Category Archives: Induced Pluripotent Stem Cells

Induced Pluripotent Stem Cells (iPS) – UCLA Broad Stem Cell

iPSC are derived from skin or blood cells that have been reprogrammed back into an embryonic-like pluripotent state that enables the development of an unlimited source of any type of human cell needed for therapeutic purposes. For example, iPSC can be prodded into becoming beta islet cells to treat diabetes, blood cells to create new blood free of cancer cells for a leukemia patient, or neurons to treat neurological disorders.

In late 2007, a BSCRC team of faculty, Drs. Kathrin Plath, William Lowry, Amander Clark, and April Pyle were among the first in the world to create human iPSC. At that time, science had long understood that tissue specific cells, such as skin cells or blood cells, could only create other like cells. With this groundbreaking discovery, iPSC research has quickly become the foundation for a new regenerative medicine.

Using iPSC technology our faculty have reprogrammed skin cells into active motor neurons, egg and sperm precursors, liver cells, bone precursors, and blood cells. In addition, patients with untreatable diseases such as, ALS, Rett Syndrome, Lesch-Nyhan Disease, and Duchenne's Muscular Dystrophy donate skin cells to BSCRC scientists for iPSC reprogramming research. The generous participation of patients and their families in this research enables BSCRC scientists to study these diseases in the laboratory in the hope of developing new treatment technologies.

Follow this link:
Induced Pluripotent Stem Cells (iPS) - UCLA Broad Stem Cell

Induced stem cells – Wikipedia

Induced stem cells (iSC) are stem cells derived from somatic, reproductive, pluripotent or other cell types by deliberate epigenetic reprogramming. They are classified as either totipotent (iTC), pluripotent (iPSC) or progenitor (multipotentiMSC, also called an induced multipotent progenitor celliMPC) or unipotent(iUSC) according to their developmental potential and degree of dedifferentiation. Progenitors are obtained by so-called direct reprogramming or directed differentiation and are also called induced somatic stem cells.

Three techniques are widely recognized:[1]

In 1895 Thomas Morgan removed one of a frog's two blastomeres and found that amphibians are able to form whole embryos from the remaining part. This meant that the cells can change their differentiation pathway. In 1924 Spemann and Mangold demonstrated the key importance of cellcell inductions during animal development.[20] The reversible transformation of cells of one differentiated cell type to another is called metaplasia.[21] This transition can be a part of the normal maturation process, or caused by an inducement.

One example is the transformation of iris cells to lens cells in the process of maturation and transformation of retinal pigment epithelium cells into the neural retina during regeneration in adult newt eyes. This process allows the body to replace cells not suitable to new conditions with more suitable new cells. In Drosophila imaginal discs, cells have to choose from a limited number of standard discrete differentiation states. The fact that transdetermination (change of the path of differentiation) often occurs for a group of cells rather than single cells shows that it is induced rather than part of maturation.[22]

The researchers were able to identify the minimal conditions and factors that would be sufficient for starting the cascade of molecular and cellular processes to instruct pluripotent cells to organize the embryo. They showed that opposing gradients of bone morphogenetic protein (BMP) and Nodal, two transforming growth factor family members that act as morphogens, are sufficient to induce molecular and cellular mechanisms required to organize, in vivo or in vitro, uncommitted cells of the zebrafish blastula animal pole into a well-developed embryo.[23]

Some types of mature, specialized adult cells can naturally revert to stem cells. For example, "chief" cells express the stem cell marker Troy. While they normally produce digestive fluids for the stomach, they can revert into stem cells to make temporary repairs to stomach injuries, such as a cut or damage from infection. Moreover, they can make this transition even in the absence of noticeable injuries and are capable of replenishing entire gastric units, in essence serving as quiescent "reserve" stem cells.[24] Differentiated airway epithelial cells can revert into stable and functional stem cells in vivo.[25]

After injury, mature terminally differentiated kidney cells dedifferentiate into more primordial versions of themselves and then differentiate into the cell types needing replacement in the damaged tissue[26] Macrophages can self-renew by local proliferation of mature differentiated cells.[27][28] In newts, muscle tissue is regenerated from specialized muscle cells that dedifferentiate and forget the type of cell they had been. This capacity to regenerate does not decline with age and may be linked to their ability to make new stem cells from muscle cells on demand.[29]

