Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

Burn healing should be regarded as a dynamic process consisting of two main, interrelated phases: (a) the inflammatory phase when neutrophils and monocytes infiltrate the injury site, through localized vasodilation and fluid extravasation, and (b) the proliferative-remodeling phase, which represents a key event in wound healing. In the skin, both canonical autophagy (induced by starvation, oxidative stress, and environmental aggressions) and non-canonical or selective autophagy have evolved to play a discrete, but, essential, “housekeeping” role, for homeostasis, immune tolerance, and survival. Experimental data supporting the pro-survival roles of autophagy, highlighting its Yang, luminous and positive feature of this complex but insufficient explored molecular pathway, have been reported. Autophagic cell death describes an “excessive” degradation of important cellular components that are necessary for normal cell function. This deadly molecular mechanism brings to light the darker, concealed, Yin feature of autophagy. Autophagy seems to perform dual, conflicting roles in the angiogenesis context, revealing once again, its Yin–Yang features. Autophagy with its Yin–Yang features remains the shadow player, able to decide quietly whether the cell survives or dies.

Keywords

burns burn wound healing autophagy oxidative stress

Introduction

The skin is a complex organized first line of defense.¹ The skin micro-environment is strongly influenced by temperature, diet, pH, moisture, sebum level, resident immune cells, infectious exposure, and last but not least, oxidative stress.^1–4 However, the skin is gifted with an insufficiently explored arsenal of molecular and cellular weapons and able to counterattack potential external threats.^1,2 The efficiency of skin protective function relies mainly on molecular mechanisms controlling and sustaining the continuous removal of dead cells and other debris without alarming the immune system.^1–4 In this context, one of the main roles will be played by autophagy.⁵

Skin cell populations are both non-immune and immune.^2,6 Epidermis cells are represented by keratinocytes, Langerhans cells (LCs), dendritic epidermal γδ T cells, melanocytes, and Merkel cells.⁷ The dermis has populations of non-immune cells, like fibroblasts, endothelial cells, and neurons and immune cells, such as B cells, macrophages, T cells, innate lymphoid cells, and NK.^1–3 Hypodermis consists of adipocytes, lymphatic and blood vessels, and nerves.^1–3 Normally, the epidermis and dermis have circulating immune cells (neutrophils, monocytes, macrophage, αβ T cells, γd T cells, NK cells, B cells, and innate lymphoid cells) and non-immune cells (such as keratinocytes, fibroblasts, and melanocytes).^1–3

On the other hand, in the skin, both canonical autophagy (induced by starvation, oxidative stress, and environmental aggressions) and non-canonical or selective autophagy have evolved in order to play a discrete, but, essential, “housekeeping” role, in homeostasis, immune tolerance, and survival.^1,6 The skin is exposed to many and various environmental stressing factors, so it has big energy and resource requirements. However, being a nutrient-poor organ, its functions and survival mainly depend on the recycling of limited resources via the complex autophagy system.^5,8

Regarding autophagy, of all the organs of the human body, the skin remains one of the less studied. The aim of our review is to shed some light upon the vailed roles of autophagy in burn wounds healing, and, also, to outline its Yin Yang duplicitous features, as a pro-survival/cell death initiator mechanism, in burns context. We have focused on three main topics: (1) the molecular mechanism of the autophagic process, (2) autophagy as a pro-survival mechanism in burns, the Yang, and (3) autophagy as a cell-death promotor pathway in burns, the Yin.

Autophagy

The word “Autophagy” is derived from the ancient Greek language, and it means self (auto) eating (phagy). The term autophagy was first presented by Christian de Duve, who won the Nobel Prize in Medicine for studying lysosomes, in 1974.^9–14 Autophagy is a highly conserved molecular pathway across eukaryotes’ evolution. This molecular machine enables the cells to recycle cellular debris via lysosomes, ensuring, in this way, survival during periods of nutrient deprivation and stress.⁹ However, presently, it becomes clearer and clearer that the pathway of autophagy is intimately involved, not only in cell adaptation to starvation but also in inflammation, apoptosis, and cellular necrosis. The autophagy pathway can be classified as follows: macroautophagy (canonical autophagy—known as autophagy), microautophagy, and chaperone-mediated autophagy.^9,11,15 Characteristic of macroautophagy is the autophagosome formation. The autophagosome represents a double membrane vesicle, able to engulf cytosolic proteins, damaged organelles, and other cellular materials.^9,11,15

Microautophagy represents the substrate translocation, via direct protrusion or invagination, into lysosome, for degradation.^9,11,15 The chaperone-mediated autophagy involves the direct translocation of the substrate proteins across the lysosomal membrane, by a chaperone protein Hsc70 (heat shock cognate 70)-mediated mechanism.^9,11,15

The molecular orchestra of autophagy is precisely controlled by the ATG protein group.^9,16 Briefly, the main steps of the autophagic pathway are (1) the pre-initiation complex organization; (2) the phagophore formation; (3) autophagosome elaboration; (4) autophagosome–lysosome fusion triggering the autolysosome formation; and (5) cargo degradation (Figure 1).^9,16–18

Figure 1.

Main steps of the autophagic pathway.

The mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR) represents the key regulator of autophagy initiation; more precisely, mTOR inhibition triggers autophagy induction by the assembly of ULK1/2, ATG13, and FIP200, to elaborate the pre-initiation complex, in the presence of unwanted cellular debris (mitochondria, pathogens, and protein aggregates, representing the cargo) (Figure 1).^15–17 This molecular event will, in turn, activate the Class III phosphatidylinositol-3-kinase (PI3K) complex, formed by ATG14 (UVRAG)-VPS15-VPS34-Beclin1. The main function of this complex is to recruit the ATG proteins to the autophagosome assembly site.^15–17 During autophagosome elongation, E3 (Ubiquitin)-ligase ATG7 is recruited to the autophagosome membrane and triggers the ATG5–ATG12–ATG16L1 complex generation.^1,16,19 E2-like enzyme ATG3 generates the ATG12–ATG3 conjugate, controlling mitochondrial homeostasis.^1,16,19 ATG7 can recruit ATG3 and ATG10 leading to ATG7–ATG3 and ATG10–ATG3 complexes, respectively.^17,19,20 ATG12-conjugation is vital for pre-autophagosomes formation.^20,21 ATG3 is involved in the LC3-I conjugation with phosphatidylethanolamine (PE). LC3 lipidation with PE forms LC3-II, necessary for the autophagosomes complete assembly.^19–21 LC3-PE is included into the mature autophagosome.^19–21 The completed autophagosome finally is able to fuse with the lysosome, resulting the autolysosome inside which the cargo is degraded by lysosomal hydrolases. The degradation products are released back into the cytosol and recycled.^19–21

As mentioned above, mTOR is a critical conductor of autophagy initiation. Mitogen-activated protein kinase (MAPK) and protein kinase B (Akt) activate mTOR via the interaction of tuberous sclerosis complex (TSC) 1/2, Rheb, and the mammalian target of rapamycin complex 1/2 (mTORC1/2).¹⁰ ATG13 and the serine–threonine kinase ATG1 phosphorylation are inhibited by the activated mTOR, suppressing in this way the initiation of the autophagy pathway.¹⁶

Autophagy represents a complex molecular pathway which should not be considered limited only to cell survival during starvation. In reality, autophagy plays key role in regulating important cellular events.^9,22–24 This highlights the importance of investigating autophagy’s hidden influences on various biological mechanisms, in different contexts, such as burn wound healing. The inflammatory response in the skin, induced by environmental irritants, such as burns, involves autophagy as a complex regulator of specific molecular events.¹

Autophagy: a pro-survival mechanism—the Yang

Compared to other types of wounds, burn wounds are a special type of skin lesions, in many ways: molecular events, signaling pathways involved, pathophysiology, and the entire, imposed management.²⁵ The burn wound healing should be regarded as a complex and dynamic process, involving innate immune cells (neutrophils, monocytes, and macrophages), adaptive immune cells (alpha beta (αβ) T cells and the gamma delta (γd) T cells), and non-immune cells (keratinocytes, fibroblasts, mesenchymal stem cells, and smooth muscle cells).^25,26

Burn healing should be regarded as a dynamic process consisting of two main interrelated phases: (a) the inflammatory phase, when neutrophils and monocytes infiltrate the injury site through localized vasodilation and fluid extravasation; and (b) the proliferative-remodeling phase, which represents a key event in wound healing, characterized by fibroblast and keratinocyte activation by cytokines and growth factors (Table 1).^25–27

Table 1.

