Review Article

JOURNAL OF BACTERIOLOGY AND VIROLOGY. 31 March 2025. 10-25
https://doi.org/10.4167/jbv.2025.55.1.010

ABSTRACT


MAIN

INTRODUCTION

Autophagy is a conserved lysosome-mediated catabolic process in eukaryotic cells that plays a significant role in antimicrobial defense during infection, serving as a key defense mechanism. The activation of the autophagy/xenophagic process is triggered by complex biological events in response to invading microbes or various inflammatory stimuli. Autophagy plays a crucial role in host defense by coordinating the actions of immune cells, intracellular signaling pathways, and secreted mediators to optimize immune homeostasis during infection (1). Novel therapeutic strategies that modulate autophagy may serve as alternatives for treating infections by enhancing the host's immune response, especially in light of the significant global issue of antimicrobial drug resistance. This review investigates the different types of autophagy that regulate pathogens and the key molecules that coordinate the specific pathways involved.

TYPES OF CANONICAL AUTOPHAGY

Autophagy in mammalian cells can be divided into three types, distinguished by the interaction between the cargo and the lysosome: macroautophagy, microautophagy, and chaperone-mediated autophagy (CMA) (1). Autophagy can also be classified as nonselective or selective, depending on the nutritional state of the environment. Nonselective autophagy occurs during nutrient deprivation or starvation, whereas selective autophagy is triggered by the recognition of specific cargo, such as an organelle or an invading microbe. These different types of autophagy are described in greater detail below.

Macroautophagy

Macroautophagy, commonly known simply as autophagy, is a catabolic ‘self-eating’ pathway that serves as a critical integration point in numerous biological processes. It also plays a crucial role in maintaining cellular homeostasis, particularly under conditions of stress and infection. In addition, autophagy is a bulk degradation process that removes long-lived proteins and damaged organelles from cells either nonselectively or selectively. It begins with the formation of a double-membraned structure, the autophagosome, that encloses portions of the cytoplasm. Merging of the autophagosome with the lysosome leads to the degradation of its contents (2). The processes that mediate autophagy are orchestrated by more than 30 autophagy-related (ATG) proteins, organized into different functional units (3). Previous studies have provided insights into the origin of the autophagosomal membrane, novel regulators of autophagy, and the mechanisms by which specific intracellular membranes are targeted as autophagy substrates.

Microautophagy

Microautophagy consists of direct phagocytosis by lysosomes and occurs without the formation of an autophagosome, as the autophagic cargo is captured directly at the lysosome membrane via the latter’s protrusion or invagination. Recent studies have proposed two distinct molecular mechanisms for cargo uptake in microautophagy: fission and fusion (4). Fusion-type microautophagy resembles macroautophagy in that it requires the core autophagy machinery and the soluble N-ethylmaleimide-sensitive factor attachment protein receptor (SNARE) complex. Fission-type microautophagy is mediated by endosomal sorting complexes required for transport (ESCRT), which transport the cargo into lytic organelles. Several other forms of microautophagy have been identified as well, including micromitophagy, microreticulophagy, micronucleophagy, macrolipophagy, and endosomal microautophagy. However, microautophagy has been more difficult to study than macroautophagy or CMA, due to limited detection tools and research models (5). A better understanding of how lysosomes target and transport cargo during microautophagy awaits further research.

Chaperone-mediated autophagy

In CMA, a cytosolic chaperone recognizes specific pentapeptide sequences on cytosolic soluble protein substrates, resulting in the direct transport of those proteins to lysosomes for degradation. Among the specific targets of CMA are transcription factors, glycolytic enzymes, calcium, and lipid binding proteins, and vesicular trafficking proteins (6). Cytosolic chaperone proteins include HSC70, which together with its cochaperones recognizes the KFERQ pentapeptide of substrate proteins. The resulting complex binds to the CMA substrate receptor, lysosomal-associated membrane protein (LAMP) 2A, at the lysosomal membrane (7). Following LAMP2A multimerization, HSP90-mediated complex translocation, and stabilization of the complex on the lumenal side of the lysosomal membrane, the substrate protein is translocated into the lumen, where it is eventually degraded (7). CMA is activated in response to oxidative stress, undesirable posttranslational modifications, and significant nutrient depletion. While the regulation of CMA translocation is well understood, the intracellular signaling mechanisms require further study.

AUTOPHAGY PROCESS

Autophagy is a cellular mechanism that facilitates the degradation and recycling of damaged or unnecessary cellular components. The process is divided into several key stages, including initiation, nucleation, elongation, maturation, fusion, and degradation. This section briefly discusses the key molecules and their interactions throughout the macroautophagy process. Fig. 1 depicts an overview of the macroautophagy process, highlighting key components that regulate distinct autophagic pathways.

https://cdn.apub.kr/journalsite/sites/jbv/2025-055-01/N0290550102/images/JBV_2025_v55n1_010_f001.jpg
Fig. 1

An overview of macroautophagy pathways depicting key components. (1) Initiation: The ULK1 complex, consisting of ULK1, ATG13, FIP200, and ATG101, initiates autophagy. AMPK and mTORC1 phosphorylation activate and inhibit the ULK1 complex, respectively. Activated ULK1 phosphorylates the PI3K complex, which includes BECN1, AMBRA1, VPS34, VPS15, p115, and ATG14L. (2) Nucleation: Phagophore nucleation begins with the activation of the PI3K complex on the ER membrane, which increases PI3P concentration. Nucleation and elongation occur in PI3P-rich ER regions known as omegasomes, which recruit DFCP1 and WIPI2. ULK1 also recruits ATG9-containing vesicles, COPII vesicles, and unknown membrane components to initiate autophagosome nucleation and elongation. (3, 4) Elongation & Maturation: Two ubiquitin-like conjugation systems coordinate autophagosome elongation and maturation; ATG12 is covalently connected to ATG5/ATG16L1, and LC3 is lipidated with PE. ATG7 and ATG10 covalently conjugate ATG12 with ATG5 and ATG16L1, while WIPI2 binds directly to ATG16L1 and recruits the complex to the membrane. LC3 conjugation to membrane-resident PE generates membrane-bound, lipidated complexes via ATG3. (5) Fusion: The autophagosome and lysosome fuse to form an autolysosome, which degrades cargo. This fusion process requires the SNARE complex, which includes STX17, SNAP47, and VAMP7/8. (6) Degradation: Finally, acidity and lysosomal hydrolases from lysosomes degrade the autophagosome's inner membrane and contents. Their metabolized macromolecules are actively transported into the cytoplasm for recycling or destruction.

Initiation and nucleation

Macroautophagy is initiated by the assembly of the unc-51-like activating autophagy kinase 1 (ULK1)/ATG1 complex, containing ULK1 and the ATG proteins ATG13, FAK family kinase-interacting protein of 200 kDa (FIP200), and ATG101. Activation of the ULK1 complex is regulated by the phosphorylation of two master regulators of cell metabolism: 5′-AMP-activated protein kinase (AMPK) and mechanistic target of rapamycin complex 1 (mTORC1). The ULK1 complex is activated by AMPK phosphorylation and inhibited by mTORC1 phosphorylation. Activated ULK1 is located in the endoplasmic reticulum (ER), where, following its interaction with ATG9 (8), it initiates phagophore nucleation by phosphorylating the phosphoinositide 3-kinase catalytic subunit type III (PI3K) complex, which includes beclin 1 (BECN1), autophagy and BECN1 regulator 1 (AMBRA1), type III phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase (PIK3C3)/vacuolar protein sorting 34 (VPS34), VPS15, p115, and ATG14L (9, 10). Activation of the PI3K complex causes phosphoinositide-3-phosphate (PI3P) to concentrate at the surface of the ER membrane. Specialized ER regions called omegasomes act as PI3P-rich platforms (11) that attract zinc-finger FYVE domain-containing protein 1 (DFCP1) and phosphoinositide-interacting protein 2 (WIPI2) (12) to the phagophore for nucleation and elongation. Recent studies have suggested that the recruitment of ATG9-containing vesicles and coat protein complex II (COPII) vesicles, along with other unknown membrane components, to the ULK1 complex provokes autophagosome nucleation and elongation (13, 14). These structures thus collectively serve as platforms for autophagosome biogenesis. Their further study will provide insights into the early stages of membrane formation.