A variety of nontumorigenic stem cells display the ability to generate multiple cell types. For instance, multilineage-differentiating stress-enduring (Muse) cells are stress-tolerant adult human stem cells that can self-renew. They form characteristic cell clusters in suspension culture that express a set of genes associated with pluripotency and can differentiate into endodermal, ectodermal and mesodermal cells both in vitro and in vivo.[30][31][32][33][34]

Other well-documented examples of transdifferentiation and their significance in development and regeneration were described in detail.[35][36]

Induced totipotent cells can be obtained by reprogramming somatic cells with somatic-cell nuclear transfer (SCNT). The process involves sucking out the nucleus of a somatic (body) cell and injecting it into an oocyte that has had its nucleus removed[3][5][37][38]

Using an approach based on the protocol outlined by Tachibana et al.,[3] hESCs can be generated by SCNT using dermal fibroblasts nuclei from both a middle-aged 35-year-old male and an elderly, 75-year-old male, suggesting that age-associated changes are not necessarily an impediment to SCNT-based nuclear reprogramming of human cells.[39] Such reprogramming of somatic cells to a pluripotent state holds huge potentials for regenerative medicine. Unfortunately, the cells generated by this technology, potentially are not completely protected from the immune system of the patient (donor of nuclei), because they have the same mitochondrial DNA, as a donor of oocytes, instead of the patients mitochondrial DNA. This reduces their value as a source for autologous stem cell transplantation therapy, as for the present, it is not clear whether it can induce an immune response of the patient upon treatment.

Induced androgenetic haploid embryonic stem cells can be used instead of sperm for cloning. These cells, synchronized in M phase and injected into the oocyte can produce viable offspring.[40]

These developments, together with data on the possibility of unlimited oocytes from mitotically active reproductive stem cells,[41] offer the possibility of industrial production of transgenic farm animals. Repeated recloning of viable mice through a SCNT method that includes a histone deacetylase inhibitor, trichostatin, added to the cell culture medium,[42] show that it may be possible to reclone animals indefinitely with no visible accumulation of reprogramming or genomic errors[43] However, research into technologies to develop sperm and egg cells from stem cells raises bioethical issues.[44]

Such technologies may also have far-reaching clinical applications for overcoming cytoplasmic defects in human oocytes.[3][45] For example, the technology could prevent inherited mitochondrial disease from passing to future generations. Mitochondrial genetic material is passed from mother to child. Mutations can cause diabetes, deafness, eye disorders, gastrointestinal disorders, heart disease, dementia and other neurological diseases. The nucleus from one human egg has been transferred to another, including its mitochondria, creating a cell that could be regarded as having two mothers. The eggs were then fertilised and the resulting embryonic stem cells carried the swapped mitochondrial DNA.[46] As evidence that the technique is safe author of this method points to the existence of the healthy monkeys that are now more than four years old and are the product of mitochondrial transplants across different genetic backgrounds.[47]

In late-generation telomerase-deficient (Terc/) mice, SCNT-mediated reprogramming mitigates telomere dysfunction and mitochondrial defects to a greater extent than iPSC-based reprogramming.[48]

Other cloning and totipotent transformation achievements have been described.[49]

Recently some researchers succeeded to get the totipotent cells without the aid of SCNT. Totipotent cells were obtained using the epigenetic factors such as oocyte germinal isoform of histone.[50] Reprogramming in vivo, by transitory induction of the four factors Oct4, Sox2, Klf4 and c-Myc in mice, confers totipotency features. Intraperitoneal injection of such in vivo iPS cells generates embryo-like structures that express embryonic and extraembryonic (trophectodermal) markers.[51]

iPSc were first obtained in the form of transplantable teratocarcinoma induced by grafts taken from mouse embryos.[52] Teratocarcinoma formed from somatic cells.[53]Genetically mosaic mice were obtained from malignant teratocarcinoma cells, confirming the cells' pluripotency.[54][55][56] It turned out that teratocarcinoma cells are able to maintain a culture of pluripotent embryonic stem cell in an undifferentiated state, by supplying the culture medium with various factors.[57] In the 1980s, it became clear that transplanting pluripotent/embryonic stem cells into the body of adult mammals, usually leads to the formation of teratomas, which can then turn into a malignant tumor teratocarcinoma.[58] However, putting teratocarcinoma cells into the embryo at the blastocyst stage, caused them to become incorporated in the inner cell mass and often produced a normal chimeric (i.e. composed of cells from different organisms) animal.[59][60][61] This indicated that the cause of the teratoma is a dissonance - mutual miscommunication between young donor cells and surrounding adult cells (the recipient's so-called "niche").

