107
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Function and Mechanisms of Autophagy in Brain and Spinal Cord Trauma

      review-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Significance: Traumatic brain injury (TBI) and spinal cord injury (SCI) are major causes of death and long-term disability worldwide. Despite important pathophysiological differences between these disorders, in many respects, mechanisms of injury are similar. During both TBI and SCI, some cells are directly mechanically injured, but more die as a result of injury-induced biochemical changes (secondary injury). Autophagy, a lysosome-dependent cellular degradation pathway with neuroprotective properties, has been implicated both clinically and experimentally in the delayed response to TBI and SCI. However, until recently, its mechanisms and function remained unknown, reflecting in part the difficulty of isolating autophagic processes from ongoing cell death and other cellular events. Recent Advances: Emerging data suggest that depending on the location and severity of traumatic injury, autophagy flux—defined as the progress of cargo through the autophagy system and leading to its degradation—may be either increased or decreased after central nervous system trauma. Critical Issues: While increased autophagy flux may be protective after mild injury, after more severe trauma inhibition of autophagy flux may contribute to neuronal cell death, indicating disruption of autophagy as a part of the secondary injury mechanism. Future Directions: Augmentation and/or restoration of autophagy flux may provide a potential therapeutic target for treatment of TBI and SCI. Development of those treatments will require thorough characterization of changes in autophagy flux, its mechanisms and function over time after injury. Antioxid. Redox Signal. 23, 565–577.

          Related collections

          Most cited references58

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Guidelines for the use and interpretation of assays for monitoring autophagy.

          In 2008 we published the first set of guidelines for standardizing research in autophagy. Since then, research on this topic has continued to accelerate, and many new scientists have entered the field. Our knowledge base and relevant new technologies have also been expanding. Accordingly, it is important to update these guidelines for monitoring autophagy in different organisms. Various reviews have described the range of assays that have been used for this purpose. Nevertheless, there continues to be confusion regarding acceptable methods to measure autophagy, especially in multicellular eukaryotes. A key point that needs to be emphasized is that there is a difference between measurements that monitor the numbers or volume of autophagic elements (e.g., autophagosomes or autolysosomes) at any stage of the autophagic process vs. those that measure flux through the autophagy pathway (i.e., the complete process); thus, a block in macroautophagy that results in autophagosome accumulation needs to be differentiated from stimuli that result in increased autophagic activity, defined as increased autophagy induction coupled with increased delivery to, and degradation within, lysosomes (in most higher eukaryotes and some protists such as Dictyostelium) or the vacuole (in plants and fungi). In other words, it is especially important that investigators new to the field understand that the appearance of more autophagosomes does not necessarily equate with more autophagy. In fact, in many cases, autophagosomes accumulate because of a block in trafficking to lysosomes without a concomitant change in autophagosome biogenesis, whereas an increase in autolysosomes may reflect a reduction in degradative activity. Here, we present a set of guidelines for the selection and interpretation of methods for use by investigators who aim to examine macroautophagy and related processes, as well as for reviewers who need to provide realistic and reasonable critiques of papers that are focused on these processes. These guidelines are not meant to be a formulaic set of rules, because the appropriate assays depend in part on the question being asked and the system being used. In addition, we emphasize that no individual assay is guaranteed to be the most appropriate one in every situation, and we strongly recommend the use of multiple assays to monitor autophagy. In these guidelines, we consider these various methods of assessing autophagy and what information can, or cannot, be obtained from them. Finally, by discussing the merits and limits of particular autophagy assays, we hope to encourage technical innovation in the field.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Quantitative analysis of cellular inflammation after traumatic spinal cord injury: evidence for a multiphasic inflammatory response in the acute to chronic environment.

