Next Article in Journal
Fasting Enhances Cardiomyocyte Hypoxia Tolerance by Regulating Ca2+ Transport at Mitochondria–Endoplasmic Reticulum Contact Sites
Previous Article in Journal
Fgf10 Gene Dosage from a Single Allele Is Insufficient for Forming Multilayered Epithelial Cells in the Murine Lacrimal Gland
Previous Article in Special Issue
Autophagy Differentially Influences Toll-like Receptor 9 and B Cell-Receptor-Mediated B Cell Expansion, Expression of Major Histocompatibility Class II Proteins, and Antigenic Peptide Presentation
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
IJMS
Volume 27
Issue 5
10.3390/ijms27052116
ijms-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Review

Reading the Signature of Autophagy in the Ischemic and Infarcted Heart: A Systematic Review of Circulating Biomarkers

by
Davide Radaelli
1,
Asma Alshaeb
2,
Ibrahim Al-Habash
3,
Viktorija Belakaposka Srpanova
4,
Zlatko Jakovski
4,
Gianfranco Sinagra
1,
Anita Galic Mihic
5,* and
Stefano D’Errico
1,*
1
Department of Medical Surgical and Health Sciences, Cattinara University Hospital, University of Trieste, Strada di Fiume, 34149 Trieste, Italy
2
Department of Microbiology, Pathology and Forensic Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, The Hashemite University, Zarqa 13133, Jordan
3
Forensic Medicine Department, Mutah University, Karak 61710, Jordan
4
Institute for Forensic Medicine, Criminalistic and Medical Deontology, Medical Faculty, 1000 Skopje, North Macedonia
5
School of Medicine, University of Zagreb, Šalata 11, 10000 Zagreb, Croatia
*
Authors to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2026, 27(5), 2116; https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms27052116
Submission received: 13 January 2026 / Revised: 16 February 2026 / Accepted: 18 February 2026 / Published: 24 February 2026
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Latest Molecular Advances in Autophagy)
Browse Figures
Review Reports Versions Notes

Abstract

Ischemic heart disease is the main cause of death worldwide. Classic cardiac biomarkers, such as troponin, which are released due to myocyte necrosis, are widely used for diagnosis, but they provide limited information about the initial underlying cellular processes involved in myocardial infarction. Autophagy is now considered fundamental in the pathophysiology of cardiac ischemia and related reperfusion injury. This systematic review aims to identify and highlight candidate autophagy-related biomarkers in cardiac ischemia and infarction with potential benefits for early diagnosis, prognosis, and therapy. A comprehensive literature search was conducted up to 1 June 2025. We included studies that examined biomarkers involved in the autophagy process in cardiac ischemia/infarction, which involved humans and animal models. A total of 14 eligible articles were reviewed. Thirteen autophagy-related biomarkers were identified, including LC3-II/I, Beclin-1, ATG5, ATG7, p62, WIPI1, FGF21, CHRF, Rubicon, IL-1β, IL-18, and adiponectin. These biomarkers have a dynamic pattern, and they exhibited time-dependent changes during the different stages of myocardial infarction. Autophagy biomarkers present a promising understanding of the molecular mechanism of early myocardial ischemia and infarction. Integration of autophagy biomarkers with the classic markers should improve risk stratification, therapeutic decision-making, and prognosis in patients with ischemic heart disease.

Graphical Abstract

1. Introduction

Diseases of the cardiovascular system are the top contributors to mortality worldwide. Ischemic heart disease is the most prevalent, accounting for approximately 9 million deaths annually (13% of the total deaths) [1]. Acute myocardial infarction (AMI), which is a myocardial cell death caused by prolonged ischemia due to coronary artery disease, has a high morbidity and mortality [2]. Despite advanced management protocols, including reperfusion therapy, it is still a problematic illness with persistent morbidity and mortality. Thus, we need improvement in risk stratification, early diagnosis, and new therapeutic approaches [3,4].
Autophagy is an essential cellular process responsible for the degradation and reuse of internal components, such as organelles, proteins, and pathogens [5]. Autophagosomes are double-membrane vesicles that sequestrate these components and fuse with lysosomes for the processes of degradation and recycling [6]. Autophagy plays a fundamental role in cellular homeostasis and is upregulated in stressful conditions such as hypoxia [7].
Like other parts of the body, autophagy is important for maintaining normal function in the heart. Abnormalities in autophagy occur in ischemia and infarction [8]. The mechanism by which autophagy plays a role in cardiac ischemia/reperfusion (I/R) injury is complex. Autophagy is normally activated in response to ischemia (adaptive response) to enhance the survival of cardiomyocytes by removing the damaged organelles [9]. But excessive or impaired response can adversely lead to cardiomyocyte damage, death, and cardiac remodeling [10].
Autophagy biomarkers in cardiac ischemia or infarction are essential for novel risk categorization, diagnosis, prognosis, and therapy. Troponins deal with myocyte necrosis once damage is irreversible and are widely used worldwide in the management of cardiac ischemia, but they provide limited information about the earlier pathophysiology of the damaged cardiomyocyte cellular status [11]. The role of autophagy biomarkers could be important in the early pathophysiology, novel risk assessment, and novel therapies.
Despite the widespread knowledge about the importance of autophagy in cardiac ischemia, there are no comprehensive reviews about autophagy-related biomarkers for cardiac ischemia. Other reviews focused on the role of autophagy in cardiac ischemia or other biomarkers related to cardiac ischemia [12,13], but none have specifically focused on biomarkers directly linked to the autophagy process during myocardial ischemia or infarction.
We establish a base for further research into biomarkers that provide more comprehensive information related to cardiac ischemia, including preventive medicine development, clinical implications (diagnosis, management, and prognosis), forensic medicine investigations, and therapeutic strategies.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Eligibility Criteria

In this systematic review, all relevant literature available in the PubMed database from its inception to 1 June 2025 was systematically retrieved. The study included all papers that met the following criteria: original research articles, including both prospective and retrospective designs, reviews, or short communications; published in English; investigated potential molecules or proteins detectable in plasma samples; the molecules studied were related to the autophagy pathway; and involved subjects with confirmed acute myocardial ischemia or infarction, regardless of whether it was a first presentation or in the context of pre-existing coronary artery disease. Studies conducted on both human and animal models, particularly mice models, were involved. Journal Impact Factor was not considered in the eligibility or exclusion of studies; selection was based solely on scientific relevance and predefined methodological criteria.
The search terms used were “myocardial ischemia”, “myocardial infarction”, “autophagy” and “biomarker” restricted to titles, abstracts, and keywords. Studies that do not involve investigation of such potential biomarkers were excluded from consideration. Each selected paper underwent thorough review and cross-referencing to find other pertinent research. Based on the Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) 2020 Guidelines [14], a methodological assessment of every study was carried out (Figure 1).

2.2. Study Selection

Data collection was conducted independently by two researchers, A.S. and I.H., who separately reviewed the retrieved articles. Using the predefined search strategy, a total of 203 records were identified in the database. After screening the titles and abstracts, 29 articles were selected for full-text reviewing based on their alignment with the research criteria and objectives. Upon further assessment, studies focusing on coronary artery disease (CAD) without confirmed acute myocardial infarction, those addressing unrelated cardiac conditions, or those not involving autophagy were excluded. Ultimately, 14 articles met the inclusion criteria and were included in this review.

2.3. Data Extraction

The data extraction was independently carried out by two researchers (A.A. and I.H.), with each reviewer cross-verifying the other’s results for accuracy. When discrepancies arose, the authors (A.G., Z.J., V.B.S., and D.R.) engaged in discussion, ultimately reaching a unified decision. The 14 included articles met our criteria and involved 13 candidate autophagy-related biomarkers. The extracted data were subsequently compiled into a summary table (Table 1).
The following details were gathered for all included articles: the article title, the proposed biomarkers, the involved sample (subject group), the used methods, and the results at the end of the study. The overall dataset was reviewed by a cardiologist (G.S.) and cardio-pathologist (S.D.) to ensure clinical relevance and accuracy.
To facilitate the graphical representation of apoptotic pathways activated in cardiomyocites following ischemic insult, established information derived from the scientific literature was provided to ChatGPT (OpenAI, San Francisco, CA, USA). The AI system was used solely to assist in generating a schematic draft of the explanatory figure. All biological content, pathway and accuracy, and final figure design were critically reviewed, verified and edited by the authors.

3. Results

Out of the total 14 studies that met the eligibility criteria and were included in this systematic review, 13 distinct autophagy-related biomarkers were identified and are presented herein.