Autophagy levels during burn wound healing main steps.

The most important steps of the burn wound healing are briefly illustrated in Figure 2.

Figure 2.

The most important steps of burn wound healing.

Autophagy and the inflammatory phase of burn wound healing

Immediately after the thermal injury occurred, the burn wound presents three zones: (1) the coagulation zone (most damaged in the central portion); (2) the stasis zone or zone of ischemia; and (3) the hyperemia zone (characterized by increased inflammatory-induced vasodilation).^1,27,28

Hemostasis is initiated immediately after the thermal injury occurred and involves platelets recruitment and aggregation; vasoconstriction; secretion of clotting and growth factors (like platelet-derived growth factor (PDGF), epidermal growth factor (EGF) and transforming growth factor-β (TGFβ)) by platelets, macrophages, and fibroblasts, triggering the fibrin clot formation at the thermic injury site. The fibrin clot will serve as a provisional matrix for the next steps of the healing process.^25–28

After the thermal injury occurred, neutrophils, monocytes, and monocyte-derived macrophages M1 recruited to the lesion site due to localized vasodilation. These immune cells will practically initiate and amplify the inflammatory phase.^25–28 The macrophages remove cell debris and pathogens from the injury site. Neutrophils and macrophages release cytokines (tumor necrosis factor (TNF); IL-1, IL-8) and growth factors (insulin-like growth factor (IGF) and vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF)).^25–28 Autophagy plays discrete, but, however, essential roles in the molecular basis of these immune cells’ activity. Moreover, autophagy should be regarded as a complex target of the molecular signals represented by cytokines (Figure 3).^1,25–29

Figure 3.

The complex interrelations between cytokines and autophagy.

As illustrated in Figure 3, autophagy is induced by interferon (IFN)-γ, interleukin IL-1β, IL-α, and tumor necrosis factor (TNF)-α.^28,29 Important to emphasize is that the autophagy relationship with IL-α, IL-1β, IL-17, and TNF-α can be influenced by different conditions, such as a burn wound.^28,29

Bhaskaran outlined that IL-1b could modulate Akt/mTOR metabolic signaling proteins in T cells. Moreover, these authors have shown that IL-1b increased p-Akt and p-mTOR expression in naïve and Foxp3+CD4+T cells.³⁰

The PI3K/AKT/mTOR signaling pathway represents a key modulator of autophagy. More precisely, the PI3K/AKT/mTOR pathway activation suppresses autophagy and promotes inflammatory responses in several diseases.³¹ Tang et al. have shown that TNF-α-induced PI3K/AKT/mTOR signaling activation has been abolished by lncRNA MEG3 (long non-coding RNA maternally expressed gene 3) overexpression in keratinocytes. Moreover, PI3K/AKT/mTOR pathway inhibition triggered the downregulation of TNF-α-induced inflammation and restored the autophagy level.³¹

The autophagic machine is blocked by IL-4, IL-10, IL-13, and IL-33.

In turn, autophagy induces the synthesis and secretion of IFN-γ, TNF-α, and IL-1β and abolishes the TNF-α, IL-17, IL-1β, and IL-α release.^28,29

Neutrophils are the best represented granulocytes and are considered real attack pawns of the immune system.³² Autophagy role in the neutrophils function is highlighted by the reported data revealing that autophagy-deficient neutrophils showed NADPH-oxidase-mediated reactive oxygen species (ROS) production, impaired degranulation, and abnormal inflammatory responses.³⁰ Moreover, the neutrophils from leprosy patients’ skin showed intensified autophagy and exhibited accelerated apoptosis in vitro.³³ In neutrophil-mediated inflammation, autophagy represents a protective mechanism.

Neutrophil autophagy blocking may trigger an uncontrolled inflammatory response.³⁴ It has been reported that autophagy decreases cytokine production and downregulates neutrophil influx.^35,36 Autophagy decreases degranulation and ROS generation, triggering apoptosis downregulation.^37,38

Macrophages are phagocyting cells, located in the epidermis and dermis.⁶ In normal conditions, these cells are involved in maintaining the skin immunotolerant environment.^6,39

In macrophages, autophagy also plays key roles regarding the functions of these phagocytic cells. These important roles are outlined by the experimental data revealing that in leprosy patients, skin macrophages presented significant upregulations of autophagy genes, especially atg14 and beclin1.⁴⁰

Other important immune cells, deeply involved in the burn wound evolution, are the adaptive immune cells, the alpha beta (αβ) T cells and the gamma delta (γd) T cells. The alpha beta (αβ) T cells (CD8⁺ T cells and CD4⁺ T cells) are maintained in the skin long after the immune response is over.^41–48 Atg7-deficient (αβ) T cells are not able to participate in the skin homeostasis maintenance,^49,50 illustrating once again the importance of the autophagic pathway in sustaining their functions. At the same time, gamma delta (γd) T cells are found in the epidermis and dermis and are named dendritic epidermal γd T cells (DETCs) and dermal γd T cells, respectively.^51–53 Like αβ T cells, they have mediator roles in tissue repair.^51,54 γd T cells are among the first responders to skin damage, including burns. This type of T cells is important in maintaining skin homeostasis in different conditions, including burns, by releasing cytokines like IGF-1, TNF-α, and KGF-1. These cytokines underlie their roles in burn wound repair.⁵⁴ DETCs develop close contacts with keratinocytes and have a significant contribution in wound healing.^55,56 Interestingly, skin γd T cells are able to sustain autophagy for survival, also in the absence of cytokines.^54,57 These mentioned experimental data highlight the important roles performed by autophagy in the molecular landscape of the functions of immune cells like neutrophils and macrophages, especially considering that they are the key players in the inflammatory phase initiation of burn wound healing.

