Transforming growth factor (TGF)-β1 (encoded by TGFB1) is the prototypic member of the TGF-β family of 33 proteins that orchestrate embryogenesis, development and tissue homeostasis1,2. Following its discovery 3 , enormous interest and numerous controversies have emerged about the role of TGF-β in coordinating the balance of pro- and anti-oncogenic properties4,5, pro- and anti-inflammatory effects 6 , or pro- and anti-fibrinogenic characteristics 7 . Here we describe three individuals from two pedigrees with biallelic loss-of-function mutations in the TGFB1 gene who presented with severe infantile inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) and central nervous system (CNS) disease associated with epilepsy, brain atrophy and posterior leukoencephalopathy. The proteins encoded by the mutated TGFB1 alleles were characterized by impaired secretion, function or stability of the TGF-β1-LAP complex, which is suggestive of perturbed bioavailability of TGF-β1. Our study shows that TGF-β1 has a critical and nonredundant role in the development and homeostasis of intestinal immunity and the CNS in humans.
In 2008, we published the first set of guidelines for standardizing research in autophagy. Since then, this topic has received increasing attention, and many scientists have entered the field. Our knowledge base and relevant new technologies have also been expanding. Thus, it is important to formulate on a regular basis updated guidelines for monitoring autophagy in different organisms. Despite numerous reviews, there continues to be confusion regarding acceptable methods to evaluate autophagy, especially in multicellular eukaryotes. Here, we present a set of guidelines for investigators to select and interpret methods to examine autophagy and related processes, and for reviewers to provide realistic and reasonable critiques of reports that are focused on these processes. These guidelines are not meant to be a dogmatic set of rules, because the appropriateness of any assay largely depends on the question being asked and the system being used. Moreover, no individual assay is perfect for every situation, calling for the use of multiple techniques to properly monitor autophagy in each experimental setting. Finally, several core components of the autophagy machinery have been implicated in distinct autophagic processes (canonical and noncanonical autophagy), implying that genetic approaches to block autophagy should rely on targeting two or more autophagy-related genes that ideally participate in distinct steps of the pathway. Along similar lines, because multiple proteins involved in autophagy also regulate other cellular pathways including apoptosis, not all of them can be used as a specific marker for bona fide autophagic responses. Here, we critically discuss current methods of assessing autophagy and the information they can, or cannot, provide. Our ultimate goal is to encourage intellectual and technical innovation in the field.