3.1. MAP-LC3 (Microtubule-Associated Protein Light Chain 3) (LC3II/I)

LC3 is considered one of the autophagy-related (ATG) proteins involved in the autophagic process. LC3 is a subunit of microtubule-associated proteins 1A and 1B (MAP1LC3). It is similar to the yeast protein ATG8. All mammalian ATG8 homologues play a role in autophagosome formation in the autophagy process. Two types of LC3 are involved in the process of autophagy: LC3-I (cytosolic form) and LC3-II (membrane-bound form). Upon the process, LC3-I is formed by LC3β. After that, LC3I converts to membrane-bound LC3II via Conjugation with phosphatidylethanolamine (PE). LC3II is considered to be very important for autophagosome formation. Levels of LC3-II proportionally correlate with the number of autophagosomes [28,29]. According to Mo et al. (2021), LC3-II/I notably increases during I/R injury [15]. Kong et al. (2023) also reported increase in LC3-II in acute myocardial infarction before coronary revascularization [17]. In another study, this autophagy marker was reduced 6 months after myocardial infarction (rehabilitation period) [16].

3.2. Nuclear Pore Glycoprotein P62

P62, which is also called sequestosome 1 (SQSTM1), is a stress-inducible intracellular protein that regulates different transduction pathways responsible for cell survival and death [30]. It is one of the receptors that are involved in selective autophagy [31]. It is usually found in cellular inclusion bodies with polyubiquitinated proteins and also in cytosolic protein aggregates, which accumulate in some situations, such as some chronic diseases. It is normally degraded by autophagy [32]. This explains the decrease in P62 level noticed by Mo et al. (2021) during I/R injury [15]. Even though autophagy itself can modulate the level of P62, it can inhibit autophagy by activation of mammalian target of rapamycin complex 1 (mTORC1) [30].

3.3. ATG7 (Autophagy-Related Gene 7)

A multifaceted core ATG protein that drives the essential stages of autophagy [33]. It could be linked to innate immunity via LC3-associated phagocytosis, unconventional protein secretion, receptor recycling, exocytosis of secretory granules, and modulation of p53-dependent cell cycle arrest and apoptosis [34,35]. ATG7 is upregulated in I/R injury. This can be explained by the role of the Cardiac hypertrophy-related factor (CHRF) effect on the miR-182-5p/ATG7 pathway [36]. In I/R injury, CHRF increases, leading to sequestration of miR-182-5p. ATG7 is upregulated when miR-182-5p is downregulated. This sequence means that CHRF sequestrates miR-182-5p to regulate ATG7 [15].

3.4. CHRF

CHRF is a type of lncRNA that regulates multiple cardiac diseases [36,37]. CHRF is upregulated in cases of myocardial I/R injury in vivo and in vitro models. It was found that CHRF aggravates myocardial I/R injury through the aggravation of autophagy in the mean of the modulation of miR-182-5p/ATG7 pathway. Silencing of CHRF causes a decrease in myocardial I/R injury in addition to suppression of autophagy, as noticed by the reversal of the changes occurring for both LC3 and P62 [15].

3.5. NLRP3 (NLR Family Pyrin Domain Containing 3)

NLRP3 is a sensor located intracellularly to detect abnormal dangerous signaling [38]. Disturbances in cellular hemostasis are sensed by NLRP3, which lead to activation of caspase-1, interleukin 1 beta (IL-1β), and Interleukin-18 (IL-18) [39,40]. In cases of myocardial ischemia and infarction, activation of NLRP3 inflammasome leads to further damage of cardiac muscle through direct promotion of cell death and indirect initiation of inflammation in the cardiac muscle mediated by interleukins (IL-1β, IL-18) [40]. The NLRP3 inflammasome is inhibited by autophagy, but the exact mechanism is still unclear [41]. Autophagy impairment in cases of AMI, noticed by lower levels of MAP-LC3, could explain this increase in NLRP3 during AMI [16].

3.6. IL-1β and IL-18

Both interleukins are activated by the inflammasome, which is a protein complex including Nod-like receptor (NLR), the precursor procaspase-1, and the adaptor ASC (apoptosis-associated speck-like protein containing a CARD). This inflammation causes harmful effects on the heart, and the interruption of this activation is considered to be a protective measure for the heart [42,43]. In cases of AMI, these interleukins increase in response to the effect of NLRP3 inflammasome. Impairment of autophagy leads to an exaggerated effect of these inflammatory interleukins on the cardiac muscle [16].

3.7. ATG5 (Autophagy-Related Gene 5) and Beclin 1

ATG5 and Beclin 1 are both essential autophagy regulators that are involved in the formation of the autophagosome. Both have a central role in autophagy, so their disruption or dysregulation may result in impairment of autophagy and may be associated with several pathological conditions [10,44,45,46]. Independent of autophagy, ATG5 is involved in other functions, including control of mitochondrial quality following oxidative damage, immune-related functions, adipocyte differentiation, and apoptosis [47,48]. Beclin 1 acts primarily through its interaction with class III-type phosphoinositide 3-kinase (class III PI3K). In response to various stress signals, Beclin 1 contributes to cardiomyocyte survival by promoting autophagic flux and limiting cell death during I/R injury [10,49].
Kong, Min Gyu, et al.’s study showed that the level of ATG5 and Beclin 1 was significantly elevated in the serum of patients with AMI before revascularization [17], and in the study by Grazide et al., these levels were lower compared to individuals without CAD in the late phase of reperfusion [18]. This initial upregulation followed by downregulation can be explained by the change in the autophagy flux; it is stimulated once the cells are exposed to ischemic injury and its associated oxidative stress and hypoxia, leading to elevated levels of both regulators. Then, with restoration of perfusion, particularly after enough time of reperfusion, there will be the inactivation of autophagy flux, which explains the low level. Furthermore, Beclin 1 has been shown to be elevated even in the early reperfusion triggered by reactive oxygen species formation in the I/R stage, which promotes excessive autophagy and induces further injury [50,51].

3.8. FGF21 (Fibroblast Growth Factor 21)

FGF21 is a cardioprotective hormone expressed by various tissues in the body, working as an endocrine hormone primarily to correct metabolic dysfunction related to energy and glucose homeostasis [52,53]. It is mainly expressed by the liver, with smaller contributions from the heart, muscle, brain, pancreas, and adipose tissue [54,55]. Its expression is induced in response to stressful conditions, such as ischemia-induced injury, exercise, and nutritional stresses [56,57]. It inhibits cell apoptosis, up-regulates the expression of antioxidants, and suppresses endoplasmic reticulum stress, all of which contribute, in myocardial infarction (MI), to preventing cardiomyocyte death and helping them survive during prolonged ischemia [58,59,60].
In addition, it is considered one of the autophagy-related proteins whose activity is mediated through signaling molecules such as Beclin1, protein kinase B (AKT), transcription factor EB (TFEB), LC3, and 5-adenosine monophosphate-activated protein kinase (AMPK) [61,62,63]. As a result, it helps protect cardiac cells from ischemic injury and promotes autophagic flux to protect cardiomyocytes during I/R [64].
In patients with CAD, the production and release of cardiac FGF21 has been observed to increase [19,20,21]. Clinical studies found that the circulating FGF21 levels were elevated in all CAD subtypes, AMI, stable angina pectoris (SAP), and unstable angina pectoris (UAP), peaking during the first day of infarction, and the high level remained for several days after the infarction. Notably, patients with higher FGF21 levels one week after infarction experienced reinfarction within a month, and this higher level is associated with a high mortality rate [19]. Also, the study by Cheng et al. illustrates a correlation between elevated FGF21 and cardiac troponin I as well as Creatine Kinase-MB (CK-MB) levels [21], while another study by Sunaga et al. found that FGF21 levels correlated with adipose tissue lipolysis byproducts such as fatty acid binding protein 4 (FABP4) and saturated fatty acids, but not with cardiac troponin T [20]. However, the high level is not related to the age, sex, body weight, or glucose levels [19]. These findings highlight its potential as an independent and strong biomarker.

3.9. APN (Adiponectin)

APN is an adipocyte-derived adipokine with well-known anti-inflammatory and cardioprotective effects. It plays an important role in various physiological processes, including energy metabolism, insulin sensitivity, and vascular homeostasis [65,66]. Several studies have demonstrated that APN has a cardioprotective role, as it has an essential role in regulating myocardial autophagy. This function of APN is mediated primarily through the activation of AMPK and p38 mitogen-activated protein kinase (MAPK) signaling pathways [67].
Autophagy appears to be impaired in the absence of APN, so its deficiency is associated with abnormal cardiac function [68,69,70]. For instance, an experimental study using APN-deficient mouse models subjected to MI further confirmed the impaired autophagic response, resulting in exacerbated cardiac damage [71].
Herein, three studies have linked circulating APN levels with AMI. It has been observed that plasma APN concentrations are significantly lower in those with AMI compared to controls, suggesting it as a biomarker for myocardial injury [67].