Autophagy, a complex and dynamic molecular flux, represents a key point for cell survival.^58,59 As mentioned above, cytosolic LC3 (LC3-I) conversion to the autophagosome-associated form LC3-II by conjugation of phosphatidylethanolamine is considered an essential event for autophagy initiation.^60,61 P62 should be regarded as another autophagy biomarker since after the autophagic machinery starts, p62 is degraded.^58,59 Beclin-1 level can also be used as an indicator of autophagy.^60,61 Putting all this together, LC3-II and Beclin-1 increment along with p62 decrease should be regarded as biomarkers of autophagic activity level during burn wound evolution. Heba A et al. reported experimental data supporting the pro-survival role of autophagy, highlighting its Yang, luminous, and positive feature of this complex but insufficient explored molecular pathway.⁶¹ The study of Heba, conducted on skin samples from burn wounds, revealed, by measuring LC3-II and Beclin-1, a significant decrease of autophagic level (p < .001) during the first 24 h.⁶¹ After 24 h, autophagy intensity began to increase, but it did not reach the normal level up to 72 h after the burn injury occurred.⁶¹ This increase took place in accordance with the epithelial cells’ migration and scab formation.⁶¹ These findings outlined the hypothesis that, in the very early stage of the burn injury, the cell number sustaining autophagy is reduced, necrosis becoming the main event.⁶¹ After 24–72 h, when the tissue necrosis decreased in intensity, but the surrounding tissue presented ischemic damages as a consequence of strong inflammatory signals, autophagy reenters the scene, as a molecular pro-survival mechanism, being able to protect cells against these stress effects. This hypothesis may explain the later increase of autophagy intensity, illustrated by the LC3-II and Beclin-1 increase.⁶¹

It has been shown that excessive exposure to UV radiation results in acute skin damage including epidermal injuries. These injuries trigger an influx of activated immune cells into the wounded skin bed generating a localized inflammatory response that further exacerbates inflammation, altering the tissue repair process.^62,63 Das et al. have shown that a single dose of vitamin D decreased the UV-induced skin inflammation and was sufficient to sustain skin cell survival and to accelerate the tissue recovery process.⁶⁴ Strozyc et al. have highlighted that the uncontrolled cell death caused by excessive UV exposure may be offset by survival signals transmitted from upregulated autophagy.⁶⁵ Autophagy is regarded as a powerful immune regulator able to counteract infection and respond to toll-like receptor signaling, directing the cells towards survival or apoptosis.^66–68 Moreover, it has been reported that macrophages autophagy upregulation had protective effects from acute and chronic organ injury through reducing inflammation intensity, promoting cell survival, and, finally, supporting the tissue repair process.^69–72 Jiang et al. have also shown that enhanced autophagy had protective effects against polymicrobial sepsis by dampening the cytokine storm triggered by microbial load.⁷³

These studies support the conclusion that the enhanced autophagy represents a very important pro-survival mechanism, influenced, however, by the surrounding micro-environment and stress response. However, future studies are needed in order to clarify the role of vitamin D, via autophagy, in burn wounds’ recovery.

Autophagy and the molecular landscape of the proliferative and remodeling phase

The next phase of burn wound healing is the proliferative and remodeling phase.^28,61 The molecular events characterizing this phase are strongly based on fibroblasts, keratinocytes, and endothelial cells recruitment, activation and proliferation at the wound site.^28,61 The proliferation of these non-immune cells insures the provisional matrix substitution with a connective tissue matrix (Table 1).^28,61 The important next steps are represented by angiogenesis, granulation tissue formation, and epithelialization (Table 1).^28,61

Keratinocytes are non-immune cells involved in both angiogenesis (restoring the blood vessels and resuming circulation) and epithelialization (which means wound surface closure) modulation of angiogenesis through circadian oscillation of vascular endothelial growth factor A (VEGF-A) in epidermal keratinocytes.^1,74,75

Keratinocytes represent the foundation of the epidermis. From all the skin cells, they are the most studied. Human keratinocytes are able to initiate inflammasomes assembly upon either UVB irradiation, viral infection, or, probably, burns.^1,74 The keratinocyte growth factor (FGF7/KGF) controls keratinocyte differentiation and autophagy initiation. Keratinocyte FGF7/KGF-controlled differentiation triggers the LC3 expression and autophagy initiation via the PI3K–AKT–mTOR pathway,^76,77 lysosomal enzyme activation, and cellular components degradation.^1,6,78–80 In the case of Atg7-deficient keratinocytes, N,N′-dimethyl-4,4′-bipyridinium dichloride (paraquat) treatment led to p53 and p21 accumulation and abnormal cellular aging,⁷⁹ highlighting the importance of the autophagic machinery. Reported experimental data revealed that Atg5-deficient keratinocytes are unable to undergo differentiation.^1,81–83 Regarding keratinocytes, autophagy reveals again its bright, Yang feature.

The resident fibroblasts are transformed into myofibroblasts, which will contribute to extracellular matrix (ECM) deposition.¹ The final steps of the proliferative and remodeling phase are granulation tissue becomes mature and the ECM is remodeled by matrix metalloproteinases (MMPs) under the precise control of growth factors and tissue inhibitors of metalloproteinases (TIMPs), leading to increased tensile strength (Figure 2).¹

Angiogenesis involves endothelial cell activation by growth factors like FGFs, VEGF, and hepatocyte growth factor (HGF).⁸⁴ Angiogenesis, a key pathway in wound healing, presents the following steps: (1) the surrounding basement membrane degradation by endothelial proteolytic enzymes; (2) the initiation of the sprout formation; (3) endothelial cell proliferation and migration; and (4) tube-like structure formation by the migrating cells.^85,86

All these are sustained by Liang et al. findings, highlighting that angiogenesis was stimulated during the heat-denatured endothelial cell (HDEC) recovery.⁸⁴ Angiogenesis initiation has been illustrated by increased endothelial cell proliferation, migration, and tube organization.⁸⁷ Liang et al. also pointed, based on their experimental results, that (1) autophagy level increments during HDECs recovery depended on intracellular ROS (reactive oxygen species) generation; (2) autophagy inhibition suppressed endothelial cell proliferation, migration, and tube-like structure formation, in vitro; (3) autophagy proved to be vital for pro-angiogenesis during HDECs recovery, in vivo; and (4) intracellular ROS are subtle but essential regulators of AMPK/Akt/mTOR signaling, enhancing the autophagy level and initiating angiogenesis during HDEC recovery.⁸⁴

The post-burn inflammatory phase is characterized by a huge ROS generation, triggering the progression of the local and, also, distant inflammatory reactions.⁸⁸ Immediately after the thermal injury, PMNs invade the lesion scene inducing the release of massive amounts of ROS in the interstitial fluid. However, the antioxidant enzyme concentration and activity in the wound fluid is modest and insufficient in order to remove the large ROS amounts, generated during the post-injury phase.

Reactive nitrogen species (RNS) and ROS are highly reactive species released during the cellular metabolism, in both normal and pathological conditions. Basal ROS/RNS levels play essential homeostatic roles in regulating the molecular signaling pathways, involved in metabolism control, proliferation, and survival.^38,89 However, when the redox balance is dysregulated and antioxidant defense systems are surpassed, oxidative stress is initiated. When oxidative stress defeats the cell capacity to repair oxidatively damaged biomolecules (nucleic acids, lipids, and proteins), oxidative damage is initiated. It has been highlighted that oxidative stress triggers autophagosomes accumulation in different types of somatic cells.^18,90 However, the precise redox events involved remain unclear. It has been reported that ROS are associated with autophagy induction in starvation conditions.^91–93 Oxidative stress-activated autophagy is crucial in protecting cells from apoptosis.^94,95 Autophagy impairment will induce and/or increase the oxidative stress.⁹⁶ Furthermore, antioxidant molecules are able to suppress autophagy initiation, moderately or completely.⁹⁷ In conclusion, ROS not only induce the autophagic pathway but also inhibit it, ROS and autophagy being mutually influenced. ROS, known as key signaling molecules, are very important players in the molecular landscape of angiogenesis, controlling indirectly the endothelial cells’ proliferation and migration.⁹⁸

Recent data highlighted the significant roles of ROS in the complex control mechanism of autophagy.⁹⁹ Moreover, experimental data revealed the autophagy protective effects against oxidative stress–induced cell death. For instance, it has been shown that the vascular smooth muscle cell platelet-derived growth factor has protective effects against oxidative damage of molecules and 4-hydroxynonenal induced cell death, by upregulating autophagy.¹⁰⁰ In endothelial cells, autophagy induced by glycolysis inhibition with 2-deoxy-D-glucose is controlled by AMPK activation through ROS formation.¹⁰¹ Reoxygenation-induced ROS generation also triggers autophagy upregulation. The same study revealed that autophagy inhibition increases apoptotic cell death of primary hepatocytes.¹⁰²