In August 2006, Japanese researchers circumvented the need for an oocyte, as in SCNT. By reprograming mouse embryonic fibroblasts into pluripotent stem cells via the ectopic expression of four transcription factors, namely Oct4, Sox2, Klf4 and c-Myc, they proved that the overexpression of a small number of factors can push the cell to transition to a new stable state that is associated with changes in the activity of thousands of genes.[7]

Reprogramming mechanisms are thus linked, rather than independent and are centered on a small number of genes.[62] IPSC properties are very similar to ESCs.[63] iPSCs have been shown to support the development of all-iPSC mice using a tetraploid (4n) embryo,[64] the most stringent assay for developmental potential. However, some genetically normal iPSCs failed to produce all-iPSC mice because of aberrant epigenetic silencing of the imprinted Dlk1-Dio3 gene cluster.[18]

An important advantage of iPSC over ESC is that they can be derived from adult cells, rather than from embryos. Therefore, it became possible to obtain iPSC from adult and even elderly patients.[9][65][66]

Reprogramming somatic cells to iPSC leads to rejuvenation. It was found that reprogramming leads to telomere lengthening and subsequent shortening after their differentiation back into fibroblast-like derivatives.[67] Thus, reprogramming leads to the restoration of embryonic telomere length,[68] and hence increases the potential number of cell divisions otherwise limited by the Hayflick limit.[69]

However, because of the dissonance between rejuvenated cells and the surrounding niche of the recipient's older cells, the injection of his own iPSC usually leads to an immune response,[70] which can be used for medical purposes,[71] or the formation of tumors such as teratoma.[72] The reason has been hypothesized to be that some cells differentiated from ESC and iPSC in vivo continue to synthesize embryonic protein isoforms.[73] So, the immune system might detect and attack cells that are not cooperating properly.

A small molecule called MitoBloCK-6 can force the pluripotent stem cells to die by triggering apoptosis (via cytochrome c release across the mitochondrial outer membrane) in human pluripotent stem cells, but not in differentiated cells. Shortly after differentiation, daughter cells became resistant to death. When MitoBloCK-6 was introduced to differentiated cell lines, the cells remained healthy. The key to their survival, was hypothesized to be due to the changes undergone by pluripotent stem cell mitochondria in the process of cell differentiation. This ability of MitoBloCK-6 to separate the pluripotent and differentiated cell lines has the potential to reduce the risk of teratomas and other problems in regenerative medicine.[74]

In 2012 other small molecules (selective cytotoxic inhibitors of human pluripotent stem cellshPSCs) were identified that prevented human pluripotent stem cells from forming teratomas in mice. The most potent and selective compound of them (PluriSIn #1) inhibits stearoyl-coA desaturase (the key enzyme in oleic acid biosynthesis), which finally results in apoptosis. With the help of this molecule the undifferentiated cells can be selectively removed from culture.[75][76] An efficient strategy to selectively eliminate pluripotent cells with teratoma potential is targeting pluripotent stem cell-specific antiapoptotic factor(s) (i.e., survivin or Bcl10). A single treatment with chemical survivin inhibitors (e.g., quercetin or YM155) can induce selective and complete cell death of undifferentiated hPSCs and is claimed to be sufficient to prevent teratoma formation after transplantation.[77] However, it is unlikely that any kind of preliminary clearance,[78] is able to secure the replanting iPSC or ESC. After the selective removal of pluripotent cells, they re-emerge quickly by reverting differentiated cells into stem cells, which leads to tumors.[79] This may be due to the disorder of let-7 regulation of its target Nr6a1 (also known as Germ cell nuclear factor - GCNF), an embryonic transcriptional repressor of pluripotency genes that regulates gene expression in adult fibroblasts following micro-RNA miRNA loss.[80]

Teratoma formation by pluripotent stem cells may be caused by low activity of PTEN enzyme, reported to promote the survival of a small population (0,1-5% of total population) of highly tumorigenic, aggressive, teratoma-initiating embryonic-like carcinoma cells during differentiation. The survival of these teratoma-initiating cells is associated with failed repression of Nanog as well as a propensity for increased glucose and cholesterol metabolism.[81] These teratoma-initiating cells also expressed a lower ratio of p53/p21 when compared to non-tumorigenic cells.[82] In connection with the above safety problems, the use iPSC for cell therapy is still limited.[83] However, they can be used for a variety of other purposes - including the modeling of disease,[84] screening (selective selection) of drugs, toxicity testing of various drugs.[85]