3.10. WIPI1 (WD Repeat Domain Phosphoinositide-Interacting Protein 1)

WIPI1 is one of the autophagy regulators; specifically, it is involved in mitophagy, which is a specialized form that deals with mitochondrial integrity maintenance and reduces oxidative stress [72]. Its autophagy function plays a role in immunological responses, cancers, and infections [72,73]. Furthermore, it is involved in cardiovascular diseases, particularly ventricular failure when it is upregulated [74], and diabetic cardiomyopathy with its reduction [72]. It has been explained that its upregulation causes autophagy promotion, while its downregulation is associated with mitophagy impairment, worsening cardiac function.
Notably, WIPI1 is significantly elevated within one hour of AMI, explained by the increased making it a promising early diagnostic biomarker. This upregulation was explained as probably reducing the infarction progress by activating autophagy pathways [26].

3.11. Rubicon

Rubicon is another regulator of autophagy but has a negative role that inhibits the maturation of autophagosomes by interacting with the Beclin 1-UVRAG-Vps34 complex and suppressing Rab7 activity [75,76]. However, Rubicon is essential for LC3-associated phagocytosis (LAP) and endocytosis (LANDO), as it promotes immune regulation and lysosomal degradation [76,77]. In MI, Rubicon is upregulated during I/R injury, contributing to impaired autophagic flux and increasing the cardiac injury. Its dual role in suppressing autophagy while supporting LAP may disrupt cellular balance under stress. Thus, Rubicon is another potential biomarker in MI. Additionally, it was demonstrated that its level is related to both total and low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol levels, but the Rubicon level generally is independently related to the risk of infarction [27].

4. Discussion

Autophagy is a tightly regulated intracellular degradation pathway essential for maintaining cellular homeostasis and quality control under basal conditions. It is responsible for removing damaged organelles, misfolded proteins, and unwanted cytoplasmic components via lysosomal degradation [78]. Under stress conditions such as hypoxia, nutrient deficiency, and oxidative stress, autophagy is markedly upregulated [6,79]. Physiologically, autophagy regulates many processes such as aging, embryogenesis, immunity, and cell differentiation [5,80]. Abnormal autophagy contributes to many pathological conditions such as neurodegenerative disorders, cardiovascular diseases, infections, and cancer [81,82].
In the context of AMI, the autophagic response is neither uniform nor unidirectional; rather, it oscillates between cytoprotection and cytotoxicity depending on the timing, extent, and molecular regulation [9,83,84,85].
This systematic review presents several potential biomarkers involved in the process of autophagy useful in the myocardial acute phase or during the phase of I/R injury, highlighting their diagnostic, prognostic, and therapeutic potential. Some of those candidate biomarkers are direct indicators of autophagy (involved in autophagosome formation, maturation, elongation, fusion, and degradation), such as LC3II/I, P62, ATG7, ATG5, Beclin 1, WIPI1, and Rubicon; others are indirect indicators, like CHRF, NLRP3, IL-1β, IL-18, FGF21, and APN, that regulate the process either by promoting or suppressing it according to the specific function and condition (Figure 2).
The findings illustrate that the alterations in the levels of the proposed biomarkers are time-dependent. During the early phase of AMI, several biomarkers, such as WIPI1, NLRP3, IL-1β, and IL-18, were found to be elevated in circulation. In contrast, APN showed significantly lower levels in the early phase of MI, and other candidate biomarkers, including CHRF, ATG7, and Rubicon, showed elevated levels during the I/R phase rather than the initial onset of MI. At this same phase, P62 levels were reduced. Some of the biomarkers, such as ATG5 and Beclin-1, followed a biphasic pattern; their levels were significantly elevated in the early infarction stage but subsequently declined below control levels during the late reperfusion phase. Also, another biomarker, LC3-II/I, displayed a biphasic pattern; its levels were higher in MI patients compared to controls during both the early infarction and the I/R stage, yet they declined markedly during rehabilitation. Additionally, FGF21 demonstrated a sustained elevation, peaking during early infarction and remaining high throughout the I/R period.
Out of those proposed biomarkers, WIPI1 exhibited a unique feature in that it was detected to rise within one hour of the infarction, highlighting its diagnostic role in the earliest time, especially when combined with traditional markers like troponins, even if the symptoms are not severe enough yet [26]. Regarding the prognostic features, APN, which was downregulated in the circulation during AMI, had its high circulating level linked with lowering MI risk in a prospective study that followed up men for 6 years [86]. Another one with a prognostic feature is FGF21, as its high level after a week of the infarction suggests that this patient is at a high risk to experience reinfarction within 30 days [19].
Furthermore, the change exhibited by the alteration of the CHRF, ATG7, and Rubicon levels during only one stage can be useful as a diagnostic tool and an indicator; upon its elevation, it indicates the ischemic reperfusion injury is starting, giving a time spot that may be beneficial for many therapies directed to minimize these harmful period consequences [87,88,89,90].
The harmful effect of autophagy in I/R was also reported through studying the axis of CHRF, miR-182-5p, and ATG7, which was discussed by Mo et al. (2021). CHRF, an lncRNA, is upregulated during I/R [36,37]. This upregulation causes an increase in the risk of myocardial injury. Silencing CHRF enhances cellular viability and decreases infarct size, lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) activity, and apoptosis in cardiomyocytes exposed to I/R. CHRF sequestrates miR-182-5p, preventing it from inhibiting ATG7 (a key gene for autophagy). ATG7 decreased, leading to autophagy attenuation when miR-182-5p upregulated in response to CHRF suppression. This is supported by the decreased level of LC3-II/I and the restoration of P62 expression level in response to CHRF suppression, which indeed indicates decreased autophagy activity. This suggests that CHRF increases autophagy activity in stress conditions, as both LC3-II/I upregulation and P62 degradation reflect the autophagy activity. According to that, CHRF is suggested to exacerbate myocardial I/R injury by activation of autophagy. Modulation in the axis of CHRF, miR-182-5p, and ATG7 could be helpful in the therapeutic strategies concerned in this field [15].
Only one paper discussed the role of autophagy in the post-MI rehabilitation period. According to [16], a significant decrease in the level of MAP-LC3 in rehabilitated MI patients compared to controls was noticed, indicating a decrease in autophagosome formation. In contrast, NLRP3 inflammasome and IL-1β levels were elevated, suggesting that the activation of an inflammatory status leads to defective autophagy activity. This defect could affect the clearance of the unwanted cellular components and stimulate the inflammatory response, which affects repair and recovery. Given these findings, monitoring of LC3 and inflammasome activity could be very helpful for rehabilitation quality improvement. Also, focusing on increasing the expression of LC3 in rehabilitated MI patients could inhibit the inflammatory response and promote the repair and recovery of myocardium [16].
Kong et al. [17] investigated the changes in autophagy biomarkers in AMI patients and compared them with the usually used cardiac biomarkers and clinical parameters. The study revealed a correlation between the elevated autophagy markers, LC3-II and Beclin 1 in the coronary artery, and cardiac Troponin T and NTproBNP levels, which indicates the presence of a relationship between autophagy activity and cardiac injury severity. In addition, there was no association between autophagy markers and ventricular ejection fraction, except for WIPI1, which was found to be elevated in ventricular failure, attributing the phenomenon to its role in promoting autophagy, and demonstrated reduced levels in diabetic patients who developed diabetic cardiomyopathy, as its reduction impairs mitophagy, resulting in deterioration of cardiac function [72,74]. Additionally, a negative correlation has been reported in one of the involved articles between APN levels and C-reactive protein (CRP) in AMI patients, suggesting that the decrease in APN is not only a marker of infarction but may also reflect the degree of systemic inflammation associated with it [25]. According to that, integrating autophagy markers with the traditional cardiac biomarkers could be beneficial in investigating the extent of cardiac damage and indeed in improving therapeutic strategies [17].
Despite significant advances, substantial gaps remain in the explanation and the exact role of autophagy in cardiac ischemia and infarction. The temporal dynamics of autophagy-related biomarkers, prior to ischemic insult, during ischemia, throughout I/R, and in the post-infarction period, are not yet fully elucidated. Moreover, it remains unclear whether these alterations in autophagy markers are involved in the causative pathological status in myocardial injury or are secondary responses to ischemic stress.
Reperfusion-related ventricular arrhythmias, especially ventricular fibrillation, are a well-recognized cause of sudden cardiac death in both laboratory models and patients undergoing myocardial reperfusion [91,92]. Although restoring coronary blood flow is necessary to limit infarct size, the process itself can inversely affect the myocardium. The sudden return of oxygen and substrates is accompanied by intracellular calcium accumulation, mitochondrial injury, and a surge in reactive oxygen species. These alterations are closely associated with cell death pathways, including necrosis and autophagy [8,93].
Autophagy in this setting appears to have context-dependent effects. Basal activity may support cellular adaptation; however, excessive activation or interruption of autophagic flux during reperfusion can intensify mitochondrial dysfunction, reduce ATP availability, and disrupt ionic gradients. Such metabolic and structural disturbances can alter membrane excitability and conduction, creating conditions favorable for malignant ventricular arrhythmias [8,85,94,95].
Clinical data that directly link autophagy markers to reperfusion arrhythmias are still limited. Clarifying this relationship may help to define whether targeting autophagic pathways may have potential in reducing lethal reperfusion-induced arrhythmias.
Another considerable challenge regarding the death of cardiomyocytes during myocardial ischemia and reperfusion, as an example of cellular death in general, is that it normally occurs as a complex set of processes, not through isolated pathways. These processes mainly include autophagy, apoptosis, and necrosis, which usually coexist and interact [96]. Increasing evidence indicates that autophagic, apoptotic, and necrotic pathways converge at common regulatory nodes, including p53, Bcl-2 family proteins, and RIP kinases, highlighting the integrated nature of cellular death signaling [97]. Autophagy may initially start as a cytoprotective mechanism in response to stressful stimuli. However, excessive or dysregulated autophagy can facilitate apoptotic or necrotic cell death [98,99]. Several molecules, which could be considered as biomarkers, including Beclin-1, ATG5, LC3, p62, and caspases, can all be affected during the whole process through the three mechanisms, which indeed highlights the overlapping of these processes regarding cellular death [100,101,102]. For instance, cleavage of autophagy-related proteins such as Beclin-1 and ATG5 by caspases shifts the process of autophagy toward apoptosis [103,104], and modulation of RIPK1/RIPK3 or MLKL can direct cells toward necrotic-like death even when autophagy or apoptosis is active [105]. It is important to recognize this overlap when interpreting the related biomarkers, as changes in autophagy-related markers may reflect not only autophagic activity but also broader cell death dynamics occurring within the ischemic myocardium.
The contribution of autophagy and its associated biomarkers to the subsequent outcomes, including recurrent ischemic events and the development of heart failure, also remains underexplored. Additionally, another challenge in this field is the absence of standardized methodologies for detecting and quantifying autophagy markers, which hinders inter-study comparability and the development of clinically valid conclusions.
The significant results about autophagy markers in different aspects regarding cardiac infarction encourage further studies. Further research is needed for validation before clinical implementation in order to comprehensively improve diagnosis, prognosis, risk stratification, therapeutic strategies, and rehabilitation protocols.

