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

[Abstract unavailable

Research in autophagy continues to accelerate,(1) and as a result many new scientists are entering the field. Accordingly, it is important to establish a standard set of criteria for monitoring macroautophagy in different organisms. Recent reviews have described the range of assays that have been used for this purpose.(2,3) There are many useful and convenient methods that can be used to monitor macroautophagy in yeast, but relatively few in other model systems, and there is much confusion regarding acceptable methods to measure macroautophagy in higher eukaryotes. A key point that needs to be emphasized is that there is a difference between measurements that monitor the numbers of autophagosomes versus those that measure flux through the autophagy pathway; thus, a block in macroautophagy that results in autophagosome accumulation needs to be differentiated from fully functional autophagy that includes delivery to, and degradation within, lysosomes (in most higher eukaryotes) or the vacuole (in plants and fungi). Here, we present a set of guidelines for the selection and interpretation of the methods that can be used by investigators who are attempting to examine macroautophagy and related processes, as well as by reviewers who need to provide realistic and reasonable critiques of papers that investigate these processes. This set of guidelines is 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 verify an autophagic response.

In the classical form of alpha1-antitrypsin (AT) deficiency, a point mutation in AT alters the folding of a liver-derived secretory glycoprotein and renders it aggregation-prone. In addition to decreased serum concentrations of AT, the disorder is characterized by accumulation of the mutant alpha1-antitrypsin Z (ATZ) variant inside cells, causing hepatic fibrosis and/or carcinogenesis by a gain-of-toxic function mechanism. The proteasomal and autophagic pathways are known to mediate degradation of ATZ. Here we show that the autophagy-enhancing drug carbamazepine (CBZ) decreased the hepatic load of ATZ and hepatic fibrosis in a mouse model of AT deficiency-associated liver disease. These results provide a basis for testing CBZ, which has an extensive clinical safety profile, in patients with AT deficiency and also provide a proof of principle for therapeutic use of autophagy enhancers.

Autophagy has emerged as a critical lysosomal pathway that maintains cell function and survival through the degradation of cellular components such as organelles and proteins. Investigations specifically employing the liver or hepatocytes as experimental models have contributed significantly to our current knowledge of autophagic regulation and function. The diverse cellular functions of autophagy, along with unique features of the liver and its principal cell type the hepatocyte, suggest that the liver is highly dependent on autophagy for both normal function and to prevent the development of disease states. However, instances have also been identified in which autophagy promotes pathological changes such as the development of hepatic fibrosis. Considerable evidence has accumulated that alterations in autophagy are an underlying mechanism of a number of common hepatic diseases including toxin-, drug- and ischemia/reperfusion-induced liver injury, fatty liver, viral hepatitis and hepatocellular carcinoma. This review summarizes recent advances in understanding the roles that autophagy plays in normal hepatic physiology and pathophysiology with the intent of furthering the development of autophagy-based therapies for human liver diseases.