Elongation and maturation

Two ubiquitin-like conjugation systems, consisting of ATG12 covalently linked with ATG5/ATG16L1 and microtubule- associated protein light chain 3 (LC3)/ATG8 lipidated with phosphatidylethanolamine (PE), are required for the coordinated action that leads to the elongation and transformation of the single-layer membrane into the double-membrane vesicle known as the autophagosome. DFCP1 and WIPI2 recruit these two systems to the elongation site (12). Initially, ATG12 is covalently conjugated with ATG5 and ATG16L1 via ATG7 and ATG10; then WIPI2 binds directly to ATG16L1, recruiting the ATG12–ATG5–ATG16L1 complex to the membrane (12, 15). ATG3-mediated conjugation of LC3 to membrane-resident PE leads to the formation of membrane-bound, lipidated structures. In this process, the covalent attachment of a PE molecule to LC3 begins with the cleavage of the terminal arginine residue of LC3 by ATG4 protease, revealing a glycine residue at the C terminus that allows the formation of LC3-I. Subsequently, the proteolyzed protein is recognized and processed by two enzymes: the E1-activating enzyme ATG7 and its own E2-like enzyme, ATG3. Ultimately, the E3-like ATG12–ATG5–ATG16L1 complex facilitates the definitive ligation of LC3 to PE, thereby converting LC3-I into LC3-II, the signature molecule of autophagosome membranes (10, 16).

Fusion and degradation

Finally, the autophagosome merges with the lysosome, giving rise to an autolysosome where the engulfed cargo undergoes degradation. This critical fusion event requires the participation of the SNARE complex (17), which includes autophagosome-localized Q-SNARE STX17. The latter binds to VAMP8, a lysosome-localized R-SNARE, via an autophagosome- localized Q-SNARE, SNAP29 (18). However, a recent study reported that the STX17-SNAP47–VAMP7/VAMP8 SNARE complex, rather than SNAP29-containing SNAREs, is the default SNARE complex governing autophagosome-lysosome fusion, responsible for both selective and nonselective autophagy (19).

In addition to SNAREs, a group of proteins engaged in fusion also function as constituents of the cellular machinery associated with other transport mechanisms that converge on the lysosome/vacuole (10). Among these proteins are the homotypic fusion and vacuolar protein sorting (HOPS)/class C VPS tethering complex (20), small GTPase RAB7 (21), and several members of the ESCRT protein family (22, 23). Both the VPS34–BECN1–UVRAG complex (24, 25) and LAMP1 (26) are required for lysosome–autophagosome fusion. The specific functions of these proteins within the complex network of cellular processes, including autophagy-related fusion events and other crucial pathways that direct cellular components toward the lysosome/vacuole, remain to be unraveled.

After fusion with the lysosome/vacuole, the inner membrane of the autophagosome and its contents are degraded by lysosomal hydrolases and the acidic environment. Then the catabolized macromolecules are actively transported from these organelles into the cytoplasm, where they can be recycled or further degraded.

AUTOPHAGY IN INFECTION

Autophagy across infection stages

Autophagy is considered a critical defense mechanism against various infections and plays a dynamic role throughout the bacterial infection process. During the early stages of infection, autophagy helps identify and sequester pathogens that enter the host through a mechanism known as xenophagy (27). Autophagosomes then engulf the pathogen, fusing with lysosomes to degrade it, allowing for early infection control. Autophagy activation at the initial stage appears crucial for inhibiting the progression of the acute phase of infectious diseases (28, 29, 30).

As the infection progresses, autophagy may act as a defense mechanism and a regulator of immune responses, combating pathogens while avoiding collateral damage to host tissue (31). During viral infection, autophagy triggers an innate immune response by collaborating with pattern recognition receptor signaling to induce interferon production (32). Once the pathogen has been cleared or contained, autophagy continues to support the host's immune response by removing cellular debris and damaged organelles caused by the infection (33). It facilitates the resolution of inflammation and tissue repair, thereby ensuring efficient recovery from infection. Autophagy is also recognized for its role in regulating inflammation through the inhibition of the inflammasome, a multiprotein complex associated with the pathogenesis of various inflammatory and autoimmune diseases (34, 35). However, some pathogens exploit the autophagy machinery to survive and establish a replication niche in host cells. For example, Legionella pneumophila and hepatitis C virus (HCV) were shown to induce autophagosome formation but inhibit phagolysosomal fusion, resulting in microbial replication (32, 36). Mycobacterium tuberculosis activates the mTOR pathway to actively inhibit autophagy (37), while Listeria monocytogenes manipulates LC3-associated phagocytosis (LAP) to form spacious Listeria-containing phagosomes (SLAPs) (38). From this perspective, host-directed therapies that enhance autophagy or target pathogen mechanisms that bypass autophagic pathways have the potential to be novel therapeutic strategies in infectious diseases.

In the later stages of infection, autophagy may help host defense by facilitating antigen processing and presentation, thereby empowering adaptive immune responses (32). For example, human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) type 1 is targeted to autophagosomes, where it is processed by autophagic machinery before being presented on MHC class II molecules (39). Autophagy is also involved in the transport and processing of extracellular antigens for cross-presentation by MHC class I molecules (40). However, chronic pulmonary inflammation can lead to persistent unregulated autophagy, which may worsen lung injury (41) This suggests that a regulated autophagy response is crucial for maintaining immune system homeostasis, especially in the context of inflammation management.

Autophagy and pathogen control

Autophagy, specifically xenophagy, functions as an effective defense mechanism against intracellular pathogens. Many intracellular pathogens, including Streptococcus pyogenes, M. tuberculosis, L. monocytogenes, and Salmonella Typhimurium, have been identified as effective autophagy targets (42). However, these pathogens also have evolved strategies to adapt successfully against autophagy mechanisms within host cells (43, 44).

Although autophagy primarily targets intracellular pathogens, it also contributes to the defense against extracellular pathogens by activating neutrophil function (45) and facilitating antigen presentation (46). Autophagy promotes neutrophil degranulation and the release of neutrophil extracellular traps, which can trap and kill extracellular pathogens (45). Autophagosomes form in MHC class II-positive dendritic cells and fuse with late endosomal compartments to transport cytoplasmic proteins for MHC class II presentation (32).

In summary, autophagy serves as a crucial defense mechanism against both intracellular and extracellular pathogens. However, its effectiveness can be undermined by sophisticated pathogen evasion and exploitation strategies, emphasizing the intricate interplay between host defense and microbial survival mechanisms. While the role of autophagy against bacterial infections has been extensively studied, more research is needed to understand the precise mechanisms of autophagy pathways involved in infections across different stages and pathogen types.