5. Conclusions

This systematic review aims to identify and highlight the potential autophagy-related biomarkers in cardiac ischemia and infarction cases. Autophagy markers may help improve protocols and strategies related to ischemic heart disease, including diagnosis, prognosis, and management. Several markers, such as LC3-II/I, ATG5, Beclin 1, FGF21, and WIPI1, could be beneficial in determining high-risk individuals, identifying the stages of the disease, modifying the pathway of management, and predicting the outcome. For a clinical application, further validation and standardization are needed.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, S.D. and D.R.; methodology, I.A.-H. and A.A.; software, A.A. and I.A.-H.; validation, S.D. and G.S.; formal analysis, A.G.M., V.B.S. and Z.J.; resources, S.D.; data curation, I.A.-H. and A.A.; writing—original draft preparation, A.A., I.A.-H. and A.G.M.; writing—review and editing, D.R. and V.B.S.; visualization, Z.J.; supervision, S.D. and G.S. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research was funded by Regione Friuli Venezia Giulia, by the regional law n. 26/2020.

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

The original contributions presented in this study are included in the article. Further inquiries can be directed to the corresponding authors.

Acknowledgments

During the preparation of this manuscript the authors used ChatGPT (OpenAI, San Francisco, CA, USA) for assistance in the preliminary drafting of Figure 2. The authors have reviewed and edited the output and take full responsibility for the content of this publication.

Conflicts of Interest

All authors have no conflicts of interest or financial ties to disclose.

Abbreviations

The following abbreviations are used in this manuscript:
AMIAcute Myocardial Infarction
APNAdiponectin
ATGAutophagy-Related Gene
CHRFCardiac Hypertrophy–Related Factor
ELISAEnzyme-Linked Immunosorbent Assay
FGF21Fibroblast Growth Factor 21
I/RIschemia/Reperfusion
IL-1βInterleukin-1 beta
IL-18Interleukin 18
LC3Light Chain 3
MAP-LC3Microtubule-Associated Protein Light Chain 3
WIPI1WD Repeat Domain Phosphoinositide-Interacting Protein 1

