4.8 Article

Association and dissociation of autophagy, apoptosis and necrosis by systematic chemical study

Journal

ONCOGENE
Volume 30, Issue 45, Pages 4544-4556

Publisher

NATURE PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1038/onc.2011.168

Keywords

high-content screen; autophagy; cell death; systematic analysis; cancer therapy

Funding

  1. Ligue Nationale contre le Cancer (Equipes labellisee)
  2. Agence Nationale pour la Recherche (ANR)
  3. European Commission
  4. Fondation pour la Recherche Medicale (FRM)
  5. Fondation Bettencourt-Schueller
  6. Institut National du Cancer (INCa)
  7. Canceropole Ile-de-France
  8. European Commission Apo-Sys
  9. La Ligue contre le Cancer

Ask authors/readers for more resources

To address the question of whether established or experimental anticancer chemotherapeutics can exert their cytotoxic effects by autophagy, we performed a high-content screen on a set of cytotoxic agents. We simultaneously determined parameters of autophagy, apoptosis and necrosis on cells exposed to similar to 1400 compounds. Many agents induced a 'pure' autophagic, apoptotic or necrotic phenotype, whereas less than 100 simultaneously induced autophagy, apoptosis and necrosis. A systematic analysis of the autophagic flux induced by the most potent 80 inducers of GFP-LC3 puncta among the NCI panel agents showed that 59 among them truly induced autophagy. The remaining 21 compounds were potent inducers of apoptosis or necrosis, yet failed to stimulate an autophagic flux, which were characterized as microtubule inhibitors. Knockdown of ATG7 was efficient in preventing GFP-LC3 puncta, yet failed to attenuate cell death by the agents that induce GFP-LC3 puncta. Thus there is not a single compound that would induce cell death by autophagy in our screening, underscoring the idea that cell death is rarely, if ever, executed by autophagy in human cells. Oncogene (2011) 30, 4544-4556; doi: 10.1038/onc.2011.168; published online 16 May 2011

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available