SELECTIVE AUTOPHAGY

Selective autophagy differs from nonselective autophagy in that it targets the degradation of specific cellular components, such as damaged organelles (mitophagy), protein aggregates (aggrephagy), and pathogens (xenophagy). This is accomplished by specific cargo receptors known as selective autophagy receptors (SARs), which contribute to autophagosome formation by interacting with LC3/ATG8 family proteins via the sequence motifs making up the LC3-interacting region (LIR) (47). An in-depth review of selective autophagy is provided in previous studies (48, 49). In the following sections, we briefly discuss the mechanisms and key features of several types of selective autophagy associated with infectious conditions. Fig. 2 illustrates the specific SARs that participate in the selective autophagy pathways.

https://cdn.apub.kr/journalsite/sites/jbv/2025-055-01/N0290550102/images/JBV_2025_v55n1_010_f002.jpg
Fig. 2

SARs involved in xenophagy and mitophagy. (A) Xenophagy engulfs pathogens in the cytosol or vacuole. SARs such as p62, OPTN, NDP52, and TAX1BP1 mediate xenophagy by selectively recognizing and labeling pathogens with ubiquitin chains. SARs collaborate with LC3 to activate autophagy and eliminate pathogens through lysosomal clearance. (B) Ubiquitin- dependent mitophagy recognizes and activates autophagic degradation of damaged or excess mitochondria. PINK1 accumulates in damaged mitochondria and recruits Parkin ligase to activate mitophagy. Mitophagy recognizes damaged mitochondria using cargo receptors such as p62, OPTN, NDP52, and TAX1BP1, similar to xenophagy. (C) Ubiquitin-independent mitophagy involves mitochondrial outer membrane SARs, including NIX/BNIP3L, BNIP3, FUNDC1, Bcl2L13, FKBP8, NLRX1, AMBRA1, and cardiolipin.

Xenophagy

Xenophagy targets cytosolic or vacuolar pathogens by enveloping them in autophagosomes and breaking them down within lysosomes. It is therefore a critical part of the innate immune defense system. Xenophagy is mediated by various SARs, such as p62/SQSTM1 (50), OPTN (51), NDP52 (52), and TAX1BP1 (53), which play crucial roles in selectively recognizing and labeling pathogens with ubiquitin chains. During this process, galectins bind to damaged membranes (54) and have been implicated in the inhibition of pathogens such as M. tuberculosis, group A Streptococcus, and hepatitis B virus (HBV) (55, 56, 57). However, a recent study found that galectin-3, -8, and -9 play only limited roles in resistance to acute M. tuberculosis, S. Typhimurium, or L. monocytogenes infections (58). During infection, multiple SARs interact with LC3/GABARAP to facilitate the interaction between the recognized pathogen and the autophagy machinery, ultimately leading to lysosomal clearance and effective pathogen elimination.

Studies involving the deletion of various autophagy genes both in vitro and in vivo have provided valuable insights into the role of xenophagy in controlling bacterial replication. For instance, mice with myeloid-derived cell-specific ATG5 deletion (Atg5fl/fl LysM-Cre) succumb to M. tuberculosis infection due to the hyperactivated pathological inflammation induced by neutrophil infiltration (59). Moreover, a recent study demonstrated that robust depletion of ATG16L1 or ATG7 leads to increased M. tuberculosis growth, enhanced necrosis, and heightened host susceptibility in mice (60). Future studies exploring the in vivo function of ATG genes should thus consider the nature of those infections. In addition, numerous pathogens have evolved strategies to evade xenophagy or manipulate the xenophagic machinery for their own benefit. For example, group A Streptococcus expresses the cysteine protease SpeB, which can degrade cargo receptors such as p62 and NRB1 (61). L. pneumophila, an intracellular pathogen, produces an effector protein, RavZ, to deconjugate LC3/ATG8 from ATG3 and ATG7, thus preventing xenophagy (62). Viruses such as HBV, HIV, and influenza A virus also possess unique xenophagy evasion tactics (63, 64, 65). Nonetheless, much remains to be learned about the molecular mechanisms by which individual pathogens manipulate the host xenophagy process to establish and maintain their infections in host cells.

Mitophagy

Mitophagy selectively targets and stimulates the autophagic degradation of damaged or excessive mitochondria. It has garnered recent attention following the discovery of a link between mitophagy and the pathogenesis of Parkinson’s Disease (66). In mammals, Ser/Thr kinase PTEN-induced putative kinase protein 1 (PINK1) and the E3 ubiquitin ligase Parkin are key proteins that regulate mitochondrial quality (67). PINK1 rapidly accumulates in damaged mitochondria, causing the recruitment of the Parkin ligase (68, 69, 70), which then mediates the ubiquitination of voltage-dependent anion channel 1 (VDAC1) and the recruitment of p62 to activate mitophagy (71). Prohibitin 2, an inner mitochondrial membrane protein, is a vital receptor involved in mitophagy via a PINK-Parkin-dependent pathway (72). Like xenophagy, mitophagy requires SARs, such as NDP52 and OPTN, to recognize damaged mitochondria (73).

In addition to ubiquitin-dependent mitophagy, a ubiquitin-independent pathway has been identified that involves several SARs located on the mitochondrial outer membrane, including NIX/BNIP3L (74), BNIP3 (75), FUNDC1 (76), Bcl2L13 (77), FKBP8 (78), NLRX1 (79), AMBRA1 (80), and cardiolipin (81). However, their specific molecular mechanisms are so far unknown. The interactions of the different processes in the mitophagy pathway are also poorly understood.

Recent studies suggest that mitophagy closely regulates the innate immune response to infection (82). In a polymicrobial sepsis model, PINK1-Parkin pathway dysfunction was shown to increase host susceptibility and inflammasome activation (83). Impaired mitophagy leads to the accumulation of damaged mitochondria and thus potentially to mitochondrial- DNA-mediated inflammation (84, 85). Pathogens such as L. monocytogenes have evolved to manipulate mitophagy to improve their survival, by targeting the mitophagy receptor NLR family member X1 (NLRX1) (79). Other pathogens induce mitophagy to suppress innate immune responses and maintain infection. For example, influenza A virus proteins such as PB1-F2 and nucleoprotein stimulate mitophagy to inhibit innate immunity (86, 87), while the lytic replication of human herpes virus 8 is promoted by NIX-mediated mitophagy induction (88). These observations demonstrate the complexity of mitophagy-mediated innate immunity control in terms of the type of pathogen, host cell responses, and disease models. Understanding the intricate role of mitophagy under infectious conditions will aid the development of mitophagy-targeted therapies for both known and emerging pathogens. Moreover, because mitophagy and xenophagy share several cargo receptors, such as p62, OPTN, NDP52, and TAX1BP1, insights into their crosstalk, as well as their relative contributions to different immune stages, may improve our understanding of the key roles of selective autophagy-mediated host defenses against pathogens.

NONCANONICAL AUTOPHAGY

Canonical autophagy proceeds in a well-defined sequence of steps, including formation of the autophagosome for lysosomal degradation. The pathways of noncanonical autophagy differ from the canonical pathway in terms of the molecular machinery involved and the cargo type targeted for degradation. The following section briefly discusses one such pathway, LAP, including the mechanisms and key features that contribute to inflammation and infection.

LC3-associated phagocytosis (LAP)

In LAP, autophagy components are directly conjugated with LC3 to phagosomal membranes via the recruitment of Rubicon to activate the PI3K complex, a process that replaces the formation of the autophagosome’s characteristic double-membrane structure (89). Specifically, upon infection, membrane-bound receptors, such as Toll-like receptors (TLRs), dendritic cell-associated C-type lectin-1 (dectin-1), and Fc-gamma receptors (FcγRs), on phagocytes activate the LAP pathway (90, 91), which induces the recruitment of the NADPH oxidase 2 complex and is stabilized by Rubicon, an indispensable component of the BECN1-VPS34 autophagy complex and LAP maturation (92). NADPH oxidase-derived reactive oxygen species (ROS) lead to LC3 lipidation, resulting in the formation of the LAPosome, which fuses with lysosomes to eliminate pathogens through phagolysosome complexes (90).