Liang et al. revealed that both heat treatment and recovery significantly stimulated intracellular ROS generation.¹⁰³ They also have shown that ROS generation inhibition by N-acetylcysteine (NAC) triggered the reduction of autophagy in HDECs.¹⁰⁰ More precisely, NAC treatment significantly inhibited AMPK phosphorylation and stimulated AKT and mTOR phosphorylation. This way, autophagy and, consequently, angiogenesis were inhibited during the recovery of HDECs in vivo.¹⁰⁴ These data lead to the conclusion that in the HDECs recovery context, autophagy and angiogenesis are interconnected by a fine molecular network of ROS. ROS are able to initiate autophagy through various signaling pathways, including AMPK and mTOR pathways, playing crucial roles.^84,105

In response to metabolic stress, AMPK is one of the main actors on the autophagy regulation scene in endothelial cells.^104,105 AMPK, as a positive autophagy regulator, downregulates the AKT/mTOR pathway,^106,107 one of the main modulators of autophagy. AKT regulates autophagy mostly via mTOR activity modulation. AKT pathway initiation by the recombinant active human AKT1 full-length protein (rAKT) was able to inhibit autophagy, affecting the angiogenesis process, normally induced in HDECs by autophagy.^84,103 However, future research will have to clarify the molecular mechanisms through which ROS induce and support the pro-survival feature of autophagy during burn wound evolution and healing.

Autophagic cell death—the Yin

Usually, autophagy initiation in response to stress represents a pro-survival molecular mechanism. However, in some specific situations, autophagy changes its protective role and becomes the mediator and inducer of the autophagic cell death.¹⁰⁸ We still know very little about the autophagy roles in the evolution of burn wounds. Recent studies revealed that in case of burns, cell death may occur due to necrosis, autophagy, and apoptosis, all leading through a specific molecular path to burn injury positive or negative evolution.^109–112

Necroptosis, necrosis, and secondary necrosis following apoptosis have been recently highlighted as different mechanisms of cell death.^109–112 These mechanisms are based on similar cellular and molecular events: redox imbalance, oxidative burst, hyperpolarization of the mitochondrial membrane, and permeation of lysosomal membrane, and of the cell membrane.^109–112

Necrosis is considered an accidental type of cell death, occurring as a response to severe cell damages, like those occurred in the first moments of thermic burns.^109–112 The necrotic cell death molecular mechanism can be finely orchestrated by specific signal transduction pathways, involving both the receptor interaction protein kinase 1 and 3 (RIP1 and RIP3).¹¹³ Catabolic processes (necroptosis) also play important roles on cellular necrosis stage. Necrostatins are able to specifically inhibit cellular necrosis.¹¹⁰ Secondary necrosis represents a form of cellular necrosis that usually occurs in apoptotic cells that escape phagocytosis.^112,114 Autophagic cell death describes an “excessive” degradation of important cellular components that are necessary for the normal cell function.^115–117 This deadly molecular mechanism brings to light the darker, concealed, Yin feature of autophagy.

ROS, like hydrogen peroxide, superoxide radical, and hydroxyl radicals, are known as key mediators of progressive tissue damage after initial burn injury.¹¹⁸ The high ROS levels in the burn wound might be caused directly by the thermal energy of burns¹¹⁹ and, also, by xanthine oxidase and NADPH oxidase enhanced activities.^120,121 It has been highlighted that in the zone of stasis, ROS may be involved in the cell death molecular mechanism, possibly via an excessive upregulation of the autophagy pathway.^122–125 A possible molecular process used by the autophagic cell death machinery is lysosomal membrane permeation as an answer to stressing factors, like thermic injuries.^122–125 Recent studies outlined the hypothesis that ROS are pawns with decisive roles in the fate of the molecular match of autophagic cell death.^114–116 It has been shown that the released lysosomal cathepsins have been involved in the oxidative stress–induced apoptosis.^122–125 Moreover, since lysosomes represent important sources of ROS, they might play important performances in the redox imbalance initiation and the exacerbation of oxidative stress, triggering oxidative cellular damages.^126–129 However, the complex relationships between the disrupted redox balance, oxidative stress and autophagy, and their consequences on burn wound evolution still must be clarified. Many recent research studies focused on investigating the efficacy of different antioxidant agents in burn wound healing progression. Deniz et al. have shown that NAC treatment 1 hour after burns prevented an unfavorable progression of burn wound. NAC is a precursor to reduced glutathione, which has previously been shown to prevent necrosis in the zone of stasis.¹³⁰ Starting from these studies, it could be speculated that the antioxidant treatment would be useful only as long as autophagy reveals its Yin feature as a cell-death promoter mechanism. If the autophagic machinery functions as a pro-survival mechanism, the antioxidant treatment may not represent an advantage, if antioxidant species, by reducing ROS levels, could, moderately or completely, trigger autophagy repression.¹³¹ Accumulation of damaged proteins may be responsible for the harmful effects of autophagy suppression.^132–135

Tan et al. experimental results revealed higher autophagy rates compared to apoptosis in hair follicle epithelium during the first 24 h after burn injury occurred.⁶⁰ They have concluded that in the zone of stasis, both pathways led to cell death but with a different timing, suggesting that two different treatment strategies should be used in order to target both processes. Xiao et al., contrary to the results of Tan et al., reported decreased autophagy rates early in burn injury progression and higher autophagic levels later.¹³⁶ The authors have also outlined that rapamycin increased the autophagic rate and, consequently, improved wound healing. These experimental findings suggested that autophagy should be regarded as a key player in preventing burn wound unfavorable progression.⁹⁵ In the burn wound context, autophagy proved to be both destructive and protective for the cell, possibly depending on the timing from initial injury, the degree of cell damage, and the evolution of cellular ROS levels.

Future research to discover the autophagy roles in the zone of stasis will be extremely important in order to establish whether the therapeutic strategies should be based on enhancing or inhibiting this complex molecular pathway.^137,138

Nevertheless, the pro-angiogenesis molecular mechanism that occurs during HDEC recovery has yet many secrets to reveal and it has not been explored enough. Increasing experimental data lead more and more clearly to the idea that autophagy is a main actor on the angiogenesis molecular stage, both in vitro^84,139,140 and in vivo.^84,141 However, these data also show that autophagy seems to perform dual, conflicting roles in the angiogenesis context, revealing once again its Yin–Yang features. Autophagy initiation in specific circumstances may trigger the death of endothelial cells. The endogenous angiogenic inhibitor, endostatin, is able to induce autophagy, triggering endothelial cell death. However, the treatment with 3-methyladenine, an autophagy inhibitor, abolished the autophagic-controlled death of endothelial cells.¹⁴¹ Chau et al. highlighted the existence of a transition between the autophagy-mediated cell survival to autophagic-controlled cell death, in hypoxic endothelial cells, in a time-dependent manner.¹⁴² In conclusion, these findings suggest that in human endothelial cells, (1) endostatin mainly causes autophagic, rather than apoptotic, cell death; (2) endostatin-induced autophagic cell death occurs through an oxidative-independent pathway and in the absence of caspase activation; and (3) endostatin-induced “autophagic cell death” is regulated by serine and cysteine lysosomal proteases. Table 2 presents the Yang versus Yin feature of autophagy in burns.

Table 2.

Examples of Yang and Yin, respectively, features of autophagy.

