the processing enzyme ATG4 by destabilizing the complex. Phosphorylated LC3C/GABARAP-L2 cannot be removed from liposomes by ATG4 and are thus protected from ATG4-mediated premature removal from nascent autophagosomes. This ensures a steady coat of lipidated LC3C/GABARAP-L2 throughout the early steps in autophagosome formation and aids in maintaining a unidirectional flow of the autophagosome to the lysosome. Taken together, we present a new regulatory mechanism of autophagy, which influences the conjugation and de-conjugation of LC3C and GABARAP-L2 to autophagosomes by TBK1-mediated phosphorylation.
Autophagy is a cytosolic quality control process that recognizes substrates through receptor‐mediated mechanisms. Procollagens, the most abundant gene products in Metazoa, are synthesized in the endoplasmic reticulum (ER), and a fraction that fails to attain the native structure is cleared by autophagy. However, how autophagy selectively recognizes misfolded procollagens in the ER lumen is still unknown. We performed siRNA interference, CRISPR‐Cas9 or knockout‐mediated gene deletion of candidate autophagy and ER proteins in collagen producing cells. We found that the ER‐resident lectin chaperone Calnexin (CANX) and the ER‐phagy receptor FAM134B are required for autophagy‐mediated quality control of endogenous procollagens. Mechanistically, CANX acts as co‐receptor that recognizes ER luminal misfolded procollagens and interacts with the ER‐phagy receptor FAM134B. In turn, FAM134B binds the autophagosome membrane‐associated protein LC3 and delivers a portion of ER containing both CANX and procollagen to the lysosome for degradation. Thus, a crosstalk between the ER quality control machinery and the autophagy pathway selectively disposes of proteasome‐resistant misfolded clients from the ER.
Autophagy is a membrane-trafficking process that directs degradation of cytoplasmic material in lysosomes. The process promotes cellular fidelity, and while the core machinery of autophagy is known, the mechanisms that promote and sustain autophagy are less well defined. Here we report that the epigenetic reader BRD4 and the methyltransferase G9a repress a TFEB/TFE3/MITF-independent transcriptional program that promotes autophagy and lysosome biogenesis. We show that BRD4 knockdown induces autophagy in vitro and in vivo in response to some, but not all, situations. In the case of starvation, a signaling cascade involving AMPK and histone deacetylase SIRT1 displaces chromatin-bound BRD4, instigating autophagy gene activation and cell survival. Importantly, this program is directed independently and also reciprocally to the growth-promoting properties of BRD4 and is potently repressed by BRD4-NUT, a driver of NUT midline carcinoma. These findings therefore identify a distinct and selective mechanism of autophagy regulation.
Autophagy can act either as a tumor suppressor or as a survival mechanism for established tumors. To understand how autophagy plays this dual role in cancer, in vivo models are required. By using a highly heterogeneous C. elegans germline tumor, we show that autophagy-related proteins are expressed in a specific subset of tumor cells, neurons. Inhibition of autophagy impairs neuronal differentiation and increases tumor cell number, resulting in a shorter life span of animals with tumors, while induction of autophagy extends their life span by impairing tumor proliferation. Fasting of animals with fully developed tumors leads to a doubling of their life span, which depends on modular changes in transcription including switches in transcription factor networks and mitochondrial metabolism. Hence, our results suggest that metabolic restructuring, cell-type specific regulation of autophagy and neuronal differentiation constitute central pathways preventing growth of heterogeneous tumors.
Recently, the conserved intracellular digestion mechanism ‘autophagy’ has been considered to be involved in early tumorigenesis and its blockade proposed as an alternative treatment approach. However, there is an ongoing debate about whether blocking autophagy has positive or negative effects in tumor cells. Since there is only poor data about the clinico-pathological relevance of autophagy in gliomas in vivo, we first established a cell culture based platform for the in vivo detection of the autophago-lysosomal components. We then investigated key autophagosomal (LC3B, p62, BAG3, Beclin1) and lysosomal (CTSB, LAMP2) molecules in 350 gliomas using immunohistochemistry, immunofluorescence, immunoblotting and qPCR. Autophagy was induced pharmacologically or by altering oxygen and nutrient levels. Our results show that autophagy is enhanced in astrocytomas as compared to normal CNS tissue, but largely independent from the WHO grade and patient survival. A strong upregulation of LC3B, p62, LAMP2 and CTSB was detected in perinecrotic areas in glioblastomas suggesting micro-environmental changes as a driver of autophagy induction in gliomas. Furthermore, glucose restriction induced autophagy in a concentration-dependent manner while hypoxia or amino acid starvation had considerably lesser effects. Apoptosis and autophagy were separately induced in glioma cells both in vitro and in vivo. In conclusion, our findings indicate that autophagy in gliomas is rather driven by micro-environmental changes than by primary glioma-intrinsic features thus challenging the concept of exploitation of the autophago-lysosomal network (ALN) as a treatment approach in gliomas.