It is interesting to note that the tissue grown from iPSCs, placed in the "chimeric" embryos in the early stages of mouse development, practically do not cause an immune response (after the embryos have grown into adult mice) and are suitable for autologous transplantation[86] At the same time, full reprogramming of adult cells in vivo within tissues by transitory induction of the four factors Oct4, Sox2, Klf4 and c-Myc in mice results in teratomas emerging from multiple organs.[51] Furthermore, partial reprogramming of cells toward pluripotency in vivo in mice demonstrates that incomplete reprogramming entails epigenetic changes (failed repression of Polycomb targets and altered DNA methylation) in cells that drive cancer development.[87]

Determining the unique set of cellular factors that is needed to be manipulated for each cell conversion is a long and costly process that involved much trial and error. As a result, this first step of identifying the key set of cellular factors for cell conversion is the major obstacle researchers face in the field of cell reprogramming. An international team of researchers have developed an algorithm, called Mogrify(1), that can predict the optimal set of cellular factors required to convert one human cell type to another. When tested, Mogrify was able to accurately predict the set of cellular factors required for previously published cell conversions correctly. To further validate Mogrify's predictive ability, the team conducted two novel cell conversions in the laboratory using human cells and these were successful in both attempts solely using the predictions of Mogrify.[89][90][91] Mogrify has been made available online for other researchers and scientists.

By using solely small molecules, Deng Hongkui and colleagues demonstrated that endogenous "master genes" are enough for cell fate reprogramming. They induced a pluripotent state in adult cells from mice using seven small-molecule compounds.[17] The effectiveness of the method is quite high: it was able to convert 0.02% of the adult tissue cells into iPSCs, which is comparable to the gene insertion conversion rate. The authors note that the mice generated from CiPSCs were "100% viable and apparently healthy for up to 6 months". So, this chemical reprogramming strategy has potential use in generating functional desirable cell types for clinical applications.[92][93]

In 2015th year a robust chemical reprogramming system was established with a yield up to 1,000-fold greater than that of the previously reported protocol. So, chemical reprogramming became a promising approach to manipulate cell fates.[94]

The fact that human iPSCs capable of forming teratomas not only in humans but also in some animal body, in particular in mice or pigs, allowed to develop a method for differentiation of iPSCs in vivo. For this purpose, iPSCs with an agent for inducing differentiation into target cells are injected to genetically modified pig or mouse that has suppressed immune system activation on human cells. The formed teratoma is cut out and used for the isolation of the necessary differentiated human cells[95] by means of monoclonal antibody to tissue-specific markers on the surface of these cells. This method has been successfully used for the production of functional myeloid, erythroid and lymphoid human cells suitable for transplantation (yet only to mice).[96] Mice engrafted with human iPSC teratoma-derived hematopoietic cells produced human B and T cells capable of functional immune responses. These results offer hope that in vivo generation of patient customized cells is feasible, providing materials that could be useful for transplantation, human antibody generation and drug screening applications. Using MitoBloCK-6[74] and/or PluriSIn # 1 the differentiated progenitor cells can be further purified from teratoma forming pluripotent cells. The fact, that the differentiation takes place even in the teratoma niche, offers hope that the resulting cells are sufficiently stable to stimuli able to cause their transition back to the dedifferentiated (pluripotent) state and therefore safe. A similar in vivo differentiation system, yielding engraftable hematopoietic stem cells from mouse and human iPSCs in teratoma-bearing animals in combination with a maneuver to facilitate hematopoiesis, was described by Suzuki et al.[97] They noted that neither leukemia nor tumors were observed in recipients after intravenous injection of iPSC-derived hematopoietic stem cells into irradiated recipients. Moreover, this injection resulted in multilineage and long-term reconstitution of the hematolymphopoietic system in serial transfers. Such system provides a useful tool for practical application of iPSCs in the treatment of hematologic and immunologic diseases.[98]

For further development of this method animal in which is grown the human cell graft, for example mouse, must have so modified genome that all its cells express and have on its surface human SIRP.[99] To prevent rejection after transplantation to the patient of the allogenic organ or tissue, grown from the pluripotent stem cells in vivo in the animal, these cells should express two molecules: CTLA4-Ig, which disrupts T cell costimulatory pathways and PD-L1, which activates T cell inhibitory pathway.[100]

See also: US 20130058900 patent.