	Examples	References
Autophagy as a pro-survival mechanism—the Yang feature	1. After 24–72 h from the burn injury when the tissue necrosis decreased as intensity, autophagy changes into a molecular pro-survival pathway, protecting cells against cell death	28, 61
	2. Autophagy plays a main role in angiogenesis (restoring the blood vessels and resuming circulation) and epithelialization (which means wound surface closure), mediated by keratinocytes	76–83
	3. Autophagy is vital for pro-angiogenesis during the HDECs recovery, in vivo	76–83
	4. Intracellular ROS are subtle but essential regulators of AMPK/Akt/mTOR signaling, enhancing the autophagy level and initiating angiogenesis during HDECs recovery	84, 103–107
Autophagy, a cell-death promotor—the Yin feature	Autophagic cell death represents an “excessive” degradation of important cellular components that are necessary for normal cell function	95, 108–127, 135
	Autophagy initiation in specific circumstances may trigger the death of endothelial cells	84, 139–142
	The transition between the autophagy-mediated cell survival to autophagic-controlled cell death, in hypoxic endothelial cells, is a time-dependent process	141, 142

In summary, ROS-induced autophagy in burns could play either a protective role, relieving oxidative stress, or a destructive one. Deciphering the complex ways by which autophagy is controlled via the variations of the cellular redox potential should be considered crucial for future therapeutic strategies development in burns.

The complex dual role of autophagy is still a matter of debate. The predominant manifestation of one of the two contradictory roles (the one that promotes cell survival or the one that induces apoptosis) may depend on the conditions generated by a specific cellular context. It has been clearly highlighted that strictly controlled and balanced lower levels of redox signaling are crucial for normal autophagy.¹⁴³ The big question mark arises when the redox status becomes imbalanced and, consequently, disrupts the signaling network necessary to control and modulate autophagy.

In the context of burn wound healing, more and more evidence sustains the potential communication channels between the enigmatic autophagic machinery and skin immune and non-immune cells, against the background of a local inflammatory state that will resonate in the whole body. However, the molecular mechanisms that could clarify the reason for dual features of autophagy in burns and the roles of these communication channels are not yet understood.

According to our knowledge, exploring the specialized literature, we have noticed that until now, there are very few publications that have focused on the study of autophagy in the cells from thermal burn injuries. This reduced number of studies represented one of the starting points in the elaboration of our article. The purpose of our article is to outline more visibly the possible importance of autophagy in the context of thermal burn wounds, especially due to its dual role, demonstrated in other pathological situations, on which the evolution of the healing process could depend. Also, this small number of studies must be considered one of the limitations of our review.

Conclusions

We hope that all these findings presented here had a little contribution to a better understanding of this mysterious and duplicitous molecular machinery, autophagy, in the context of burn wound healing. There are still some mysteries regarding the special molecular mechanisms by which oxidative stress and autophagy mediate and control cell survival in very stressful conditions, such as burns. Understanding these complex mechanisms will help clinicians to establish new starting points for designing accurate therapeutic approaches in burns. Till then, autophagy with its Yin–Yang features remains the shadow player, able to decide quietly whether the cell survives or dies.

Once Edgar Allan Poe said “The boundaries which divide Life from Death are at best shadowy and vague. Who shall say where the one ends, and the other begins?”. Returning to the molecular landscapes, the answer is much less poetical and may be: it depends on the delicate equilibrium between the Yin and Yang features of AUTOPHAGY.

Footnotes

Author Contributions

All authors have equal contributions to the article.

Declaration of conflicting interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

ORCID iD

Bogdan-Ioan Coculescu

References

Sil

Wong

Jennifer Martinez

(2018) More than skin deep: autophagy is vital for skin barrier function. Frontiers in Immunology 9: 1376.

Dainichi

Hanakawa

Kabashima

(2014) Classification of inflammatory skin diseases: a proposal based on the disorders of the three-layered defense systems, barrier, innate immunity and acquired immunity. Journal of Dermatological Science 76(2): 81–89.

Belkaid

Segre

(2014) Dialogue between skin microbiota and immunity. Science 346(6212): 954–959.

Elias PM Skin barrier function. Current Allergy and Asthma Reports. 2008; 8(4):299-305.

Sukseree

Eckhart

Tschachler

, et al. (2013) Autophagy in epithelial homeostasis and defense. Frontiers in Bioscience (Elite Ed) 5(3): 1000–1010.

Richmond

Harris

(2014) Immunology and skin in health and disease. Cold Spring Harbor Perspectives in Medicine 4(12): a015339.

Parra

Gómez

, et al. (2013) Teleost skin, an ancient mucosal surface that elicits gut-like immune responses. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the USA 110(32): 13097–13102.

Slominski

Zmijewski

Skobowiat

, et al. Sensing the environment: regulation of local and global homeostasis by the skin’s neuroendocrine system. Anatomy, Embryology and Cell Biology. 2012;212:v, vii, 1-115.

Sil

Muse

Martinez

(2018) A ravenous defense: canonical and non-canonical autophagy in immunity. Current Opinion in Immunology 50: 21–31.

10.

Harnett

Pineda

Latre de Late

, et al. (2017) From Christian de Duve to Yoshinori Ohsumi: more to autophagy than just dining at home. Biomedical Journal 40(1): 9–22.

11.

Zuber

(2015) Targeting autophagy in skin diseases. Journal of Molecular Medicine (Berl) 93(1): 31–38.

12.

De Duve

(1966) The significance of lysosomes in pathology and medicine. The Proceedings of the Institute of Medicine ofChicago 26(4): 73–76.

13.

De Duve

Wattiaux

(1966) Functions of lysosomes. Annual Review of Physiology 28: 435–492.

14.

De Duve

(1964) Principles of tissue fractionation. Journal of Theoretical Biology 6(1): 33–59.

15.

Mizushima

Levine

Cuervo

, et al. (2008) Autophagy fights disease through cellular self-digestion. Nature 451(7182): 1069–1075.

16.

Giampieri

Afrin

Forbes-Hernandez

, et al. (2019) Autophagy in human health and disease: novel therapeutic opportunities. Antioxidants Redox Signal 30(4): 577–634.

17.

Shiba

Yabu

Sudayama

, et al. (2016) Sequential steps of macroautophagy and chaperone-mediated autophagy are involved in the irreversible process of posterior silk gland histolysis during metamorphosis of Bombyx mori. The Journal of Experimental Biology 219(Pt 8): 1146–1153.

18.

Coculescu

Manole

Coculescu

, et al. (2018) Autophagy as a neuronal survival mechanism in ischemic stroke. Romanian Journal of Legal Medicine 26(4): 333–339.

19.

Klionsky

Abdelmohsen

Abe

, et al. (2016) Guidelines for the use and interpretation of assays for monitoring autophagy (3rd edition). Autophagy 12(1): 1–222.

20.

Kaiser

Qiu

Coats

, et al. (2013) Structures of Atg7-Atg3 and Atg7-Atg10 reveal noncanonical mechanisms of E2 recruitment by the autophagy E1. Autophagy 9(5): 778–780.

21.

Kuma

Komatsu

Mizushima

(2017) Autophagy-monitoring and autophagy-deficient mice. Autophagy 13(10): 1619–1628.

22.

Yin

Pascual

Klionsky

(2016) Autophagy: machinery and regulation. Microbial Cell 3(12): 588–596.

23.

Anton

Botnariu

Coculescu

, et al. (2021) Particular aspects of evolution of SARS-Cov-2 infection in type 2 diabetic patients. Romanian Journal of Legal Medicine 29(1): 53–59.

24.

Coculescu

Pană

Vladimirescu

, et al. (2021) Data on anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies (IgM/IgG) in COVID-19 patients. Romanian Journal of Legal Medicine 29(4): 356–359.

25.

Tiwari

(2012) Burn wound: how it differs from other wounds? Indian Journal of Plastic Surgery 45(2): 364–373.