Recent studies have shed light on the molecular mechanisms governing LAP pathway activation in the context of infections. During LAP, the integration of lipidated LC3 into endolysosomal membranes is facilitated by the WD repeat-containing C-terminal domain of ATG16L1 (93). ATG16L1 is recruited by V-ATPase, via K490, and participates in the conjugation of LC3/ATG8 to single endolysosomal membranes (94). Histoplasma capsulatum infection triggers LAP activation by involving the Dectin-1-Syk pathway and NLRX1. The interaction between NLRX1 and Tu translation elongation factor (TUFM) causes their association with autophagic proteins ATG5–ATG12, leading to the formation of LAPosomes. The NLRX1–TUFM complex-dependent pathway also plays a vital role in LAP-mediated MAPKs-AP-1 activation, which is essential for the cytokine response to H. capsulatum (95). During infection with L. monocytogenes, the integrin ITGAM- ITGB2, also known as Mac-1 or CR3, acts as the receptor responsible for initiating the activation of antimicrobial immune responses by LAP (96). Engulfment and cell motility protein 1 (ELMO1) also actively participates in LAP by facilitating LC3 accumulation and enhancing antibacterial responses during enteric infection (97). Studies in animal models have demonstrated the vital role of LAP activation in enhancing antimicrobial defenses in various infection scenarios. A study of a zebrafish model of invasive Aspergillosis showed that autophagy-related responses, including LAP, augment host defenses (98). These and similar compelling findings underscore the potential of LAP pathways as promising host-directed therapies for combating infections by drug-resistant pathogens.

AUTOPHAGY AND IMMUNOMETABOLISM

During an infection, macrophages and other immune cells undergo metabolic reprogramming, a stepwise adaptation that allows host cells to meet the bioenergetic requirements of biosynthetic pathways (99, 100). However, some pathogens exploit host immunometabolic responses by utilizing the metabolites released by host cells for their own survival and proliferation (100). A significant shift towards glycolysis during acute infections links to inflammatory responses and the development of trained immunity (101), which in turn provides innate memory, enhancing nonspecific protection against secondary infections via the epigenetic reprogramming of myeloid cells. The metabolic shift towards increased glycolysis in trained monocytes depends on the Akt-mTOR-hypoxia-inducible factor 1-alpha (HIF-1α) pathway (101). Although mTOR activation inhibits autophagy, exogenous lactate treatment of human macrophages ultimately attenuates the glycolytic shift and maintains oxidative phosphorylation in these cells. Lactate also promotes autophagy and enhances the intracellular clearance of M. tuberculosis (102). These data suggest that early immunometabolic responses to microbial stimuli are characterized by increases in glycolytic flux and lactate production, mediated by mTOR-HIF-1α signaling. Concurrently, these early responses are associated with enhanced inflammatory responses, the activation of autophagy, and heightened bactericidal function during infection.

In the later phase of infection, intracellular metabolism redirects enhanced mitochondrial oxidative phosphorylation (OXPHOS) to the generation of mitochondrial ROS (mtROS), which act as antimicrobial effectors and play a crucial role in activating bactericidal functions (103). Recent studies have identified a dual role of mtROS in antimicrobial responses during infection (104): regulating autophagy pathways and maintaining homeostasis under stress conditions such as infection and cellular damage (104). However, excessive mtROS can damage host cells and cause pathological inflammation. mtROS levels are regulated by TNF signaling, which promotes cellular glutamine uptake and succinate accumulation, leading to mtROS generation and necrosis (105). The complex I inhibitor metformin prevents TNF-mediated mtROS production, thereby enhancing bacterial clearance (105).

In addition, during the early phase of TLR4 stimulation with LPS, there is an increase in aerobic glycolysis and a decrease in OXPHOS. Conversely, TLR2 activation in monocytes by Pam3Cys-Ser-(Lys)4 (Pam3CSK4) increases oxygen consumption, OXPHOS, and lipid metabolism. Pharmacological inhibition of mitochondrial respiratory chain complex I reduces cytokine production and phagocytosis in Pam3CSK4-stimulated monocytes (106). M. tuberculosis requires fatty acids and cholesterol for its survival, due to its lipid-rich cell wall (107). Blocking host fatty acid β-oxidation (FAO) activates antimicrobial killing mechanisms through mtROS bursts, which promote macrophage NADPH oxidase activity and xenophagy (108). However, one study showed that FAO metabolism in murine alveolar macrophages is necessary to inhibit foam cell formation (109). Autophagy has an intricate relationship with the immunometabolic status of infected cells, although the precise mechanisms have not been fully elucidated.

Emerging evidence highlights that the interplay between autophagy and immunometabolism is essential for shaping immune defenses at various stages of infections, affecting both pathogen clearance and immune cell function. Dysregulation of autophagy by pathogens can disrupt the balance between host immune and metabolic pathways, potentially impairing immune responses and increasing disease susceptibility. Further research into these interactions within the context of specific pathogenic infections will provide valuable insights into how targeting metabolic and autophagic pathways can enhance immune responses and improve disease management. This understanding could drive the development of innovative therapeutic strategies regulating autophagy and metabolism to optimize infection outcomes.

AUTOPHAGY AND DRUG-RESISTANT INFECTION

The emergence of drug-resistant pathogens has forced the urgent development of new therapeutics to control infectious diseases. Previous studies have shown that intravenous immunoglobulin-induced autophagy was critical in bactericidal effects against drug-resistant Escherichia coli and Pseudomonas aeruginosa in human neutrophils (110). Furthermore, autophagy has been shown to alleviate organ damage and improve the survival rate of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA)-induced septic mice by inhibiting Th1 and Th17 responses (111). Recently, several autophagy-activating molecules were found to have antibacterial properties against multidrug-resistant mycobacterial infections. V46, a novel resveratrol derivative, demonstrated effective antimicrobial activity against multidrug-resistant Mycobacteroides abscessus through autophagy and transcription factor EB activation (112). Dimethyl itaconate-mediated autophagy activation has also been shown to enhance host defense against multidrug-resistant M. tuberculosis infection. (113). Further research is necessary to elucidate the specific mechanisms connecting autophagy activation to the clearance of multidrug-resistant mycobacteria. However, the regulation of autophagy presents a promising therapeutic target for the eradication of multidrug-resistant bacteria.

CONCLUSION

This study examines the detailed mechanism of autophagy potentially activated during infection. Current research focuses on the development of innovative host-directed therapies to fight the emergence of multidrug-resistant bacteria. The regulation of macroautophagy and selective autophagy, including xenophagy, mitophagy, and noncanonical autophagy such as LAP, may play crucial roles in preventing the emergence of new infectious diseases and managing existing intractable infectious diseases through the development of novel autophagy-activating agents. Further research is necessary to elucidate the intricate mechanisms and roles of essential molecules that govern autophagy pathways in the defense against pathogens.

CONFLICT OF INTEREST

Not applicable.

Acknowledgements

This work was supported by the National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF) grant funded by the Korea government (MSIT) (RS-2021-NR061875 and RS-2023-00249417). Fig. 1 and 2 were created in BioRender.com.

References

1

Nie T, Zhu L, Yang Q. The Classification and Basic Processes of Autophagy. Adv Exp Med Biol. 2021;1208:3-16.

10.1007/978-981-16-2830-6_134260018
2

Bah A, Vergne I. Macrophage Autophagy and Bacterial Infections. Front Immunol. 2017;8:1483.

10.3389/fimmu.2017.0148329163544PMC5681717
3

Ravikumar B, Sarkar S, Davies JE, Futter M, Garcia-Arencibia M, Green-Thompson ZW, et al. Regulation of mammalian autophagy in physiology and pathophysiology. Physiol Rev. 2010;90(4):1383-1435.

10.1152/physrev.00030.200920959619
4

Schuck S. Microautophagy - distinct molecular mechanisms handle cargoes of many sizes. J Cell Sci. 2020;133(17):jcs246322.