In the near-future, clinical trials designed to demonstrate the safety of the use of iPSCs for cell therapy of the people with age-related macular degeneration, a disease causing blindness through retina damaging, will begin. There are several articles describing methods for producing retinal cells from iPSCs[101][102] and how to use them for cell therapy.[103][104] Reports of iPSC-derived retinal pigmented epithelium transplantation showed enhanced visual-guided behaviors of experimental animals for 6 weeks after transplantation.[105] However, clinical trials have been successful: ten patients suffering from retinitis pigmentosa have had their eyesight restoredincluding a woman who had only 17 percent of her vision left.[106]

Chronic lung diseases such as idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis and cystic fibrosis or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and asthma are leading causes of morbidity and mortality worldwide with a considerable human, societal and financial burden. So there is an urgent need for effective cell therapy and lung tissue engineering.[107][108] Several protocols have been developed for generation of the most cell types of the respiratory system, which may be useful for deriving patient-specific therapeutic cells.[109][110][111][112][113]

Some lines of iPSCs have the potentiality to differentiate into male germ cells and oocyte-like cells in an appropriate niche (by culturing in retinoic acid and porcine follicular fluid differentiation medium or seminiferous tubule transplantation). Moreover, iPSC transplantation make a contribution to repairing the testis of infertile mice, demonstrating the potentiality of gamete derivation from iPSCs in vivo and in vitro.[114]

The risk of cancer and tumors creates the need to develop methods for safer cell lines suitable for clinical use. An alternative approach is so-called "direct reprogramming" - transdifferentiation of cells without passing through the pluripotent state.[115][116][117][118][119][120] The basis for this approach was that 5-azacytidine - a DNA demethylation reagent - can cause the formation of myogenic, chondrogenic and adipogeni clones in the immortal cell line of mouse embryonic fibroblasts[121] and that the activation of a single gene, later named MyoD1, is sufficient for such reprogramming.[122] Compared with iPSC whose reprogramming requires at least two weeks, the formation of induced progenitor cells sometimes occurs within a few days and the efficiency of reprogramming is usually many times higher. This reprogramming does not always require cell division.[123] The cells resulting from such reprogramming are more suitable for cell therapy because they do not form teratomas.[120] For example, Chandrakanthan et al., & Pimanda describe the generation of tissue-regenerative multipotent stem cells (iMS cells) by treating mature bone and fat cells transiently with a growth factor (platelet-derived growth factorAB (PDGF-AB)) and 5-Azacytidine. These authors claim that: "Unlike primary mesenchymal stem cells, which are used with little objective evidence in clinical practice to promote tissue repair, iMS cells contribute directly to in vivo tissue regeneration in a context-dependent manner without forming tumors" and so "has significant scope for application in tissue regeneration."[124][125][126]

Originally only early embryonic cells could be coaxed into changing their identity. Mature cells are resistant to changing their identity once they've committed to a specific kind. However, brief expression of a single transcription factor, the ELT-7 GATA factor, can convert the identity of fully differentiated, specialized non-endodermal cells of the pharynx into fully differentiated intestinal cells in intact larvae and adult roundworm Caenorhabditis elegans with no requirement for a dedifferentiated intermediate.[127]

The cell fate can be effectively manipulated by directly activating of specific endogenous gene expression with CRISPR-mediated activator. When dCas9 (that has been modified so that it no longer cuts DNA, but still can be guided to specific sequences and to bind to them) is combined with transcription activators, it can precisely manipulate endogenous gene expression. Using this method, Wei et al., enhanced the expression of endogenous Cdx2 and Gata6 genes by CRISPR-mediated activators, thus directly converted mouse embryonic stem cells into two extraembryonic lineages, i.e., typical trophoblast stem cells and extraembryonic endoderm cells.[128] An analogous approach was used to induce activation of the endogenous Brn2, Ascl1, and Myt1l genes to convert mouse embryonic fibroblasts to induced neuronal cells.[129] Thus, transcriptional activation and epigenetic remodeling of endogenous master transcription factors are sufficient for conversion between cell types. The rapid and sustained activation of endogenous genes in their native chromatin context by this approach may facilitate reprogramming with transient methods that avoid genomic integration and provides a new strategy for overcoming epigenetic barriers to cell fate specification.