26.

Kondo

Ishida

(2010) Molecular pathology of wound healing. Forensic Science International 203(1–3): 93–98.

27.

Shupp

Nasabzadeh

Rosenthal

, et al. (2010) A review of the local pathophysiologic bases of burn wound progression. Journal of Burn Care & Research 31(6): 849–873.

28.

Jeschke

van Baar

Choudhry

, et al. (2020) Burn injury. Nature Reviews Disease Primers 6(1): 11.

29.

Netea-Maier

Plantinga

van de Veerdonk

, et al. (2016) Modulation of inflammation by autophagy: consequences for human disease. Autophagy 12(2): 245–260.

30.

Bhaskaran

Faddoul

Paes da Silva

, et al. (2020) IL-1β-MyD88-mTOR axis promotes immune-protective IL-17A+Foxp3+ cells during mucosal infection and is dysregulated with aging. Frontiers in Immunology 11: 595936.

31.

Tang

Zhang

, et al. (2021) LncRNA MEG3 suppresses PI3K/AKT/mTOR signalling pathway to enhance autophagy and inhibit inflammation in TNF-α-treated keratinocytes and psoriatic mice. Cytokine 148: 155657.

32.

Bhattacharya

Wei

Shin

, et al. (2015) Autophagy is required for neutrophil-mediated inflammation. Cell Reports 12(11): 1731–1739.

33.

Oliveira

Moraes

Oliveira

, et al. (1999) Neutrophils isolated from leprosy patients release TNF-alpha and exhibit accelerated apoptosis in vitro. Journal of Leukocyte Biology 65(3): 364–371.

34.

Liu

(2017) Innate immunity in tuberculosis: host defense vs pathogen evasion. Cell Molecular Immunol 14: 963–975.

35.

Zhou

, et al. (2017) Autophagy inhibitors suppress environmental particulate matter-induced airway inflammation. Toxicology Letters 280: 206–212.

36.

Gabrion

Hmitou

Moshous

, et al. (2017) Mammalian target of rapamycin inhibition counterbalances the inflammatory status of immune cells in patients with chronic granulomatous disease. The Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology 139(5): 1641–1649.e6.

37.

Pfeiler

Khandagale

Magenau

, et al. (2016) Distinct surveillance pathway for immunopathology during acute infection via autophagy and SR-BI. Science Reports 6: 34440.

38.

Diaconu

Coculescu

Manole

, et al. (2021) Lipoprotein-associated phospholipase A2 (Lp-PLA2) – possible diagnostic and risk biomarker in chronic ischemic heart disease. Journal of Enzyme Inhibition and Medicinal Chemistry 36(1): 68–73.

39.

Murase

Hachiya

Takano

, et al. (2013) Autophagy has a significant role in determining skin color by regulating melanosome degradation in keratinocytes. The Journal of Investigative Dermatology 133(10): 2416–2424.

40.

Silva

Barbosa

Andrade

, et al. (2017) Autophagy is an innate mechanism associated with leprosy polarization. PLoS Pathogens 13(1): e1006103.

41.

Botbol

Guerrero-Ros

Macian

(2016) Key roles of autophagy in regulating T-cell function. European Journal of Immunology 46(6): 1326–1334.

42.

Sundarasetty

Volk

Theobald

, et al. (2017) Human effector memory T helper cells engage with mouse macrophages and cause graft-versus-host-like pathology in skin of humanized mice used in a nonclinical immunization study. The American Journal of Pathology 187(6): 1380–1398.

43.

Larregina

Domsic

, et al. (2017) Skin-Resident effector memory CD8+CD28- T cells exhibit a profibrotic phenotype in patients with systemic sclerosis. Journal of Investigative Dermatology 137(5): 1042–1050.

44.

Clark

Watanabe

Teague

, et al. (2012) Skin effector memory T cells do not recirculate and provide immune protection in alemtuzumab-treated CTCL patients. Science Translational Medicine 4(117): 117ra7.

45.

Homey

(2012) Psoriasis oder atopisches Ekzem: Hautinfiltrierende Effektor-Memory-T-Zellen machen den Unterschied [Psoriasis or atopic eczema: skin-infiltrating effector memory T cells make the difference]. Hautarzt 63(1): 52.

46.

Anderson

Tang

Wang

, et al. (2011) Enhancing alloreactivity does not restore GVHD induction but augments skin graft rejection by CD4⁺ effector memory T cells. European Journal of Immunology 41(9): 2782–2792.

47.

Hirai

Whitley

Kaplan

(2020) Migration and function of memory CD8+ T cells in skin. Journal of Investigative Dermatology 140(4): 748–755.

48.

Cruz

Diamond

Russell

, et al. (2018) Human αβ and γδ T cells in skin immunity and disease. Frontiers in Immunology 9: 1304.

49.

Le Texier

Lineburg

Cao

, et al. (2016) Autophagy-dependent regulatory T cells are critical for the control of graft-versus-host disease. JCI Insight 1(15): e86850.

50.

Wohlfert

Grainger

Bouladoux

, et al. (2011) GATA3 controls Foxp3⁺ regulatory T cell fate during inflammation in mice. Journal of Clinical Investigation 121(11): 4503–4515.

51.

Nielsen

Witherden

Havran

(2017) γδ T cells in homeostasis and host defence of epithelial barrier tissues. Nature Reviews Immunology 17(12): 733–745.

52.

Lawand

Déchanet-Merville

Dieu-Nosjean

(2017) Key features of gamma-Delta T-Cell subsets in human diseases and their immunotherapeutic implications. Frontiers in Immunology 8: 761.

53.

Stetson

Voehringer

Grogan

, et al. (2004) Th2 cells: orchestrating barrier immunity. Advances in Immunology 83: 163–189.

54.

Mills

Taylor

Podshivalova

, et al. (2008) Defects in skin gamma delta T cell function contribute to delayed wound repair in rapamycin-treated mice. Journal of Immunology 181(6): 3974–3983.

55.

Chen

Meng

Ren

, et al. (2021) The molecular mechanisms supporting the homeostasis and activation of dendritic epidermal T cell and its role in promoting wound healing. Burns and Trauma 9: tkab009.

56.

Shang

Yang

, et al. (2022) Skin γδ T cells and their function in wound healing. Frontiers in Immunology 13: 875076.

57.

Wang

, et al. (2016) Roseotoxin B improves allergic contact dermatitis through a unique anti-inflammatory mechanism involving excessive activation of autophagy in activated T Lymphocytes. Journal of Investigative Dermatology 136(8): 1636–1646.

58.

Barthet

VJA

Mrschtik

Kania

, et al. (2022) DRAM-4 and DRAM-5 are compensatory regulators of autophagy and cell survival in nutrient-deprived conditions. FEBS Journal 289: 3752–3769. Epub ahead of print.

59.

Schwartz

(2021) Autophagic cell death during development - Ancient and mysterious. Frontiers in Cell and Developmental Biology 9: 656370.

60.

Tan

Zhang

Lei

, et al. (2013) The roles of autophagy and apoptosis in burn wound progression in rats. Burns 39(8): 1551–1556.

61.

Baird

Kurz

Brunk

(2006) Metallothionein protects against oxidative stress-induced lysosomal destabilization. Biochemical Journal 394(Pt 1): 275–283.

62.

Ryser

Schuppli

Gauthier

, et al. (2014) UVB-induced skin inflammation and cutaneous tissue injury is dependent on the MHC class I-like protein, CD1d. Journal of Investigative Dermatology 134(1): 192–202.

63.

Rognoni

Goss

Hiratsuka

, et al. (2021) Role of distinct fibroblast lineages and immune cells in dermal repair following UV radiation-induced tissue damage. Elife 10: e71052.