10.1242/jcs.24632232907930
5

Wang L, Klionsky DJ, Shen HM. The emerging mechanisms and functions of microautophagy. Nat Rev Mol Cell Biol. 2023;24(3):186-203.

10.1038/s41580-022-00529-z36097284
6

Arias E, Cuervo AM. Chaperone-mediated autophagy in protein quality control. Curr Opin Cell Biol. 2011;23(2):184-189.

10.1016/j.ceb.2010.10.00921094035PMC3078170
7

Kaushik S, Cuervo AM. The coming of age of chaperone-mediated autophagy. Nat Rev Mol Cell Biol. 2018;19(6):365-381.

10.1038/s41580-018-0001-629626215PMC6399518
8

Karanasios E, Walker SA, Okkenhaug H, Manifava M, Hummel E, Zimmermann H, et al. Autophagy initiation by ULK complex assembly on ER tubulovesicular regions marked by ATG9 vesicles. Nat Commun. 2016;7:12420.

10.1038/ncomms1242027510922PMC4987534
9

Ktistakis NT, Tooze SA. Digesting the Expanding Mechanisms of Autophagy. Trends Cell Biol. 2016;26(8):624-635.

10.1016/j.tcb.2016.03.00627050762
10

Ariosa AR, Klionsky DJ. Autophagy core machinery: overcoming spatial barriers in neurons. J Mol Med (Berl). 2016;94(11):1217-1227.

10.1007/s00109-016-1461-927544281PMC5071157
11

Axe EL, Walker SA, Manifava M, Chandra P, Roderick HL, Habermann A, et al. Autophagosome formation from membrane compartments enriched in phosphatidylinositol 3-phosphate and dynamically connected to the endoplasmic reticulum. J Cell Biol. 2008;182(4):685-701.

10.1083/jcb.20080313718725538PMC2518708
12

Polson HE, de Lartigue J, Rigden DJ, Reedijk M, Urbe S, Clague MJ, et al. Mammalian Atg18 (WIPI2) localizes to omegasome-anchored phagophores and positively regulates LC3 lipidation. Autophagy. 2010;6(4):506-522.

10.4161/auto.6.4.1186320505359
13

Ge L, Zhang M, Schekman R. Phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase and COPII generate LC3 lipidation vesicles from the ER-Golgi intermediate compartment. Elife. 2014;3:e04135.

10.7554/eLife.0413525432021PMC4270069
14

Shima T, Kirisako H, Nakatogawa H. COPII vesicles contribute to autophagosomal membranes. J Cell Biol. 2019;218(5):1503-1510.

10.1083/jcb.20180903230787039PMC6504894
15

Mizushima N, Kuma A, Kobayashi Y, Yamamoto A, Matsubae M, Takao T, et al. Mouse Apg16L, a novel WD-repeat protein, targets to the autophagic isolation membrane with the Apg12-Apg5 conjugate. J Cell Sci. 2003;116(Pt 9):1679-1688.

10.1242/jcs.0038112665549
16

Hanada T, Noda NN, Satomi Y, Ichimura Y, Fujioka Y, Takao T, et al. The Atg12-Atg5 conjugate has a novel E3-like activity for protein lipidation in autophagy. J Biol Chem. 2007;282(52):37298-37302.

10.1074/jbc.C70019520017986448
17

Tian X, Teng J, Chen J. New insights regarding SNARE proteins in autophagosome-lysosome fusion. Autophagy. 2021;17(10):2680-2688.

10.1080/15548627.2020.182312432924745PMC8525925
18

Itakura E, Kishi-Itakura C, Mizushima N. The hairpin-type tail-anchored SNARE syntaxin 17 targets to autophagosomes for fusion with endosomes/lysosomes. Cell. 2012;151(6):1256-1269.

10.1016/j.cell.2012.11.00123217709
19

Jian F, Wang S, Tian R, Wang Y, Li C, Li Y, et al. The STX17-SNAP47-VAMP7/VAMP8 complex is the default SNARE complex mediating autophagosome-lysosome fusion. Cell Res. 2024;34(2):151-168.

10.1038/s41422-023-00916-x38182888PMC10837459
20

Jiang P, Nishimura T, Sakamaki Y, Itakura E, Hatta T, Natsume T, et al. The HOPS complex mediates autophagosome-lysosome fusion through interaction with syntaxin 17. Mol Biol Cell. 2014;25(8):1327-1337.

10.1091/mbc.e13-08-044724554770PMC3982997
21

Bucci C, Thomsen P, Nicoziani P, McCarthy J, van Deurs B. Rab7: a key to lysosome biogenesis. Mol Biol Cell. 2000;11(2):467-480.

10.1091/mbc.11.2.46710679007PMC14786
22

Rusten TE, Vaccari T, Lindmo K, Rodahl LM, Nezis IP, Sem-Jacobsen C, et al. ESCRTs and Fab1 regulate distinct steps of autophagy. Curr Biol. 2007;17(20):1817-1825.

10.1016/j.cub.2007.09.03217935992
23

Lee JA, Beigneux A, Ahmad ST, Young SG, Gao FB. ESCRT-III dysfunction causes autophagosome accumulation and neurodegeneration. Curr Biol. 2007;17(18):1561-1567.

10.1016/j.cub.2007.07.02917683935
24

Liang C, Lee JS, Inn KS, Gack MU, Li Q, Roberts EA, et al. Beclin1-binding UVRAG targets the class C Vps complex to coordinate autophagosome maturation and endocytic trafficking. Nat Cell Biol. 2008;10(7):776-787.

10.1038/ncb174018552835PMC2878716
25

Raudenska M, Balvan J, Masarik M. Crosstalk between autophagy inhibitors and endosome-related secretory pathways: a challenge for autophagy-based treatment of solid cancers. Mol Cancer. 2021;20(1):140.

10.1186/s12943-021-01423-634706732PMC8549397
26

Huynh KK, Eskelinen EL, Scott CC, Malevanets A, Saftig P, Grinstein S. LAMP proteins are required for fusion of lysosomes with phagosomes. EMBO J. 2007;26(2):313-324.

10.1038/sj.emboj.760151117245426PMC1783450
27

Knodler LA, Celli J. Eating the strangers within: host control of intracellular bacteria via xenophagy. Cell Microbiol. 2011;13(9):1319-1327.

10.1111/j.1462-5822.2011.01632.x21740500PMC3158265
28

Dubuisson JF, Swanson MS. Mouse infection by Legionella, a model to analyze autophagy. Autophagy. 2006;2(3):179-182.

10.4161/auto.283116874080PMC1774947
29

Qin Z, Yang Y, Wang H, Luo J, Huang X, You J, et al. Role of Autophagy and Apoptosis in the Postinfluenza Bacterial Pneumonia. Biomed Res Int. 2016;2016:3801026.

10.1155/2016/380102627376082PMC4916274
30

Nikouee A, Kim M, Ding X, Sun Y, Zang QS. Beclin-1-Dependent Autophagy Improves Outcomes of Pneumonia-Induced Sepsis. Front Cell Infect Microbiol. 2021;11:706637.

10.3389/fcimb.2021.70663734211859PMC8239405
31

Cadwell K. Crosstalk between autophagy and inflammatory signalling pathways: balancing defence and homeostasis. Nat Rev Immunol. 2016;16(11):661-675.

10.1038/nri.2016.10027694913PMC5343289
32

Choi Y, Bowman JW, Jung JU. Autophagy during viral infection - a double-edged sword. Nat Rev Microbiol. 2018;16(6):341-354.

10.1038/s41579-018-0003-629556036PMC6907743
33

Pang Y, Wu L, Tang C, Wang H, Wei Y. Autophagy-Inflammation Interplay During Infection: Balancing Pathogen Clearance and Host Inflammation. Front Pharmacol. 2022;13:832750.