Another way of reprogramming is the simulation of the processes that occur during amphibian limb regeneration. In urodele amphibians, an early step in limb regeneration is skeletal muscle fiber dedifferentiation into a cellulate that proliferates into limb tissue. However, sequential small molecule treatment of the muscle fiber with myoseverin, reversine (the aurora B kinase inhibitor) and some other chemicals: BIO (glycogen synthase-3 kinase inhibitor), lysophosphatidic acid (pleiotropic activator of G-protein-coupled receptors), SB203580 (p38 MAP kinase inhibitor), or SQ22536 (adenylyl cyclase inhibitor) causes the formation of new muscle cell types as well as other cell types such as precursors to fat, bone and nervous system cells.[130]

The researchers discovered that GCSF-mimicking antibody can activate a growth-stimulating receptor on marrow cells in a way that induces marrow stem cells that normally develop into white blood cells to become neural progenitor cells. The technique[131] enables researchers to search large libraries of antibodies and quickly select the ones with a desired biological effect.[132]

Schlegel and Liu[133] demonstrated that the combination of feeder cells[134][135][136] and a Rho kinase inhibitor (Y-27632) [137][138] induces normal and tumor epithelial cells from many tissues to proliferate indefinitely in vitro. This process occurs without the need for transduction of exogenous viral or cellular genes. These cells have been termed "Conditionally Reprogrammed Cells (CRC)". The induction of CRCs is rapid and results from reprogramming of the entire cell population. CRCs do not express high levels of proteins characteristic of iPSCs or embryonic stem cells (ESCs) (e.g., Sox2, Oct4, Nanog, or Klf4). This induction of CRCs is reversible and removal of Y-27632 and feeders allows the cells to differentiate normally.[133][139][140] CRC technology can generate 2106 cells in 5 to 6 days from needle biopsies and can generate cultures from cryopreserved tissue and from fewer than four viable cells. CRCs retain a normal karyotype and remain nontumorigenic. This technique also efficiently establishes cell cultures from human and rodent tumors.[133][141][142]

The ability to rapidly generate many tumor cells from small biopsy specimens and frozen tissue provides significant opportunities for cell-based diagnostics and therapeutics (including chemosensitivity testing) and greatly expands the value of biobanking.[133][141][142] Using CRC technology, researchers were able to identify an effective therapy for a patient with a rare type of lung tumor.[143] Engleman's group[144] describes a pharmacogenomic platform that facilitates rapid discovery of drug combinations that can overcome resistance using CRC system. In addition, the CRC method allows for the genetic manipulation of epithelial cells ex vivo and their subsequent evaluation in vivo in the same host. While initial studies revealed that co-culturing epithelial cells with Swiss 3T3 cells J2 was essential for CRC induction, with transwell culture plates, physical contact between feeders and epithelial cells is not required for inducing CRCs and more importantly that irradiation of the feeder cells is required for this induction. Consistent with the transwell experiments, conditioned medium induces and maintains CRCs, which is accompanied by a concomitant increase of cellular telomerase activity. The activity of the conditioned medium correlates directly with radiation-induced feeder cell apoptosis. Thus, conditional reprogramming of epithelial cells is mediated by a combination of Y-27632 and a soluble factor(s) released by apoptotic feeder cells.[145]

Riegel et al.[146] demonstrate that mouse ME cells isolated from normal mammary glands or from mouse mammary tumor virus (MMTV)-Neuinduced mammary tumors, can be cultured indefinitely as conditionally reprogrammed cells (CRCs). Cell surface progenitor-associated markers are rapidly induced in normal mouse ME-CRCs relative to ME cells. However, the expression of certain mammary progenitor subpopulations, such as CD49f+ ESA+ CD44+, drops significantly in later passages. Nevertheless, mouse ME-CRCs grown in a three-dimensional extracellular matrix gave rise to mammary acinar structures. ME-CRCs isolated from MMTV-Neu transgenic mouse mammary tumors express high levels of HER2/neu, as well as tumor-initiating cell markers, such as CD44+, CD49f+ and ESA+ (EpCam). These patterns of expression are sustained in later CRC passages. Early and late passage ME-CRCs from MMTV-Neu tumors that were implanted in the mammary fat pads of syngeneic or nude mice developed vascular tumors that metastasized within 6 weeks of transplantation. Importantly, the histopathology of these tumors was indistinguishable from that of the parental tumors that develop in the MMTV-Neu mice. Application of the CRC system to mouse mammary epithelial cells provides an attractive model system to study the genetics and phenotype of normal and transformed mouse epithelium in a defined culture environment and in vivo transplant studies.