64.

Das

Binko

Traylor

, et al. (2019) Vitamin D improves sunburns by increasing autophagy in M2 macrophages. Autophagy 15(5): 813–826.

65.

Strozyk

Kulms

(2013) The role of AKT/mTOR pathway in stress response to UV-irradiation: implication in skin carcinogenesis by regulation of apoptosis, autophagy and senescence. International Journal of Molecular Sciences 14(8): 15260–15285.

66.

Cui

Lin

, et al. (2019) Autophagy and the immune response. Advances in Experimental Medicine and Biology 1206: 595–634.

67.

Pradel

Robert-Hebmann

Espert

(2020) Regulation of innate immune responses by autophagy: a goldmine for viruses. Frontiers in Immunology 11: 578038.

68.

Chung

(2013) Interplay between autophagy and programmed cell death in mammalian neural stem cells. BMB Reports 46(8): 383–390.

69.

Han

Bae

Choi

, et al. (2016) Autophagy induced by AXL receptor tyrosine kinase alleviates acute liver injury via inhibition of NLRP3 inflammasome activation in mice. Autophagy 12(12): 2326–2343.

70.

Lou

Mao

, et al. (2016) Activation of MTOR in pulmonary epithelium promotes LPS-induced acute lung injury. Autophagy 12(12): 2286–2299.

71.

Peng

Wang

, et al. (2016) Atg5-mediated autophagy deficiency in proximal tubules promotes cell cycle G2/M arrest and renal fibrosis. Autophagy 12(9): 1472–1486.

72.

Liu

Luo

Tan

, et al. (2014) Autophagy activation reduces renal tubular injury induced by urinary proteins. Autophagy 10(2): 243–256.

73.

Jiang

Gao

Wang

, et al. (2015) Sinomenine hydrochloride protects against polymicrobial sepsis via autophagy. International Journal of Molecular Sciences 16(2): 2559–2573.

74.

Sand

Haertel

Biedermann

, et al. (2018) Expression of inflammasome proteins and inflammasome activation occurs in human, but not in murine keratinocytes. Cell Death Disease 9(2): 24.

75.

Luengas-Martinez

Paus

Iqbal

, et al. (2022) Circadian rhythms in psoriasis and the potential of chronotherapy in psoriasis management. Experimental Dermatology. Epub ahead of print.

76.

Chen

(2016) The signaling involved in autophagy machinery in keratinocytes and therapeutic approaches for skin diseases. Oncotarget 7(31): 50682–50697.

77.

Belleudi

Purpura

Caputo

, et al. (2014) FGF7/KGF regulates autophagy in keratinocytes: a novel dual role in the induction of both assembly and turnover of autophagosomes. Autophagy 10(5): 803–821.

78.

Aymard

Barruche

Naves

, et al. (2011) Autophagy in human keratinocytes: an early step of the differentiation? Exp Dermatol 20(3): 263–268.

79.

Grond

Radner

FPW

Eichmann

, et al. (2017) Skin barrier development depends on CGI-58 protein expression during late-stage keratinocyte differentiation. J Invest Dermatol 137(2): 403–413.

80.

Elias

, et al. (2018) Skin care products can aggravate epidermal function: studies in a murine model suggest a pathogenic role in sensitive skin. Contact Dermatitis 78(2): 151–158.

81.

Song

Narzt

Nagelreiter

, et al. (2017) Autophagy deficient keratinocytes display increased DNA damage, senescence and aberrant lipid composition after oxidative stress in vitro and in vivo. Redox Biology 11: 219–230.

82.

Lichtman

Alsentzer

Jaffe

, et al. (2016) The effect of microbial colonization on the host proteome varies by gastrointestinal location. ISME J 10(5): 1170–1181.

83.

Chikh

Sanzà

Raimondi

, et al. (2014) iASPP is a novel autophagy inhibitor in keratinocytes. Journal of Cell Science 127(Pt 14): 3079–3093.

84.

Liang

Jiang

, et al. (2018) Autophagy promotes angiogenesis via AMPK/Akt/mTOR signaling during the recovery of heat-denatured endothelial cells. Cell Death Disease 9(12): 1152.

85.

Flegg

Byrne

Flegg

, et al. (2012) Wound healing angiogenesis: the clinical implications of a simple mathematical model. Journal of Theoretical Biology 300: 309–316.

86.

Hsu

Chen

, et al. (2012) Far-infrared therapy induces the nuclear translocation of PLZF which inhibits VEGF-induced proliferation in human umbilical vein endothelial cells. PLoS One 7(1): e30674.

87.

Jiang

Liang

, et al. (2015) Nucleolin enhances the proliferation and migration of heat-denatured human dermal fibroblasts. Wound Repair and Regeneration 23(6): 807–818.

88.

Vorauer-Uhl

Fürnschlief

Wagner

, et al. (2002) Reepithelialization of experimental scalds effected by topically applied superoxide dismutase: controlled animal studies. Wound Repair and Regeneration 10(6): 366–371.

89.

Checa

Aran

(2020) Reactive oxygen species: drivers of physiological and pathological processes. Journal of Inflammation Research 13: 1057–1073.

90.

Kruk

Aboul-Enein

Kładna

, et al. (2019) Oxidative stress in biological systems and its relation with pathophysiological functions: the effect of physical activity on cellular redox homeostasis. Free Radical Biology and Medicine 53(5): 497–521.

91.

Yun

Kim

, et al. (2020) Roles of autophagy in oxidative stress. International Journal of Molecular Sciences 21(9): 3289.

92.

Filomeni

De Zio

Cecconi

(2015) Oxidative stress and autophagy: the clash between damage and metabolic needs. Cell Death and Differentiation 22(3): 377–388.

93.

Mizushima

Komatsu

(2011) Autophagy: renovation of cells and tissues. Cell 147(4): 728–741.

94.

Lee

Giordano

Zhang

(2012) Autophagy, mitochondria and oxidative stress: cross-talk and redox signalling. Biochemical Journal 441(2): 523–540.

95.

Levonen

Hill

Kansanen

, et al. (2014) Redox regulation of antioxidants, autophagy, and the response to stress: implications for electrophile therapeutics. Free Radical Biology and Medicine 71: 196–207.

96.

Meijer

Codogno

(2011) Autophagy: regulation by energy sensing. Current Biology 21(6): R227–R229.

97.

Corona Velazquez

Jackson

(2018) So many roads: the multifaceted regulation of autophagy induction. Molecular and Cellular Biology 38(21): e00303–e100318.

98.

Wong

(2017) New connections: the duality of ROS in angiogenesis. Science Signaling 10(479): eaan6438.

99.

Yan

Finkel

(2017) Autophagy as a regulator of cardiovascular redox homeostasis. Free Radical Biology and Medicine 109: 108–113.

100.

Smith

Marcinko

Desjardins

, et al. (2016) Treatment of nonalcoholic fatty liver disease: role of AMPK. American Journal Of Physiology-Endocrinology And Metabolism 311(4): E730–E740.

101.

Wang

Liang

Shirwany

, et al. (2011) 2-Deoxy-D-glucose treatment of endothelial cells induces autophagy by reactive oxygen species-mediated activation of the AMP-activated protein kinase. PLoS One 6(2): e17234.

102.

Shao

Lai

Zhang

(2016) Induction of autophagy and apoptosis via PI3K/AKT/TOR pathways by Azadirachtin A in Spodoptera litura cells. Scientific Reports 6: 35482.

103.

Liang

Jiang

, et al. (2013) The expression and proangiogenic effect of nucleolin during the recovery of heat-denatured HUVECs. Biochimica et Biophysica Acta 1830(10): 4500–4512.