10.3389/fphar.2022.83275035273506PMC8902503
34

Takahama M, Akira S, Saitoh T. Autophagy limits activation of the inflammasomes. Immunol Rev. 2018;281(1):62-73.

10.1111/imr.1261329248000
35

Biasizzo M, Kopitar-Jerala N. Interplay Between NLRP3 Inflammasome and Autophagy. Front Immunol. 2020;11:591803.

10.3389/fimmu.2020.59180333163006PMC7583715
36

Joshi AD, Swanson MS. Secrets of a successful pathogen: legionella resistance to progression along the autophagic pathway. Front Microbiol. 2011;2:138.

10.3389/fmicb.2011.0013821743811PMC3127087
37

Singh P, Subbian S. Harnessing the mTOR Pathway for Tuberculosis Treatment. Front Microbiol. 2018;9:70.

10.3389/fmicb.2018.0007029441052PMC5797605
38

Lam GY, Cemma M, Muise AM, Higgins DE, Brumell JH. Host and bacterial factors that regulate LC3 recruitment to Listeria monocytogenes during the early stages of macrophage infection. Autophagy. 2013;9(7):985-995.

10.4161/auto.2440623584039PMC3722333
39

Kyei GB, Dinkins C, Davis AS, Roberts E, Singh SB, Dong C, et al. Autophagy pathway intersects with HIV-1 biosynthesis and regulates viral yields in macrophages. J Cell Biol. 2009;186(2):255-268.

10.1083/jcb.20090307019635843PMC2717652
40

Dasari V, Rehan S, Tey SK, Smyth MJ, Smith C, Khanna R. Autophagy and proteasome interconnect to coordinate cross-presentation through MHC class I pathway in B cells. Immunol Cell Biol. 2016;94(10):964-974.

10.1038/icb.2016.5927297581
41

Racanelli AC, Kikkers SA, Choi AMK, Cloonan SM. Autophagy and inflammation in chronic respiratory disease. Autophagy. 2018;14(2):221-232.

10.1080/15548627.2017.138982329130366PMC5902194
42

Siqueira MDS, Ribeiro RM, Travassos LH. Autophagy and Its Interaction With Intracellular Bacterial Pathogens. Front Immunol. 2018;9:935.

10.3389/fimmu.2018.0093529875765PMC5974045
43

Kimmey JM, Stallings CL. Bacterial Pathogens versus Autophagy: Implications for Therapeutic Interventions. Trends Mol Med. 2016;22(12):1060-1076.

10.1016/j.molmed.2016.10.00827866924PMC5215815
44

Keller MD, Torres VJ, Cadwell K. Autophagy and microbial pathogenesis. Cell Death Differ. 2020;27(3):872-886.

10.1038/s41418-019-0481-831896796PMC7205878
45

Skendros P, Mitroulis I, Ritis K. Autophagy in Neutrophils: From Granulopoiesis to Neutrophil Extracellular Traps. Front Cell Dev Biol. 2018;6:109.

10.3389/fcell.2018.0010930234114PMC6131573
46

Munz C. Autophagy Beyond Intracellular MHC Class II Antigen Presentation. Trends Immunol. 2016;37(11):755-763.

10.1016/j.it.2016.08.01727667710
47

Johansen T, Lamark T. Selective Autophagy: ATG8 Family Proteins, LIR Motifs and Cargo Receptors. J Mol Biol. 2020;432(1):80-103.

10.1016/j.jmb.2019.07.01631310766
48

Gatica D, Lahiri V, Klionsky DJ. Cargo recognition and degradation by selective autophagy. Nat Cell Biol. 2018;20(3):233-242.

10.1038/s41556-018-0037-z29476151PMC6028034
49

Vargas JNS, Hamasaki M, Kawabata T, Youle RJ, Yoshimori T. The mechanisms and roles of selective autophagy in mammals. Nat Rev Mol Cell Biol. 2023;24(3):167-185.

10.1038/s41580-022-00542-236302887
50

Zheng YT, Shahnazari S, Brech A, Lamark T, Johansen T, Brumell JH. The adaptor protein p62/SQSTM1 targets invading bacteria to the autophagy pathway. J Immunol. 2009;183(9):5909-5916.

10.4049/jimmunol.090044119812211
51

Wild P, Farhan H, McEwan DG, Wagner S, Rogov VV, Brady NR, et al. Phosphorylation of the autophagy receptor optineurin restricts Salmonella growth. Science. 2011;333(6039):228-233.

10.1126/science.120540521617041PMC3714538
52

Thurston TL, Ryzhakov G, Bloor S, von Muhlinen N, Randow F. The TBK1 adaptor and autophagy receptor NDP52 restricts the proliferation of ubiquitin-coated bacteria. Nat Immunol. 2009;10(11):1215-1221.

10.1038/ni.180019820708
53

Tumbarello DA, Manna PT, Allen M, Bycroft M, Arden SD, Kendrick-Jones J, et al. The Autophagy Receptor TAX1BP1 and the Molecular Motor Myosin VI Are Required for Clearance of Salmonella Typhimurium by Autophagy. PLoS Pathog. 2015;11(10):e1005174.

10.1371/journal.ppat.100517426451915PMC4599966
54

Thurston TL, Wandel MP, von Muhlinen N, Foeglein A, Randow F. Galectin 8 targets damaged vesicles for autophagy to defend cells against bacterial invasion. Nature. 2012;482(7385):414-418.

10.1038/nature1074422246324PMC3343631
55

Bell SL, Lopez KL, Cox JS, Patrick KL, Watson RO. Galectin-8 Senses Phagosomal Damage and Recruits Selective Autophagy Adapter TAX1BP1 To Control Mycobacterium tuberculosis Infection in Macrophages. mBio. 2021;12(4):e0187120.

10.1128/mBio.01871-2034225486PMC8406326
56

Lin CY, Nozawa T, Minowa-Nozawa A, Toh H, Hikichi M, Iibushi J, et al. Autophagy Receptor Tollip Facilitates Bacterial Autophagy by Recruiting Galectin-7 in Response to Group A Streptococcus Infection. Front Cell Infect Microbiol. 2020;10:583137.

10.3389/fcimb.2020.58313733425778PMC7786282
57

Miyakawa K, Nishi M, Ogawa M, Matsunaga S, Sugiyama M, Nishitsuji H, et al. Galectin-9 restricts hepatitis B virus replication via p62/SQSTM1-mediated selective autophagy of viral core proteins. Nat Commun. 2022;13(1):531.

10.1038/s41467-022-28171-535087074PMC8795376
58

Morrison HM, Craft J, Rivera-Lugo R, Johnson JR, Golovkine GR, Bell SL, et al. Deficiency in Galectin-3, -8, and -9 impairs immunity to chronic Mycobacterium tuberculosis infection but not acute infection with multiple intracellular pathogens. PLoS Pathog. 2023;19(6):e1011088.

10.1371/journal.ppat.101108837352334PMC10325092
59

Kimmey JM, Huynh JP, Weiss LA, Park S, Kambal A, Debnath J, et al. Unique role for ATG5 in neutrophil-mediated immunopathology during M. tuberculosis infection. Nature. 2015;528(7583):565-9.

10.1038/nature1645126649827PMC4842313
60

Golovkine GR, Roberts AW, Morrison HM, Rivera-Lugo R, McCall RM, Nilsson H, et al. Autophagy restricts Mycobacterium tuberculosis during acute infection in mice. Nat Microbiol. 2023;8(5):819-832.

10.1038/s41564-023-01354-637037941PMC11027733
61

Barnett TC, Liebl D, Seymour LM, Gillen CM, Lim JY, Larock CN, et al. The globally disseminated M1T1 clone of group A Streptococcus evades autophagy for intracellular replication. Cell Host Microbe. 2013;14(6):675-682.