A different approach to CRC is to inhibit CD47a membrane protein that is the thrombospondin-1 receptor. Loss of CD47 permits sustained proliferation of primary murine endothelial cells, increases asymmetric division and enables these cells to spontaneously reprogram to form multipotent embryoid body-like clusters. CD47 knockdown acutely increases mRNA levels of c-Myc and other stem cell transcription factors in cells in vitro and in vivo. Thrombospondin-1 is a key environmental signal that inhibits stem cell self-renewal via CD47. Thus, CD47 antagonists enable cell self-renewal and reprogramming by overcoming negative regulation of c-Myc and other stem cell transcription factors.[147] In vivo blockade of CD47 using an antisense morpholino increases survival of mice exposed to lethal total body irradiation due to increased proliferative capacity of bone marrow-derived cells and radioprotection of radiosensitive gastrointestinal tissues.[148]

Differentiated macrophages can self-renew in tissues and expand long-term in culture.[27] Under certain conditions macrophages can divide without losing features they have acquired while specializing into immune cells - which is usually not possible with differentiated cells. The macrophages achieve this by activating a gene network similar to one found in embryonic stem cells. Single-cell analysis revealed that, in vivo, proliferating macrophages can derepress a macrophage-specific enhancer repertoire associated with a gene network controlling self-renewal. This happened when concentrations of two transcription factors named MafB and c-Maf were naturally low or were inhibited for a short time. Genetic manipulations that turned off MafB and c-Maf in the macrophages caused the cells to start a self-renewal program. The similar network also controls embryonic stem cell self-renewal but is associated with distinct embryonic stem cell-specific enhancers.[28]

Hence macrophages isolated from MafB- and c-Maf-double deficient mice divide indefinitely; the self-renewal depends on c-Myc and Klf4.[149]

Indirect lineage conversion is a reprogramming methodology in which somatic cells transition through a plastic intermediate state of partially reprogrammed cells (pre-iPSC), induced by brief exposure to reprogramming factors, followed by differentiation in a specially developed chemical environment (artificial niche).[150]

This method could be both more efficient and safer, since it does not seem to produce tumors or other undesirable genetic changes and results in much greater yield than other methods. However, the safety of these cells remains questionable. Since lineage conversion from pre-iPSC relies on the use of iPSC reprogramming conditions, a fraction of the cells could acquire pluripotent properties if they do not stop the de-differentation process in vitro or due to further de-differentiation in vivo.[151]

A common feature of pluripotent stem cells is the specific nature of protein glycosylation of their outer membrane. That distinguishes them from most nonpluripotent cells, although not white blood cells.[152] The glycans on the stem cell surface respond rapidly to alterations in cellular state and signaling and are therefore ideal for identifying even minor changes in cell populations. Many stem cell markers are based on cell surface glycan epitopes including the widely used markers SSEA-3, SSEA-4, Tra 1-60 and Tra 1-81.[153] Suila Heli et al.[154] speculate that in human stem cells extracellular O-GlcNAc and extracellular O-LacNAc, play a crucial role in the fine tuning of Notch signaling pathway - a highly conserved cell signaling system, that regulates cell fate specification, differentiation, leftright asymmetry, apoptosis, somitogenesis, angiogenesis and plays a key role in stem cell proliferation (reviewed by Perdigoto and Bardin[155] and Jafar-Nejad et al.[156])

Changes in outer membrane protein glycosylation are markers of cell states connected in some way with pluripotency and differentiation.[157] The glycosylation change is apparently not just the result of the initialization of gene expression, but perform as an important gene regulator involved in the acquisition and maintenance of the undifferentiated state.[158]

For example, activation of glycoprotein ACA,[159] linking glycosylphosphatidylinositol on the surface of the progenitor cells in human peripheral blood, induces increased expression of genes Wnt, Notch-1, BMI1 and HOXB4 through a signaling cascade PI3K/Akt/mTor/PTEN and promotes the formation of a self-renewing population of hematopoietic stem cells.[160]

Furthermore, dedifferentiation of progenitor cells induced by ACA-dependent signaling pathway leads to ACA-induced pluripotent stem cells, capable of differentiating in vitro into cells of all three germ layers.[161] The study of lectins' ability to maintain a culture of pluripotent human stem cells has led to the discovery of lectin Erythrina crista-galli (ECA), which can serve as a simple and highly effective matrix for the cultivation of human pluripotent stem cells.[162]

Cell adhesion protein E-cadherin is indispensable for a robust pluripotent phenotype.[163] During reprogramming for iPS cell generation, N-cadherin can replace function of E-cadherin.[164] These functions of cadherins are not directly related to adhesion because sphere morphology helps maintaining the "stemness" of stem cells.[165] Moreover, sphere formation, due to forced growth of cells on a low attachment surface, sometimes induces reprogramming. For example, neural progenitor cells can be generated from fibroblasts directly through a physical approach without introducing exogenous reprogramming factors.