References

  1. Shahbazi, F.; Moslehi, S.; Mirzaei, Z.; Mohammadi, Y. The Effect of Addressing the Top 10 Global Causes of Death on Life Expectancy in 2019: A Global and Regional Analysis. Int. Health 2025, 17, 517–526. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Thygesen, K.; Alpert, J.S.; Jaffe, A.S.; Chaitman, B.R.; Bax, J.J.; Morrow, D.A.; White, H.D. Fourth Universal Definition of Myocardial Infarction. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 2018, 72, 2231–2264. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  3. Roth, G.A.; Mensah, G.A.; Johnson, C.O.; Addolorato, G.; Ammirati, E.; Baddour, L.M.; Barengo, N.C.; Beaton, A.Z.; Benjamin, E.J.; Benziger, C.P.; et al. Global Burden of Cardiovascular Diseases and Risk Factors, 1990–2019: Update from the GBD 2019 Study. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 2020, 76, 2982–3021, Correction in J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 2021, 77, 1958–1959. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  4. Ibanez, B.; James, S.; Agewall, S.; Antunes, M.J.; Bucciarelli-Ducci, C.; Bueno, H.; Caforio, A.L.P.; Crea, F.; Goudevenos, J.A.; Halvorsen, S.; et al. 2017 ESC Guidelines for the management of acute myocardial infarction in patients presenting with ST-segment elevation: The Task Force for the management of acute myocardial infarction in patients presenting with ST-segment elevation of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC). Eur. Heart J. 2018, 39, 119–177. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  5. Mizushima, N.; Levine, B.; Cuervo, A.M.; Klionsky, D.J. Autophagy Fights Disease through Cellular Self-Digestion. Nature 2008, 451, 1069–1075. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Klionsky, D.J.; Abdel-Aziz, A.K.; Abdelfatah, S.; Abdellatif, M.; Abdoli, A.; Abel, S.; Abeliovich, H.; Abildgaard, M.H.; Abudu, Y.P.; Acevedo-Arozena, A.; et al. Guidelines for the Use and Interpretation of Assays for Monitoring Autophagy (4th Edition). Autophagy 2021, 17, 1–382. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Kroemer, G.; Mariño, G.; Levine, B. Autophagy and the Integrated Stress Response. Mol. Cell 2010, 40, 280–293. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Sciarretta, S.; Maejima, Y.; Zablocki, D.; Sadoshima, J. The Role of Autophagy in the Heart. Annu. Rev. Physiol. 2018, 80, 1–26. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Matsui, Y.; Takagi, H.; Qu, X.; Abdellatif, M.; Sakoda, H.; Asano, T.; Levine, B.; Sadoshima, J. Distinct Roles of Autophagy in the Heart During Ischemia and Reperfusion: Roles of AMP-Activated Protein Kinase and Beclin 1 in Mediating Autophagy. Circ. Res. 2007, 100, 914–922. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Ma, X.; Liu, H.; Foyil, S.R.; Godar, R.J.; Weinheimer, C.J.; Hill, J.A.; Diwan, A. Impaired Autophagosome Clearance Contributes to Cardiomyocyte Death in Ischemia/Reperfusion Injury. Circulation 2012, 125, 3170–3181. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Lindahl, B.; Toss, H.; Siegbahn, A.; Venge, P.; Wallentin, L. Markers of Myocardial Damage and Inflammation in Relation to Long-Term Mortality in Unstable Coronary Artery Disease. N. Engl. J. Med. 2000, 343, 1139–1147. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Sciarretta, S.; Yee, D.; Nagarajan, N.; Bianchi, F.; Saito, T.; Valenti, V.; Tong, M.; Del Re, D.P.; Vecchione, C.; Schirone, L.; et al. Trehalose-Induced Activation of Autophagy Improves Cardiac Remodeling After Myocardial Infarction. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 2018, 71, 1999–2010. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  13. Kanamori, H.; Takemura, G.; Goto, K.; Maruyama, R.; Tsujimoto, A.; Ogino, A.; Takeyama, T.; Kawaguchi, T.; Watanabe, T.; Fujiwara, T.; et al. The Role of Autophagy Emerging in Postinfarction Cardiac Remodelling. Cardiovasc. Res. 2011, 91, 330–339. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  14. Page, M.J.; McKenzie, J.E.; Bossuyt, P.M.; Boutron, I.; Hoffmann, T.C.; Mulrow, C.D.; Shamseer, L.; Tetzlaff, J.M.; Akl, E.A.; Brennan, S.E.; et al. The PRISMA 2020 Statement: An Updated Guideline for Reporting Systematic Reviews. BMJ Acad. Ed. 2021, 372, 1–9. [Google Scholar]
  15. Mo, Y.; Wu, H.; Zheng, X.; Xu, L.; Liu, L.; Liu, Z. LncRNA CHRF Aggravates Myocardial Ischemia/Reperfusion Injury by Enhancing Autophagy via Modulation of the miR-182-5p/ATG7 Pathway. J. Biochem. Mol. Toxicol. 2021, 35, e22709. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Bullón, P.; Cano-García, F.J.; Alcocer-Gómez, E.; Varela-López, A.; Roman-Malo, L.; Ruiz-Salmerón, R.J.; Quiles, J.L.; Navarro-Pando, J.M.; Battino, M.; Ruiz-Cabello, J.; et al. Could NLRP3–Inflammasome Be a Cardiovascular Risk Biomarker in Acute Myocardial Infarction Patients? Antioxid. Redox Signal. 2017, 27, 269–275. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Kong, M.G.; Suh, J.; Cho, Y.; Park, H.W.; Lee, N.H. Abstract P1050: The Activity of Autophagy Biomarkers in Acute Myocardial Infarction. Circ. Res. 2023, 133, AP1050. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Grazide, M.-H.; Ruidavets, J.-B.; Martinet, W.; Elbaz, M.; Vindis, C. Association of Circulating Autophagy Proteins ATG5 and Beclin 1 with Acute Myocardial Infarction in a Case-Control Study. Cardiology 2024, 149, 217–224. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Zhang, W.; Chu, S.; Ding, W.; Wang, F. Serum Level of Fibroblast Growth Factor 21 Is Independently Associated with Acute Myocardial Infarction. PLoS ONE 2015, 10, e0129791. [Google Scholar]
  20. Sunaga, H.; Koitabashi, N.; Iso, T.; Matsui, H.; Obokata, M.; Kawakami, R.; Murakami, M.; Yokoyama, T.; Kurabayashi, M. Activation of Cardiac AMPK-FGF21 Feed-Forward Loop in Acute Myocardial Infarction: Role of Adrenergic Overdrive and Lipolysis Byproducts. Sci. Rep. 2019, 9, 11841. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Cheng, J.; Su, X.; Qiao, L.; Zhai, C.; Chen, W. Circulating Level of Fibroblast Growth Factor 21 Is Independently Associated with the Risks of Unstable Angina Pectoris. Biosci. Rep. 2018, 38, BSR20181099. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Sinha, S.R.; Prakash, P.; Keshari, J.R.; Prasad, R.V. The Correlation Between Serum Fibroblast Growth Factor 21 and the Severity and Occurrence of Coronary Artery Disease. Cureus 2024, 16, e51924. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Shibata, R.; Sato, K.; Kumada, M.; Izumiya, Y.; Sonoda, M.; Kihara, S.; Ouchi, N.; Walsh, K. Adiponectin Accumulates in Myocardial Tissue That Has Been Damaged by Ischemia-Reperfusion Injury via Leakage from the Vascular Compartment. Cardiovasc. Res. 2007, 74, 471–479. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  24. Kumada, M.; Kihara, S.; Sumitsuji, S.; Kawamoto, T.; Matsumoto, S.; Ouchi, N.; Arita, Y.; Okamoto, Y.; Shimomura, I.; Hiraoka, H.; et al. Association of Hypoadiponectinemia with Coronary Artery Disease in Men. Arterioscler. Thromb. Vasc. Biol. 2003, 23, 85–89. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  25. Kojima, S.; Funahashi, T.; Sakamoto, T.; Miyamoto, S.; Soejima, H.; Hokamaki, J.; Kajiwara, I.; Sugiyama, S.; Yoshimura, M.; Fujimoto, K.; et al. The Variation of Plasma Concentrations of a Novel, Adipocyte Derived Protein, Adiponectin, in Patients with Acute Myocardial Infarction. Heart 2003, 89, 667. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  26. Liu, W.; Shen, J.; Li, Y.; Wu, J.; Luo, X.; Yu, Y.; Zhang, Y.; Gu, L.; Zhang, X.; Jiang, C.; et al. Pyroptosis Inhibition Improves the Symptom of Acute Myocardial Infarction. Cell Death Dis. 2021, 12, 852. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Grazide, M.-H.; Ruidavets, J.-B.; Martinet, W.; Elbaz, M.; Vindis, C. Circulating Autophagy Regulator Rubicon Is Linked to Increased Myocardial Infarction Risk. J. Mol. Cell Cardiol. Plus 2024, 11, 100279. [Google Scholar]
  28. Jiang, P.; Mizushima, N. LC3- and P62-Based Biochemical Methods for the Analysis of Autophagy Progression in Mammalian Cells. Methods 2015, 75, 13–18. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Tanida, I.; Ueno, T.; Kominami, E. LC3 and Autophagy. In Autophagosome and Phagosome; Deretic, V., Ed.; Humana Press: Totowa, NJ, USA, 2008; pp. 77–88. [Google Scholar]