10.1016/j.chom.2013.11.00324331465PMC3918495
62

Choy A, Dancourt J, Mugo B, O'Connor TJ, Isberg RR, Melia TJ, et al. The Legionella effector RavZ inhibits host autophagy through irreversible Atg8 deconjugation. Science. 2012;338(6110):1072-1076.

10.1126/science.122702623112293PMC3682818
63

Liu B, Fang M, Hu Y, Huang B, Li N, Chang C, et al. Hepatitis B virus X protein inhibits autophagic degradation by impairing lysosomal maturation. Autophagy. 2014;10(3):416-430.

10.4161/auto.2728624401568PMC4077881
64

Van Grol J, Subauste C, Andrade RM, Fujinaga K, Nelson J, Subauste CS. HIV-1 inhibits autophagy in bystander macrophage/monocytic cells through Src-Akt and STAT3. PLoS One. 2010;5(7):e11733.

10.1371/journal.pone.001173320661303PMC2908694
65

Beale R, Wise H, Stuart A, Ravenhill BJ, Digard P, Randow F. A LC3-interacting motif in the influenza A virus M2 protein is required to subvert autophagy and maintain virion stability. Cell Host Microbe. 2014;15(2):239-247.

10.1016/j.chom.2014.01.00624528869PMC3991421
66

Youle RJ, Narendra DP. Mechanisms of mitophagy. Nat Rev Mol Cell Biol. 2011;12(1):9-14.

10.1038/nrm302821179058PMC4780047
67

Eiyama A, Okamoto K. PINK1/Parkin-mediated mitophagy in mammalian cells. Curr Opin Cell Biol. 2015;33:95-101.

10.1016/j.ceb.2015.01.00225697963
68

Narendra D, Tanaka A, Suen DF, Youle RJ. Parkin is recruited selectively to impaired mitochondria and promotes their autophagy. J Cell Biol. 2008;183(5):795-803.

10.1083/jcb.20080912519029340PMC2592826
69

Vives-Bauza C, Zhou C, Huang Y, Cui M, de Vries RL, Kim J, et al. PINK1-dependent recruitment of Parkin to mitochondria in mitophagy. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2010;107(1):378-383.

10.1073/pnas.091118710719966284PMC2806779
70

Narendra DP, Jin SM, Tanaka A, Suen DF, Gautier CA, Shen J, et al. PINK1 is selectively stabilized on impaired mitochondria to activate Parkin. PLoS Biol. 2010;8(1):e1000298.

10.1371/journal.pbio.100029820126261PMC2811155
71

Geisler S, Holmstrom KM, Skujat D, Fiesel FC, Rothfuss OC, Kahle PJ, et al. PINK1/Parkin-mediated mitophagy is dependent on VDAC1 and p62/SQSTM1. Nat Cell Biol. 2010;12(2):119-131.

10.1038/ncb201220098416
72

Wei Y, Chiang WC, Sumpter R Jr, Mishra P, Levine B. Prohibitin 2 Is an Inner Mitochondrial Membrane Mitophagy Receptor. Cell. 2017;168(1-2):224-238.

10.1016/j.cell.2016.11.04228017329PMC5235968
73

Lazarou M, Sliter DA, Kane LA, Sarraf SA, Wang C, Burman JL, et al. The ubiquitin kinase PINK1 recruits autophagy receptors to induce mitophagy. Nature. 2015;524(7565):309-314.

10.1038/nature1489326266977PMC5018156
74

Novak I, Kirkin V, McEwan DG, Zhang J, Wild P, Rozenknop A, et al. Nix is a selective autophagy receptor for mitochondrial clearance. EMBO Rep. 2010;11(1):45-51.

10.1038/embor.2009.25620010802PMC2816619
75

Hanna RA, Quinsay MN, Orogo AM, Giang K, Rikka S, Gustafsson AB. Microtubule-associated protein 1 light chain 3 (LC3) interacts with Bnip3 protein to selectively remove endoplasmic reticulum and mitochondria via autophagy. J Biol Chem. 2012;287(23):19094-19104.

10.1074/jbc.M111.32293322505714PMC3365942
76

Liu L, Feng D, Chen G, Chen M, Zheng Q, Song P, et al. Mitochondrial outer-membrane protein FUNDC1 mediates hypoxia-induced mitophagy in mammalian cells. Nat Cell Biol. 2012;14(2):177-185.

10.1038/ncb242222267086
77

Murakawa T, Yamaguchi O, Hashimoto A, Hikoso S, Takeda T, Oka T, et al. Bcl-2-like protein 13 is a mammalian Atg32 homologue that mediates mitophagy and mitochondrial fragmentation. Nat Commun. 2015;6:7527.

10.1038/ncomms852726146385PMC4501433
78

Bhujabal Z, Birgisdottir AB, Sjottem E, Brenne HB, Overvatn A, Habisov S, et al. FKBP8 recruits LC3A to mediate Parkin-independent mitophagy. EMBO Rep. 2017;18(6):947-961.

10.15252/embr.20164314728381481PMC5452039
79

Zhang Y, Yao Y, Qiu X, Wang G, Hu Z, Chen S, et al. Listeria hijacks host mitophagy through a novel mitophagy receptor to evade killing. Nat Immunol. 2019;20(4):433-446.

10.1038/s41590-019-0324-230804553
80

Strappazzon F, Nazio F, Corrado M, Cianfanelli V, Romagnoli A, Fimia GM, et al. AMBRA1 is able to induce mitophagy via LC3 binding, regardless of PARKIN and p62/SQSTM1. Cell Death Differ. 2015;22(3):419-432.

10.1038/cdd.2014.13925215947PMC4326570
81

Chu CT, Ji J, Dagda RK, Jiang JF, Tyurina YY, Kapralov AA, et al. Cardiolipin externalization to the outer mitochondrial membrane acts as an elimination signal for mitophagy in neuronal cells. Nat Cell Biol. 2013;15(10):1197-1205.

10.1038/ncb283724036476PMC3806088
82

Cho DH, Kim JK, Jo EK. Mitophagy and Innate Immunity in Infection. Mol Cells. 2020;43(1):10-22.

83

Kang R, Zeng L, Xie Y, Yan Z, Zhou B, Cao L, et al. A novel PINK1- and PARK2-dependent protective neuroimmune pathway in lethal sepsis. Autophagy. 2016;12(12):2374-2385.

10.1080/15548627.2016.123967827754761PMC5173260
84

West AP, Khoury-Hanold W, Staron M, Tal MC, Pineda CM, Lang SM, et al. Mitochondrial DNA stress primes the antiviral innate immune response. Nature. 2015;520(7548):553-557.

10.1038/nature1415625642965PMC4409480
85

Sliter DA, Martinez J, Hao L, Chen X, Sun N, Fischer TD, et al. Parkin and PINK1 mitigate STING-induced inflammation. Nature. 2018;561(7722):258-262.

10.1038/s41586-018-0448-930135585PMC7362342
86

Wang R, Zhu Y, Ren C, Yang S, Tian S, Chen H, et al. Influenza A virus protein PB1-F2 impairs innate immunity by inducing mitophagy. Autophagy. 2021;17(2):496-511.

10.1080/15548627.2020.172537532013669PMC8007153
87

Zhang B, Xu S, Liu M, Wei Y, Wang Q, Shen W, et al. The nucleoprotein of influenza A virus inhibits the innate immune response by inducing mitophagy. Autophagy. 2023;19(7):1916-1933.

10.1080/15548627.2022.216279836588386PMC10283423
88

Vo MT, Smith BJ, Nicholas J, Choi YB. Activation of NIX-mediated mitophagy by an interferon regulatory factor homologue of human herpesvirus. Nat Commun. 2019;10(1):3203.