104.

Herrero-Martín

Høyer-Hansen

García-García

, et al. (2009) TAK1 activates AMPK-dependent cytoprotective autophagy in TRAIL-treated epithelial cells. EMBO Journal 28(6): 677–685.

105.

Goyal

Neill

Owens

, et al. (2014) Decorin activates AMPK, an energy sensor kinase, to induce autophagy in endothelial cells. Matrix Biology 34: 46–54.

106.

Chang

Lee

, et al. (2017) Resveratrol-induced autophagy and apoptosis in cisplatin-resistant human oral cancer CAR cells: a key role of AMPK and Akt/mTOR signaling. International Journal of Oncology 50(3): 873–882.

107.

Zhong

Gong

, et al. (2017) Irbesartan ameliorates hyperlipidemia and liver steatosis in type 2 diabetic db/db mice via stimulating PPAR-γ, AMPK/Akt/mTOR signaling and autophagy. International Immunopharmacology 42: 176–184.

108.

Parzych

Klionsky

(2014) An overview of autophagy: morphology, mechanism, and regulation. Antioxidants Redox Signal 20(3): 460–473.

109.

Rennekampff

Alharbi

(2021) Burn injury: mechanisms of keratinocyte cell death. Medical sciences (Basel) 9(3): 51.

110.

Galluzzi

Vitale

Abrams

, et al. (2012) Molecular definitions of cell death subroutines: recommendations of the Nomenclature Committee on Cell Death 2012. Cell Death and Differentiation 19(1): 107–120.

111.

Jeschke

van Baar

Choudhry

, et al. (2020) Burn injury. Nature Reviews Disease Primers 6(1): 11.

112.

Kroemer

Galluzzi

Vandenabeele

Nomenclature Committee on Cell Death 2009 , et al. (2009)Classification of cell death: recommendations of the nomenclature committee on cell death 2009. Cell Death and Differentiation 16(1): 3–11.

113.

Liu

(2012) Necroptosis: an emerging form of programmed cell death. Critical Reviews in Oncology Hematology 82(3): 249–258.

114.

McCall

(2010) Genetic control of necrosis - another type of programmed cell death. Current Opinion in Cell Biology 22(6): 882–888.

115.

Klionsky

(2022) Life and death decisions - the many faces of autophagy in cell survival and cell death. Biomolecules 12: 866.

116.

Denton

Kumar

(2019) Autophagy-dependent cell death. Cell Death and Differentiation 26(4): 605–616.

117.

Ling

Wei

Wang

, et al. (2016) Mammalian Metallothionein-2A and Oxidative Stress. International Journal of Molecular Sciences 17(9): 1483.

118.

Nielson

Duethman

Howard

, et al. (2017) Pathophysiology of systemic complications and current management. J Journal of Burn Care & Research 38(1): e469–e481.

119.

Kurz

Eaton

Brunk

(2010) Redox activity within the lysosomal compartment: implications for aging and apoptosis. Antioxidants Redox Signal 13(4): 511–523.

120.

Kurz

Leake

Von Zglinicki

TBUT

, et al. (2004) Relocalized redox-active lysosomal iron is an important mediator of oxidative-stress-induced DNA damage. Biochemical Journal 378: 1039–1045.

121.

Bryan

Ahswin

Smart

, et al. (2012) Reactive oxygen species (ROS) - a family of fate deciding molecules pivotal in constructive inflammation and wound healing. European Cells and Materials 24: 249–265.

122.

Kirkin

Lamark

Sou

, et al. (2009) A role for NBR1 in autophagosomal degradation of ubiquitinated substrates. Molecular Cell 33(4): 505–516.

123.

Isakson

Holland

Simonsen

(2013) The role of ALFY in selective autophagy. Cell Death and Differentiation 20(1): 12–20.

124.

Kast

Dominguez

(2017) The cytoskeleton-Autophagy connection. Current Biology 27(8): R318–R326.

125.

Viret

Faure

(2019) Regulation of syntaxin 17 during autophagosome maturation. Trends in Cell Biology 29(1): 1–3.

126.

Matsunaga

Morita

Saitoh

, et al. (2010) Autophagy requires endoplasmic reticulum targeting of the PI3-kinase complex via Atg14L. Journal of Current Biology 190(4): 511–521.

127.

Hamasaki

Furuta

Matsuda

, et al. (2013) Autophagosomes form at ER-mitochondria contact sites. Nature 495(7441): 389–393.

128.

Schieber

Chandel

(2014) ROS function in redox signaling and oxidative stress. Current Biology 24(10): R453–R462.

129.

Navarro-Yepes

Burns

Anandhan

, et al. (2014) Oxidative stress, redox signaling, and autophagy: cell death versus survival. Antioxidants Redox Signal 21(1): 66–85.

130.

Salibian

Rosario

ATD

Severo

LAM

, et al. (2016) Current concepts on burn wound conversion-A review of recent advances in understanding the secondary progressions of burns. Burns 42(5): 1025–1035.

131.

Ravikumar

Sarkar

Davies

, et al. (2010) Regulation of mammalian autophagy in physiology and pathophysiology. Physiological Reviews 90(4): 1383–1435.

132.

Zhang

(2013) Autophagy and mitophagy in cellular damage control. Redox Biology 1(1): 19–23.

133.

Elbialy

(2020) The role of antioxidants in restoring MAPK 14 and a DNA damage marker level following autophagy suppression. Open Biology 10(12): 200253.

134.

Jiang

Tan

Wang

, et al. (2019) The relationship between autophagy and the immune system and its applications for tumor immunotherapy. Molecular Cancer 18(1): 17.

135.

Hochfeld

Lee

Rubinsztein

(2013) Therapeutic induction of autophagy to modulate neurodegenerative disease progression. Acta Pharmaceutica Sinica B - Journals 34(5): 600–604.

136.

Xiao

, et al. (2014) Role of autophagy and apoptosis in wound tissue of deep second-degree burn in rats. Academic Emergency Medicine 21(4): 383–391.

137.

Teng

Guan

, et al. (2012) Role of autophagy in angiogenesis in aortic endothelial cells. American Journal of Physiology-Cell Physiology 302(2): C383–C391.

138.

Santana-Codina

Mancias

Kimmelman

(2017) The role of autophagy in Cancer. Annual Review of Cancer Biology 1: 19–39.

139.

Qian

Yang

(2016) Functional role of autophagy in gastric cancer. Oncotarget 7(14): 17641–17651.

140.

Jiang

(2016) Autophagy in vascular endothelial cells. Clinical and Experimental Pharmacology and Physiology 43(11): 1021–1028.

141.

Zhou

Tan

Wang

, et al. (2017) Hypoxic preconditioning-induced autophagy enhances survival of engrafted endothelial progenitor cells in ischaemic limb. Journal of cellular and molecular medicine 21(10): 2452–2464.

142.

Chau

Lin

Chen

, et al. (2003) Endostatin induces autophagic cell death in EAhy926 human endothelial cells. Histology and Histopathology 18(3): 715–726.

143.

Dodson

Darley-Usmar

Zhang

(2013) Cellular metabolic and autophagic pathways: traffic control by redox signaling. Free Radical Biology and Medicine 63: 207–221.

The Yin and Yang dualistic features of autophagy in thermal burn wound healing

Abstract

Keywords

Introduction

Autophagy

Autophagy: a pro-survival mechanism—the Yang

Autophagy and the inflammatory phase of burn wound healing

Autophagy and the molecular landscape of the proliferative and remodeling phase

Autophagic cell death—the Yin

Conclusions

Footnotes

Author Contributions

Declaration of conflicting interests

Funding

ORCID iD

References