  30. Komatsu, M.; Kageyama, S.; Ichimura, Y. p62/SQSTM1/A170: Physiology and pathology. Pharmacol. Res. 2012, 66, 457–462. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Lamark, T.; Svenning, S.; Johansen, T. Regulation of Selective Autophagy: The P62/SQSTM1 Paradigm. Essays Biochem. 2017, 61, 609–624. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Pankiv, S.; Clausen, T.H.; Lamark, T.; Brech, A.; Bruun, J.-A.; Outzen, H.; Øvervatn, A.; Bjørkøy, G.; Johansen, T. p62/SQSTM1 Binds Directly to Atg8/LC3 to Facilitate Degradation of Ubiquitinated Protein Aggregates by Autophagy. J. Biol. Chem. 2007, 282, 24131–24145. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  33. Collier, J.J.; Suomi, F.; Oláhová, M.; McWilliams, T.G.; Taylor, R.W. Emerging Roles of ATG7 in Human Health and Disease. EMBO Mol. Med. 2021, 13, e14824. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  34. Mizushima, N.; Levine, B. Autophagy in Human Diseases. N. Engl. J. Med. 2020, 383, 1564–1576. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  35. Mizushima, N. The ATG Conjugation Systems in Autophagy. Curr. Opin. Cell Biol. 2020, 63, 1–10. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Wang, K.; Liu, F.; Zhou, L.-Y.; Long, B.; Yuan, S.-M.; Wang, Y.; Liu, C.-Y.; Sun, T.; Zhang, X.-J.; Li, P.-F. The Long Noncoding RNA CHRF Regulates Cardiac Hypertrophy by Targeting miR-489. Circ. Res. 2014, 114, 1377–1388. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Xie, X.; Zhao, W.; Pang, J.; Xiong, X.; Wang, H.; Ma, L. Long Non-coding RNA, CHRF, Predicts Poor Prognosis of Lung Adenocarcinoma and Promotes Cell Proliferation and Migration. Oncol. Lett. 2018, 16, 6245–6252. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Swanson, K.V.; Deng, M.; Ting, J.P.-Y. The NLRP3 Inflammasome: Molecular Activation and Regulation to Therapeutics. Nat. Rev. Immunol. 2019, 19, 477–489. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. He, Y.; Hara, H.; Núñez, G. Mechanism and Regulation of NLRP3 Inflammasome Activation. Trends Biochem. Sci. 2016, 41, 1012–1021. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Toldo, S.; Abbate, A. The NLRP3 Inflammasome in Acute Myocardial Infarction. Nat. Rev. Cardiol. 2018, 15, 203–214. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Orogo, A.M.; Gustafsson, Å.B. Therapeutic Targeting of Autophagy. Circ. Res. 2015, 116, 489–503. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Li, P.-L. Cardiovascular Pathobiology of Inflammasomes: Inflammatory Machinery and Beyond. Antioxid. Redox Signal. 2015, 22, 1079–1083. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  43. Progatzky, F.; Sangha, N.J.; Yoshida, N.; McBrien, M.; Cheung, J.; Shia, A.; Scott, J.; Marchesi, J.R.; Lamb, J.R.; Bugeon, L.; et al. Dietary Cholesterol Directly Induces Acute Inflammasome-Dependent Intestinal Inflammation. Nat. Commun. 2014, 5, 5864. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  44. Pierdominici, M.; Vomero, M.; Barbati, C.; Colasanti, T.; Maselli, A.; Vacirca, D.; Giovannetti, A.; Malorni, W.; Ortona, E. Role of Autophagy in Immunity and Autoimmunity, with a Special Focus on Systemic Lupus Erythematosus. FASEB J. 2012, 26, 1400–1412. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  45. Kim, M.; Sandford, E.; Gatica, D.; Qiu, Y.; Liu, X.; Zheng, Y.; Schulman, B.A.; Xu, J.; Semple, I.; Ro, S.-H.; et al. Mutation in ATG5 Reduces Autophagy and Leads to Ataxia with Developmental Delay. eLife 2016, 5, e12245. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Ye, X.; Zhou, X.-J.; Zhang, H. Exploring the Role of Autophagy-Related Gene 5 (ATG5) Yields Important Insights Into Autophagy in Autoimmune/Autoinflammatory Diseases. Front. Immunol. 2018, 9, 2334. [Google Scholar]
  47. Mayes, M.D.; Bossini-Castillo, L.; Gorlova, O.; Martin, J.E.; Zhou, X.; Chen, W.V.; Assassi, S.; Ying, J.; Tan, F.K.; Arnett, F.C.; et al. Immunochip Analysis Identifies Multiple Susceptibility Loci for Systemic Sclerosis. Am. J. Hum. Genet. 2014, 94, 47–61. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Changotra, H.; Kaur, S.; Yadav, S.S.; Gupta, G.L.; Parkash, J.; Duseja, A. ATG5: A Central Autophagy Regulator Implicated in Various Human Diseases. Cell Biochem. Funct. 2022, 40, 650–667. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Maejima, Y.; Isobe, M.; Sadoshima, J. Regulation of Autophagy by Beclin 1 in the Heart. J. Mol. Cell. Cardiol. 2016, 95, 19–25. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Valentim, L.; Laurence, K.M.; Townsend, P.A.; Carroll, C.J.; Soond, S.; Scarabelli, T.M.; Knight, R.A.; Latchman, D.S.; Stephanou, A. Urocortin Inhibits Beclin1-Mediated Autophagic Cell Death in Cardiac Myocytes Exposed to Ischaemia/Reperfusion Injury. J. Mol. Cell. Cardiol. 2006, 40, 846–852. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Hariharan, N.; Zhai, P.; Sadoshima, J. Oxidative Stress Stimulates Autophagic Flux During Ischemia/Reperfusion. Antioxid. Redox Signal. 2011, 14, 2179–2190. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Planavila, A.; Redondo-Angulo, I.; Villarroya, F. FGF21 and Cardiac Physiopathology. Front. Endocrinol. 2015, 6, 133. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Flippo, K.H.; Potthoff, M.J. Metabolic Messengers: FGF21. Nat. Metab. 2021, 3, 309–317. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  54. Fisher, F.M.; Maratos-Flier, E. Understanding the Physiology of FGF21. Annu. Rev. Physiol. 2016, 78, 223–241. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  55. Markan, K.R.; Naber, M.C.; Ameka, M.K.; Anderegg, M.D.; Mangelsdorf, D.J.; Kliewer, S.A.; Mohammadi, M.; Potthoff, M.J. Circulating FGF21 Is Liver Derived and Enhances Glucose Uptake During Refeeding and Overfeeding. Diabetes 2014, 63, 4057–4063. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  56. Badman, M.K.; Pissios, P.; Kennedy, A.R.; Koukos, G.; Flier, J.S.; Maratos-Flier, E. Hepatic Fibroblast Growth Factor 21 Is Regulated by PPARα and Is a Key Mediator of Hepatic Lipid Metabolism in Ketotic States. Cell Metab. 2007, 5, 426–437. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Uebanso, T.; Taketani, Y.; Yamamoto, H.; Amo, K.; Ominami, H.; Arai, H.; Takei, Y.; Masuda, M.; Tanimura, A.; Harada, N.; et al. Paradoxical Regulation of Human FGF21 by Both Fasting and Feeding Signals: Is FGF21 a Nutritional Adaptation Factor? PLoS ONE 2011, 6, e22976. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Yamamoto, T.; Sadoshima, J. Protection of the Heart Against Ischemia/Reperfusion by Silent Information Regulator 1. Trends Cardiovasc. Med. 2011, 21, 27–32. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Gómez-Sámano, M.Á.; Grajales-Gómez, M.; Zuarth-Vázquez, J.M.; Navarro-Flores, M.F.; Martínez-Saavedra, M.; Juárez-León, Ó.A.; Morales-García, M.G.; Enríquez-Estrada, V.M.; Gómez-Pérez, F.J.; Cuevas-Ramos, D. Fibroblast Growth Factor 21 and Its Novel Association with Oxidative Stress. Redox Biol. 2017, 11, 335–341. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Zhang, Y.; Liu, D.; Long, X.-X.; Fang, Q.-C.; Jia, W.-P.; Li, H.-T. The Role of FGF21 in the Pathogenesis of Cardiovascular Disease. Chin. Med. J. 2021, 134, 2931–2943. [Google Scholar]
  61. Ren, Z.; Xiao, W.; Zeng, Y.; Liu, M.-H.; Li, G.-H.; Tang, Z.-H.; Qu, S.-L.; Hao, Y.-M.; Yuan, H.-Q.; Jiang, Z.-S. Fibroblast Growth Factor-21 Alleviates Hypoxia/Reoxygenation Injury in H9c2 Cardiomyocytes by Promoting Autophagic Flux. Int. J. Mol. Med. 2019, 43, 1321–1330. [Google Scholar]
  62. Chen, F.; Zhan, J.; Yan, X.; Mamun, A.A.; Zhang, Y.; Xu, Y.; Zhang, H.; Li, X.; Zhou, K.; Xiao, J. FGF21 Alleviates Microvascular Damage Following Limb Ischemia/Reperfusion Injury by TFEB-Mediated Autophagy Enhancement and Anti-Oxidative Response. Signal Transduct. Target. Ther. 2022, 7, 349. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  63. Choi, A.M.K.; Ryter, S.W.; Levine, B. Autophagy in Human Health and Disease. N. Engl. J. Med. 2013, 368, 651–662. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  64. Liu, S.Q.; Tefft, B.J.; Roberts, D.T.; Zhang, L.-Q.; Ren, Y.; Li, Y.C.; Huang, Y.; Zhang, D.; Phillips, H.R.; Wu, Y.H. Cardioprotective Proteins Upregulated in the Liver in Response to Experimental Myocardial Ischemia. Am. J. Physiol. Heart Circ. Physiol. 2012, 303, H1446–H1458. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  65. Kawano, J.; Arora, R. The Role of Adiponectin in Obesity, Diabetes, and Cardiovascular Disease. J. Cardiometab. Syndr. 2009, 4, 44–49. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  66. Hopkins, T.A.; Ouchi, N.; Shibata, R.; Walsh, K. Adiponectin Actions in the Cardiovascular System. Cardiovasc. Res. 2007, 74, 11–18. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  67. Ren, J.; Xu, X.; Wang, Q.; Ren, S.Y.; Dong, M.; Zhang, Y. Permissive Role of AMPK and Autophagy in Adiponectin Deficiency-Accentuated Myocardial Injury and Inflammation in Endotoxemia. J. Mol. Cell. Cardiol. 2016, 93, 18–31. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  68. Lopaschuk, G.D.; Folmes, C.D.L.; Stanley, W.C. Cardiac Energy Metabolism in Obesity. Circ. Res. 2007, 101, 335–347. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  69. Essick, E.E.; Wilson, R.M.; Pimentel, D.R.; Shimano, M.; Baid, S.; Ouchi, N.; Sam, F. Adiponectin Modulates Oxidative Stress-Induced Autophagy in Cardiomyocytes. PLoS ONE 2013, 8, e68697. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  70. Kamareddine, L.; Ghantous, C.M.; Allouch, S.; Al-Ashmar, S.A.; Anlar, G.; Kannan, S.; Djouhri, L.; Korashy, H.M.; Agouni, A.; Zeidan, A. Between Inflammation and Autophagy: The Role of Leptin-Adiponectin Axis in Cardiac Remodeling. J. Inflamm. Res. 2021, 14, 5349–5365. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  71. Sung, H.K.; Tang, J.; Jahng, J.W.S.; Song, E.; Chan, Y.K.; Lone, A.H.; Peterson, J.; Abdul-Sater, A.; Sweeney, G. Ischemia-Induced Cardiac Dysfunction Is Exacerbated in Adiponectin-Knockout Mice Due to Impaired Autophagy Flux. Clin. Transl. Sci. 2024, 17, e13758. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  72. Liu, D.; Zhou, L.; Xu, B.; Tse, G.; Shao, Q.; Liu, T. WIPI1-Mediated Mitophagy Dysfunction in Ventricular Remodeling Associated with Long-Term Diabetes Mellitus. Cell. Signal. 2025, 130, 111663. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  73. Almannai, M.; Marafi, D.; El-Hattab, A.W. WIPI Proteins: Biological Functions and Related Syndromes. Front. Mol. Neurosci. 2022, 15, 1011918. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  74. Tzimas, C.; Rau, C.D.; Buergisser, P.E.; Jean-Louis, G.; Lee, K.; Chukwuneke, J.; Dun, W.; Wang, Y.; Tsai, E.J. WIPI1 Is a Conserved Mediator of Right Ventricular Failure. JCI Insight 2019, 5, 122929. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  75. Galluzzi, L.; Green, D.R. Autophagy-Independent Functions of the Autophagy Machinery. Cell 2019, 177, 1682–1699. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  76. Minami, S.; Nakamura, S.; Yoshimori, T. Rubicon in Metabolic Diseases and Ageing. Front. Cell Dev. Biol. 2022, 9, 816829. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  77. Heckmann, B.L.; Teubner, B.J.W.; Tummers, B.; Boada-Romero, E.; Harris, L.; Yang, M.; Guy, C.S.; Zakharenko, S.S.; Green, D.R. LC3-Associated Endocytosis Facilitates β-Amyloid Clearance and Mitigates Neurodegeneration in Murine Alzheimer’s Disease. Cell 2019, 178, 536–551.e14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  78. Mizushima, N.; Komatsu, M. Autophagy: Renovation of Cells and Tissues. Cell 2011, 147, 728–741. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  79. Deretic, V.; Saitoh, T.; Akira, S. Autophagy in Infection, Inflammation and Immunity. Nat. Rev. Immunol. 2013, 13, 722–737. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  80. Wada, Y.; Sun-Wada, G.-H.; Kawamura, N.; Aoyama, M. Role of Autophagy in Embryogenesis. Curr. Opin. Genet. Dev. 2014, 27, 60–66. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  81. Kobayashi, S. Choose Delicately and Reuse Adequately: The Newly Revealed Process of Autophagy. Biol. Pharm. Bull. 2015, 38, 1098–1103. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  82. Levine, B.; Kroemer, G. Autophagy in the Pathogenesis of Disease. Cell 2008, 132, 27–42. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  83. Shirakabe, A.; Ikeda, Y.; Sciarretta, S.; Zablocki, D.K.; Sadoshima, J. Aging and Autophagy in the Heart. Circ. Res. 2016, 118, 1563–1576. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  84. Hamacher-Brady, A.; Brady, N.R.; Gottlieb, R.A. Enhancing Macroautophagy Protects against Ischemia/Reperfusion Injury in Cardiac Myocytes. J. Biol. Chem. 2006, 281, 29776–29787. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  85. Gustafsson, Å.B.; Gottlieb, R.A. Autophagy in Ischemic Heart Disease. Circ. Res. 2009, 104, 150–158. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  86. Pischon, T.; Girman, C.J.; Hotamisligil, G.S.; Rifai, N.; Hu, F.B.; Rimm, E.B. Plasma Adiponectin Levels and Risk of Myocardial Infarction in Men. JAMA 2004, 291, 1730–1737. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  87. Kakavand, H.; Aghakouchakzadeh, M.; Coons, J.C.; Talasaz, A.H. Pharmacologic Prevention of Myocardial Ischemia–Reperfusion Injury in Patients with Acute Coronary Syndrome Undergoing Percutaneous Coronary Intervention. J. Cardiovasc. Pharmacol. 2021, 77, 430. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  88. Ye, Y.; Perez-Polo, J.R.; Aguilar, D.; Birnbaum, Y. The Potential Effects of Anti-Diabetic Medications on Myocardial Ischemia–Reperfusion Injury. Basic Res. Cardiol. 2011, 106, 925–952. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  89. Ibáñez, B.; Heusch, G.; Ovize, M.; Van de Werf, F. Evolving Therapies for Myocardial Ischemia/Reperfusion Injury. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 2015, 65, 1454–1471. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  90. Sharma, V.; Bell, R.M.; Yellon, D.M. Targeting Reperfusion Injury in Acute Myocardial Infarction: A Review of Reperfusion Injury Pharmacotherapy. Expert Opin. Pharmacother. 2012, 13, 1153–1175. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  91. Lujan, H.L.; DiCarlo, S.E. Reperfusion-induced sustained ventricular tachycardia, leading to ventricular fibrillation, in chronically instrumented, intact, conscious mice. Physiol. Rep. 2014, 2, e12057. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version]
  92. Wu, X.; Wu, M.; Huang, H.; Liu, Z.; Huang, H.; Wang, L. Incidence, predictors, and prognostic impact of reperfusion-related ventricular arrhythmias in STEMI patients undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention. BMC Cardiovasc. Disord. 2025, 25, 1–11. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  93. Hausenloy, D.J.; Yellon, D.M. Myocardial ischemia-reperfusion injury: A neglected therapeutic target. J. Clin. Investig. 2013, 123, 92–100. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  94. Sciarretta, S.; Hariharan, N.; Monden, Y.; Zablocki, D.; Sadoshima, J. Is autophagy in response to ischemia and reperfusion protective or detrimental for the heart? Pediatr. Cardiol. 2011, 32, 275–281. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  95. Lin, X.L.; Xiao, W.J.; Xiao, L.L.; Liu, M.H. Molecular mechanisms of autophagy in cardiac ischemia/reperfusion injury. Mol. Med. Rep. 2018, 18, 675–683. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  96. D’arcy, M.S. Cell death: A review of the major forms of apoptosis, necrosis and autophagy. Cell Biol. Int. 2019, 43, 582–592. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  97. Jain, M.V.; Paczulla, A.M.; Klonisch, T.; Dimgba, F.N.; Rao, S.B.; Roberg, K.; Schweizer, F.; Lengerke, C.; Davoodpour, P.; Palicharla, V.R.; et al. Interconnections between Apoptotic, Autophagic and Necrotic Pathways: Implications for Cancer Therapy Development. J. Cell. Mol. Med. 2013, 17, 12–29. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  98. Song, S.; Tan, J.; Miao, Y.; Li, M.; Zhang, Q. Crosstalk of Autophagy and Apoptosis: Involvement of the Dual Role of Autophagy under ER Stress. J. Cell. Physiol. 2017, 232, 2977–2984. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  99. Chandrika, B.B.; Yang, C.; Ou, Y.; Feng, X.; Muhoza, D.; Holmes, A.F.; Theus, S.; Deshmukh, S.; Haun, R.S.; Kaushal, G.P. Endoplasmic Reticulum Stress-Induced Autophagy Provides Cytoprotection from Chemical Hypoxia and Oxidant Injury and Ameliorates Renal Ischemia-Reperfusion Injury. PLoS ONE 2015, 10, e0140025. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  100. Liu, S.; Yao, S.; Yang, H.; Liu, S.; Wang, Y. Autophagy: Regulator of Cell Death. Cell Death Dis. 2023, 14, 648. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  101. Chmurska, A.; Matczak, K.; Marczak, A. Two Faces of Autophagy in the Struggle against Cancer. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2021, 22, 2981. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  102. Li, M.; Gao, P.; Zhang, J. Crosstalk between Autophagy and Apoptosis: Potential and Emerging Therapeutic Targets for Cardiac Diseases. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2016, 17, 332. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  103. Kang, R.; Zeh, H.J.; Lotze, M.T.; Tang, D. The Beclin 1 Network Regulates Autophagy and Apoptosis. Cell Death Differ. 2011, 18, 571–580. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  104. Wirawan, E.; Vande Walle, L.; Kersse, K.; Cornelis, S.; Claerhout, S.; Vanoverberghe, I.; Roelandt, R.; De Rycke, R.; Verspurten, J.; Declercq, W.; et al. Caspase-Mediated Cleavage of Beclin-1 Inactivates Beclin-1-Induced Autophagy and Enhances Apoptosis by Promoting the Release of Proapoptotic Factors from Mitochondria. Cell Death Dis. 2010, 1, e18. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  105. Liu, Y.; Liu, T.; Lei, T.; Zhang, D.; Du, S.; Girani, L.; Qi, D.; Lin, C.; Tong, R.; Wang, Y. RIP1/RIP3-Regulated Necroptosis as a Target for Multifaceted Disease Therapy (Review). Int. J. Mol. Med. 2019, 44, 771–786. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Ijms 27 02116 g001
Figure 1. PRISMA 2020 flow-diagram.
Figure 1. PRISMA 2020 flow-diagram.
Ijms 27 02116 g001
Ijms 27 02116 g002
Figure 2. Autophagic response in cardiomyocites during ischemia and ischemia/reperfusion injury. Early ischemia activates AMPK and inhibits mTOR, promoting Beclin-1-Vps34 signaling, ATG5-ATG7 conjugation, LC£-I to LC3-II conversion, and autophagosome formation. In this adaptive phase, autophagy supports mitophagy and cardiomyocyte survival. During reperfusion, ROS generation and Ca2+ overload induce Beclin-1 overactivation and impaired lysosomal clearance, resulting in defective autophagic flux and autophagosome accumulation, contributing to cell death. Autophagy impairment enhances NLRP3 inflammasome activation and IL-1β/IL-18 release, while FGF21 and adiponectin modulate AMPK-dependent cardioprotective responses. These dynamic changes support the diagnostic and prognostic relevance of autophagy-related biomarkers in acute myocardial infarction.