            Traumatic injury to the central nervous system results in the disruption of the blood brain/spinal barrier, followed by the invasion of cells and other components of the immune system that can aggravate injury and affect subsequent repair and regeneration. Although studies of chronic neuroinflammation in the injured spinal cord of animals are clinically relevant to most patients living with traumatic injury to the brain or spinal cord, very little is known about chronic neuroinflammation, though several studies have tested the role of neuroinflammation in the acute period after injury. The present study characterizes a novel cell preparation method that assesses, quickly and effectively, the changes in the principal immune cell types by flow cytometry in the injured spinal cord, daily for the first 10 days and periodically up to 180 days after spinal cord injury. These data quantitatively demonstrate a novel time-dependent multiphasic response of cellular inflammation in the spinal cord after spinal cord injury and are verified by quantitative stereology of immunolabelled spinal cord sections at selected time points. The early phase of cellular inflammation is comprised principally of neutrophils (peaking 1 day post-injury), macrophages/microglia (peaking 7 days post-injury) and T cells (peaking 9 days post-injury). The late phase of cellular inflammation was detected after 14 days post-injury, peaked after 60 days post-injury and remained detectable throughout 180 days post-injury for all three cell types. Furthermore, the late phase of cellular inflammation (14-180 days post-injury) did not coincide with either further improvements, or new decrements, in open-field locomotor function after spinal cord injury. However, blockade of chemoattractant C5a-mediated inflammation after 14 days post-injury reduced locomotor recovery and myelination in the injured spinal cord, suggesting that the late inflammatory response serves a reparative function. Together, these data provide new insight into cellular inflammation of spinal cord injury and identify a surprising and extended multiphasic response of cellular inflammation. Understanding the role of this multiphasic response in the pathophysiology of spinal cord injury could be critical for the design and implementation of rational therapeutic treatment strategies, including both cell-based and pharmacological interventions.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Neuroprotection for traumatic brain injury: translational challenges and emerging therapeutic strategies.

              Traumatic brain injury (TBI) causes secondary biochemical changes that contribute to subsequent tissue damage and associated neuronal cell death. Neuroprotective treatments that limit secondary tissue loss and/or improve behavioral outcome have been well established in multiple animal models of TBI. However, translation of such neuroprotective strategies to human injury have been disappointing, with the failure of more than thirty controlled clinical trials. Both conceptual issues and methodological differences between preclinical and clinical injury have undoubtedly contributed to these translational difficulties. More recently, changes in experimental approach, as well as altered clinical trial methodologies, have raised cautious optimism regarding the outcomes of future clinical trials. Here we critically review developing experimental neuroprotective strategies that show promise, and we propose criteria for improving the probability of successful clinical translation. Copyright © 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Antioxid Redox Signal
                Antioxid. Redox Signal
                ars
                Antioxidants & Redox Signaling
                Mary Ann Liebert, Inc. (140 Huguenot Street, 3rd FloorNew Rochelle, NY 10801USA )
                1523-0864
                1557-7716
                20 August 2015
                20 August 2015
                : 23
                : 6
                : 565-577
                Affiliations
                [1]Department of Anesthesiology and Shock, Trauma and Anesthesiology Research (STAR) Center, University of Maryland School of Medicine , Baltimore, Maryland.
                Author notes
                Address correspondence to: Dr. Marta M. Lipinski, 655 W Baltimore Street, BRB 6-013, Baltimore, MD 21201, E-mail: mlipinski@ 123456anes.umm.edu
                Article
                10.1089/ars.2015.6306
                10.1089/ars.2015.6306
                4545370
                25808205
                a7de9e28-2dd8-4b1d-bfdb-49a3a10457f4
                © Marta M. Lipinski et al. 2015; Published by Mary Ann Liebert, Inc.

                This Open Access article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Noncommercial License (< http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/>) which permits any noncommercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author(s) and the source are credited.

                History
                : 24 February 2015
                : 14 March 2015
                Page count
                Figures: 6, References: 80, Pages: 13
                Categories
                Forum Review Articles

                Comments

                Comment on this article

                scite_
                0
                0
                0
                0
                Smart Citations
                0
                0
                0
                0
                Citing PublicationsSupportingMentioningContrasting
                View Citations

                See how this article has been cited at scite.ai

                scite shows how a scientific paper has been cited by providing the context of the citation, a classification describing whether it supports, mentions, or contrasts the cited claim, and a label indicating in which section the citation was made.

                Similar content327

                Cited by97

                Most referenced authors4,208