10.1038/s41467-019-11164-231324791PMC6642096
89

Martinez J, Almendinger J, Oberst A, Ness R, Dillon CP, Fitzgerald P, et al. Microtubule-associated protein 1 light chain 3 alpha (LC3)-associated phagocytosis is required for the efficient clearance of dead cells. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2011;108(42):17396-17401.

10.1073/pnas.111342110821969579PMC3198353
90

Yuan J, Zhang Q, Chen S, Yan M, Yue L. LC3-Associated Phagocytosis in Bacterial Infection. Pathogens. 2022;11(8):863.

10.3390/pathogens1108086336014984PMC9415076
91

Sanjuan MA, Dillon CP, Tait SW, Moshiach S, Dorsey F, Connell S, et al. Toll-like receptor signalling in macrophages links the autophagy pathway to phagocytosis. Nature. 2007;450(7173):1253-1257.

10.1038/nature0642118097414
92

Matsunaga K, Saitoh T, Tabata K, Omori H, Satoh T, Kurotori N, et al. Two Beclin 1-binding proteins, Atg14L and Rubicon, reciprocally regulate autophagy at different stages. Nat Cell Biol. 2009;11(4):385-396.

10.1038/ncb184619270696
93

Fletcher K, Ulferts R, Jacquin E, Veith T, Gammoh N, Arasteh JM, et al. The WD40 domain of ATG16L1 is required for its non-canonical role in lipidation of LC3 at single membranes. EMBO J. 2018;37(4):e97840.

10.15252/embj.20179784029317426PMC5813257
94

Hooper KM, Jacquin E, Li T, Goodwin JM, Brumell JH, Durgan J, et al. V-ATPase is a universal regulator of LC3-associated phagocytosis and non-canonical autophagy. J Cell Biol. 2022;221(6):e202105112.

10.1083/jcb.20210511235511089PMC9082624
95

Huang JH, Liu CY, Wu SY, Chen WY, Chang TH, Kan HW, et al. NLRX1 Facilitates Histoplasma capsulatum-Induced LC3-Associated Phagocytosis for Cytokine Production in Macrophages. Front Immunol. 2018;9:2761.

10.3389/fimmu.2018.0276130559741PMC6286976
96

Herb M, Gluschko A, Schramm M. LC3-associated phagocytosis initiated by integrin ITGAM-ITGB2/Mac-1 enhances immunity to Listeria monocytogenes. Autophagy. 2018;14(8):1462-1464.

10.1080/15548627.2018.147581629923444PMC6103671
97

Sarkar A, Tindle C, Pranadinata RF, Reed S, Eckmann L, Stappenbeck TS, et al. ELMO1 Regulates Autophagy Induction and Bacterial Clearance During Enteric Infection. J Infect Dis. 2017;216(12):1655-1666.

10.1093/infdis/jix52829029244PMC5853658
98

Forn-Cuni G, Welvaarts L, Stel FM, van den Hondel CJ, Arentshorst M, Ram A, et al. Stimulating the autophagic-lysosomal axis enhances host defense against fungal infection in a zebrafish model of invasive Aspergillosis. Autophagy. 2023;19(1):324-337.

10.1080/15548627.2022.209072735775203PMC9809955
99

Willmann K, Moita LF. Physiologic disruption and metabolic reprogramming in infection and sepsis. Cell Metab. 2024;36(5):927-946.

10.1016/j.cmet.2024.02.01338513649
100

Chen YT, Lohia GK, Chen S, Riquelme SA. Immunometabolic Regulation of Bacterial Infection, Biofilms, and Antibiotic Susceptibility. J Innate Immun. 2024;16(1):143-158.

10.1159/00053664938310854PMC10914382
101

Cheng SC, Quintin J, Cramer RA, Shepardson KM, Saeed S, Kumar V, et al. mTOR- and HIF-1alpha-mediated aerobic glycolysis as metabolic basis for trained immunity. Science. 2014;345(6204):1250684.

10.1126/science.125068425258083PMC4226238
102

Ó Maoldomhnaigh C, Cox DJ, Phelan JJ, Mitermite M, Murphy DM, Leisching G, et al. Lactate Alters Metabolism in Human Macrophages and Improves Their Ability to Kill Mycobacterium tuberculosis. Front Immunol. 2021;12:663695.

10.3389/fimmu.2021.66369534691015PMC8526932
103

Wang Y, Li N, Zhang X, Horng T. Mitochondrial metabolism regulates macrophage biology. J Biol Chem. 2021;297(1):100904.

10.1016/j.jbc.2021.10090434157289PMC8294576
104

Dan Dunn J, Alvarez LA, Zhang X, Soldati T. Reactive oxygen species and mitochondria: A nexus of cellular homeostasis. Redox Biol. 2015;6:472-485.

10.1016/j.redox.2015.09.00526432659PMC4596921
105

Roca FJ, Whitworth LJ, Prag HA, Murphy MP, Ramakrishnan L. Tumor necrosis factor induces pathogenic mitochondrial ROS in tuberculosis through reverse electron transport. Science. 2022;376(6600):eabh2841.

10.1126/science.abh284135737799PMC7612974
106

Lachmandas E, Boutens L, Ratter JM, Hijmans A, Hooiveld GJ, Joosten LA, et al. Microbial stimulation of different Toll-like receptor signalling pathways induces diverse metabolic programmes in human monocytes. Nat Microbiol. 2016;2:16246.

10.1038/nmicrobiol.2016.24627991883
107

Laval T, Chaumont L, Demangel C. Not too fat to fight: The emerging role of macrophage fatty acid metabolism in immunity to Mycobacterium tuberculosis. Immunol Rev. 2021;301(1):84-97.

10.1111/imr.1295233559209
108

Chandra P, He L, Zimmerman M, Yang G, Koster S, Ouimet M, et al. Inhibition of Fatty Acid Oxidation Promotes Macrophage Control of Mycobacterium tuberculosis. mBio. 2020;11(4):e01139-20.

10.1128/mBio.01139-2032636249PMC7343992
109

Genoula M, Marin Franco JL, Maio M, Dolotowicz B, Ferreyra M, Milillo MA, et al. Fatty acid oxidation of alternatively activated macrophages prevents foam cell formation, but Mycobacterium tuberculosis counteracts this process via HIF-1alpha activation. PLoS Pathog. 2020;16(10):e1008929.

10.1371/journal.ppat.100892933002063PMC7553279
110

Itoh H, Matsuo H, Kitamura N, Yamamoto S, Higuchi T, Takematsu H, et al. Enhancement of neutrophil autophagy by an IVIG preparation against multidrug-resistant bacteria as well as drug-sensitive strains. J Leukoc Biol. 2015;98(1):107-117.

10.1189/jlb.4A0813-422RRR25908735PMC4467167
111

Zhang S, Huang X, Xiu H, Zhang Z, Zhang K, Cai J, et al. The attenuation of Th1 and Th17 responses via autophagy protects against methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus-induced sepsis. Microbes Infect. 2021;23(8):104833.

10.1016/j.micinf.2021.10483333930602
112

Sapkota A, Park EJ, Kim YJ, Heo JB, Nguyen TQ, Heo BE, et al. The autophagy-targeting compound V46 enhances antimicrobial responses to Mycobacteroides abscessus by activating transcription factor EB. Biomed Pharmacother. 2024;179:117313.

10.1016/j.biopha.2024.11731339167844
113

Kim YJ, Park EJ, Lee SH, Silwal P, Kim JK, Yang JS, et al. Dimethyl itaconate is effective in host-directed antimicrobial responses against mycobacterial infections through multifaceted innate immune pathways. Cell Biosci. 2023;13(1):49.

10.1186/s13578-023-00992-x36882813PMC9993662
페이지 상단으로 이동하기