Figure 2. Autophagic response in cardiomyocites during ischemia and ischemia/reperfusion injury. Early ischemia activates AMPK and inhibits mTOR, promoting Beclin-1-Vps34 signaling, ATG5-ATG7 conjugation, LC£-I to LC3-II conversion, and autophagosome formation. In this adaptive phase, autophagy supports mitophagy and cardiomyocyte survival. During reperfusion, ROS generation and Ca2+ overload induce Beclin-1 overactivation and impaired lysosomal clearance, resulting in defective autophagic flux and autophagosome accumulation, contributing to cell death. Autophagy impairment enhances NLRP3 inflammasome activation and IL-1β/IL-18 release, while FGF21 and adiponectin modulate AMPK-dependent cardioprotective responses. These dynamic changes support the diagnostic and prognostic relevance of autophagy-related biomarkers in acute myocardial infarction.
Ijms 27 02116 g002
Table 1. Overview of Included Studies Reporting Autophagy Biomarkers Implicated in Acute Myocardial Infarction.
Table 1. Overview of Included Studies Reporting Autophagy Biomarkers Implicated in Acute Myocardial Infarction.
ArticlesBiomarkerSample SourceTissue TypeMethodsResults
1Mo, Yipeng et al. [15]CHRFMale Sprague–Dawley rats
(n = 6 per group, total 5 groups)		Myocardial tissueRT-qPCR, RNA pull-down, luciferase assay, TUNEL, TTC staining, MTT assayUpregulation of CHRF in ischemia–reperfusion injury (I/R).
Silencing CHRF leads to decrease in the size of infarct, LDH, apoptosis, and autophagy markers, which indicate a protective effect.
ATG7H9C2 ratCardiomyoblast cellsRT-qPCR, Western blot, luciferase assayATG7 is a direct target of miR-182-5p. CHRF indirectly increases ATG7. Overexpression of ATG7 restores autophagy even when CHRF is silenced.
LC3-II/I, p62H9C2 ratCardiomyoblast cellsWestern blot, GFP-LC3 immunofluorescenceLC3-II/I is increased and p62 decreased under I/R (indicating enhanced autophagy). These changes are reversed by CHRF knockdown.
2Bullón, Pedro, et al. [16]NLRP3H9C2 ratCardiomyoblast cellsqPCR (SYBR Green)Higher mRNA expression in AMI patients compared to controls. Indicates inflammation and autophagy impairment in cardiac ischemia.
MAP-LC3AMI patients 6 months after the attack (n = 150)
and controls (109 healthy men)		Blood mononuclear cellsqPCR (SYBR Green)Lower gene expression in AMI group, suggesting reduced autophagic activity.
IL-1βAMI patients 6 months after the attack (n = 150)
and controls (109 healthy men)		Blood mononuclear cellsELISAElevated IL-1β in AMI patients; correlated with inflammasome activation and cardiovascular risk.
3Kong, Min Gyu, et al. [17]
-
LC3-II
-
ATG5
-
Beclin-1
AMI patients 6 months after the attack (n = 150)
and controls (109 healthy men)		Blood mononuclear cellsELISALC3-II, ATG5, and Beclin-1 levels are significantly higher in AMI patients.
4Grazide et al. [18]ATG5 and Beclin 122 AMI patients, 19 controlsHuman serum, peripheral artery and coronary artery before coronary revascularizationELISAThe circulating concentrations of ATG5 and Beclin 1 were lower in AMI patients compared with control subject.
5Ma et al. [10]Beclin 1AMI patients (n = 100) and control subjects (n = 99)
at high cardiovascular risk but without known coronary disease.		BloodImmunoblotsIschemia/reperfusion injury impairs autophagosome clearance mediated in part by reactive oxygen species–induced decline in lysosome-associated membrane protein-2 and upregulation of Beclin 1, contributing to increased cardiomyocyte death.
6Zhang et al. [19]FGF21Adult male cardiomyocyte-specific green fluorescent protein–light chain-3 (GFP-LC3) transgenic mice and C57BL/6 mice.Myocardial tissueELISAFGF21 levels reached the maximum within approximately 24 h after the onset of AMI and remained high on the 3rd and 7th days
7Sunaga et al. [20]FGF21Samples collected from 55 AMI patients and 45 non-AMI control patients on the 1st day. All patients were followed-up within 30 days.BloodWestern blot analysis and ELISASerum FGF21 levels are rapidly elevated upon onset of AMI.
AMI patients had higher serum FGF21 levels on admission than SAP.
8Cheng et al. [21]FGF21A total of 93 patients, 43 were diagnosed as SAP, and 50 were as AMI.
Also, experiments using mice model of myocardial ischemia were used.		BloodELISAFGF21 levels on admission were significantly higher in UAP patients than controls, and also higher than SAP patients.
9Sinha et al. [22]FGF21A total of 197 subjects were categorized into:
66 subjects with SAP, 76 subjects with UAP, 55 control subjects with normal coronary artery findings		BloodELISAThe case group had considerably higher levels of FGF21 compared to the control group.
10Shibata et al. [23]AdiponectinThe study enrolled a total of 110 subjects, of which 70 were in case groups (patients with SAP having atherosclerotic lesions on angiography) and 40 were in the control group.BloodPlasma adiponectin by ELISA.
Heart adiponectin: by immunohistochemical, Western blot and real-time PCR analyses.		Adiponectin accumulates in the heart following ischemic damage primarily through leakage from the vascular compartment, and that adiponectin has a longer half-life in damaged heart tissue than in plasma
11Kumada et al. [24]AdiponectinWild-type (WT) and adiponectin-knockout (APN-KO) micePlasma, Myocardial tissueELISAMale patients with hypoadiponectinemia had a significant 2-fold increase in CAD prevalence, independent of well-known CAD risk factors.
12Kojima et al. [25]Adiponectin225 male patients were enrolled from inpatients who underwent coronary angiography. Voluntary blood donors (n = 225) matched for age served as controls.BloodELISAPlasma adiponectin concentrations in the patients with AMI on admission were significantly lower than those in the control subjects.
13Liu et al. [26]WIPI134 patients with AMI, and the control group consisted of 35 subjects who had
atypical chest pain at rest, or with some exercise, but had no significant coronary artery stenosis (<25% of luminal diameter) and no coronary spasm.		BloodPolymerase chain reaction and Western blotsProtein WIPI1 specifically expressed in heart was significantly increased within an hour after AMI.
14Grazide et al. [27]RubiconThirty male mice (8 weeks old) were randomly divided into different experimental groupsMyocardial tissueELISASignificantly elevated plasma Rubicon levels in AMI patients compared to the control group Multivariate analysis confirmed that Rubicon levels were independently associated with an increased risk of MI.
CHRF: Cardiac Hypertrophy–Related Factor; ATG7; autophagy-related gene; TTC: Triphenyltetrazolium Chloride; TUNEL: Terminal Deoxynucleotidyl Transferase dUTP Nick End Labeling; MTT: 3-(4,5-dimethylthiazol-2-yl)-2,5-diphenyltetrazolium bromide assay; LDH: Lactate Dehydrogenase; qPCR: Quantitative Polymerase Chain Reaction; NLRP3: NLR family pyrin domain containing 3; AMI: Acute Myocardial Infarction; MAP-LC3: 1-Microtubule-associated protein light chain 3; IL-1β: Interleukin-1 beta; ELISA: Enzyme-Linked Immunosorbent Assay; ATG5: Autophagy-related gene 5; FGF21: Fibroblast growth factor 21; SAP: stable angina pectoris; UAP: unstable angina pectoris; CAD: Coronary artery disease; WIPI1: WD repeat domain phosphoinositide-interacting protein 1.
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Radaelli, D.; Alshaeb, A.; Al-Habash, I.; Belakaposka Srpanova, V.; Jakovski, Z.; Sinagra, G.; Mihic, A.G.; D’Errico, S. Reading the Signature of Autophagy in the Ischemic and Infarcted Heart: A Systematic Review of Circulating Biomarkers. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2026, 27, 2116. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms27052116

AMA Style

Radaelli D, Alshaeb A, Al-Habash I, Belakaposka Srpanova V, Jakovski Z, Sinagra G, Mihic AG, D’Errico S. Reading the Signature of Autophagy in the Ischemic and Infarcted Heart: A Systematic Review of Circulating Biomarkers. International Journal of Molecular Sciences. 2026; 27(5):2116. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms27052116

Chicago/Turabian Style

Radaelli, Davide, Asma Alshaeb, Ibrahim Al-Habash, Viktorija Belakaposka Srpanova, Zlatko Jakovski, Gianfranco Sinagra, Anita Galic Mihic, and Stefano D’Errico. 2026. "Reading the Signature of Autophagy in the Ischemic and Infarcted Heart: A Systematic Review of Circulating Biomarkers" International Journal of Molecular Sciences 27, no. 5: 2116. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms27052116

APA Style

Radaelli, D., Alshaeb, A., Al-Habash, I., Belakaposka Srpanova, V., Jakovski, Z., Sinagra, G., Mihic, A. G., & D’Errico, S. (2026). Reading the Signature of Autophagy in the Ischemic and Infarcted Heart: A Systematic Review of Circulating Biomarkers. International Journal of Molecular Sciences, 27(5), 2116. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms27052116

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop