Yeast nitrogen catabolite repression is sustained by signals distinct from glutamine and glutamate reservoirs.

Nitrogen catabolite repression (NCR) is a wide transcriptional regulation program enabling baker's yeast to downregulate genes involved in the utilization of poor nitrogen sources when preferred ones are available. Nowadays, glutamine and glutamate, the major nitrogen donors for biosyntheses, are assumed to be key metabolic signals regulating NCR. NCR is controlled by the conserved TORC1 complex, which integrates nitrogen signals among others to regulate cell growth. However, accumulating evidence indicate that the TORC1-mediated control of NCR is only partial, arguing for the existence of supplementary regulatory processes to be discovered. In this work, we developed a genetic screen to search for new players involved in NCR signaling. Our data reveal that the NADP-glutamate dehydrogenase activity of Gdh1 negatively regulates NCR-sensitive gene transcription. By determining the total, cytoplasmic and vacuolar pools of amino acids, we show that there is no positive correlation between glutamine/glutamate reservoirs and the extent of NCR. While our data indicate that glutamine could serve as initial trigger of NCR, they show that it is not a sufficient signal to sustain repression and point to the existence of yet unknown signals. Providing additional evidence uncoupling TORC1 activity and NCR, our work revisits the dogmas underlying NCR regulation.

Long-term follow-up of sudden cardiac arrest survivors and electrophysiologically guided antiarrhythmic therapy.

Sudden cardiac arrest survivors have a high risk of suffering from recurrent arrhythmic events. Recent studies have shown that these patients have a significantly decreased mortality rate, if they are supplied with an implantable cardioverter/defibrillator (ICD). The aim of this study was to evaluate the long-term prognosis of patients with electrophysiologically guided antiarrhythmic drug therapy in comparison to patients with ICD. 204 consecutive survivors of sudden cardiac arrest were enrolled in this study. All patients were examined with an initial electrophysiologic study (EPS) with programmed ventricular stimulation. Patients were treated with antiarrhythmic drugs (if the inducible tachycardia was suppressed) or with the implantation of an ICD. The maximal follow-up period was 120 months, the mean period was 53.3 +/- 31.4 months (ICD) versus 60.3 +/- 35.5 months (EPS, nonsignificant). Patients with ICD showed an overall mortality rate of 14.6%, whereas EPS-guided patients had a mortality rate of 43.2% (p < 0.001). The cardiac and arrhythmogenic mortality rates were significantly lower in the ICD group (12 vs. 43%, p < 0.01, and 1 vs. 16%, p < 0.001, respectively). A reduction of the mortality risk was observed in the ICD group by up to 61% (all-cause mortality), 52% (cardiac mortality) and 97.2% (arrhythmogenic mortality). In arrhythmic event survivors with ICD, arrhythmic and overall mortality rates are significantly lower compared to patients with an EPS-guided drug therapy. In the secondary prevention of sudden cardiac death, ICD should be the first choice of antiarrhythmic therapy.