Physical cues, in the form of parallel microgrooves on the surface of cell-adhesive substrates, can replace the effects of small-molecule epigenetic modifiers and significantly improve reprogramming efficiency. The mechanism relies on the mechanomodulation of the cells' epigenetic state. Specifically, "decreased histone deacetylase activity and upregulation of the expression of WD repeat domain 5 (WDR5)a subunit of H3 methyltranferaseby microgrooved surfaces lead to increased histone H3 acetylation and methylation". Nanofibrous scaffolds with aligned fibre orientation produce effects similar to those produced by microgrooves, suggesting that changes in cell morphology may be responsible for modulation of the epigenetic state.[166]

Substrate rigidity is an important biophysical cue influencing neural induction and subtype specification. For example, soft substrates promote neuroepithelial conversion while inhibiting neural crest differentiation of hESCs in a BMP4-dependent manner. Mechanistic studies revealed a multi-targeted mechanotransductive process involving mechanosensitive Smad phosphorylation and nucleocytoplasmic shuttling, regulated by rigidity-dependent Hippo/YAP activities and actomyosin cytoskeleton integrity and contractility.[167]

Mouse embryonic stem cells (mESCs) undergo self-renewal in the presence of the cytokine leukemia inhibitory factor (LIF). Following LIF withdrawal, mESCs differentiate, accompanied by an increase in cellsubstratum adhesion and cell spreading. Restricted cell spreading in the absence of LIF by either culturing mESCs on chemically defined, weakly adhesive biosubstrates, or by manipulating the cytoskeleton allowed the cells to remain in an undifferentiated and pluripotent state. The effect of restricted cell spreading on mESC self-renewal is not mediated by increased intercellular adhesion, as inhibition of mESC adhesion using a function blocking anti E-cadherin antibody or siRNA does not promote differentiation.[168] Possible mechanisms of stem cell fate predetermination by physical interactions with the extracellular matrix have been described.[169][170]

A new method has been developed that turns cells into stem cells faster and more efficiently by 'squeezing' them using 3D microenvironment stiffness and density of the surrounding gel. The technique can be applied to a large number of cells to produce stem cells for medical purposes on an industrial scale.[171][172]

Cells involved in the reprogramming process change morphologically as the process proceeds. This results in physical difference in adhesive forces among cells. Substantial differences in 'adhesive signature' between pluripotent stem cells, partially reprogrammed cells, differentiated progeny and somatic cells allowed to develop separation process for isolation of pluripotent stem cells in microfluidic devices,[173] which is:

Stem cells possess mechanical memory (they remember past physical signals)with the Hippo signaling pathway factors:[174] Yes-associated protein (YAP) and transcriptional coactivator with PDZ-binding domain (TAZ) acting as an intracellular mechanical rheostatthat stores information from past physical environments and influences the cells' fate.[175][176]

Stroke and many neurodegenerative disorders such as Parkinson's disease, Alzheimer's disease, amyotrophic lateral sclerosis need cell replacement therapy. The successful use of converted neural cells (cNs) in transplantations open a new avenue to treat such diseases.[177] Nevertheless, induced neurons (iNs), directly converted from fibroblasts are terminally committed and exhibit very limited proliferative ability that may not provide enough autologous donor cells for transplantation.[178] Self-renewing induced neural stem cells (iNSCs) provide additional advantages over iNs for both basic research and clinical applications.[118][119][120][179][180]

For example, under specific growth conditions, mouse fibroblasts can be reprogrammed with a single factor, Sox2, to form iNSCs that self-renew in culture and after transplantation can survive and integrate without forming tumors in mouse brains.[181] INSCs can be derived from adult human fibroblasts by non-viral techniques, thus offering a safe method for autologous transplantation or for the development of cell-based disease models.[180]

Neural chemically induced progenitor cells (ciNPCs) can be generated from mouse tail-tip fibroblasts and human urinary somatic cells without introducing exogenous factors, but - by a chemical cocktail, namely VCR (V, VPA, an inhibitor of HDACs; C, CHIR99021, an inhibitor of GSK-3 kinases and R, RepSox, an inhibitor of TGF beta signaling pathways), under a physiological hypoxic condition.[182] Alternative cocktails with inhibitors of histone deacetylation, glycogen synthase kinase and TGF- pathways (where: sodium butyrate (NaB) or Trichostatin A (TSA) could replace VPA, Lithium chloride (LiCl) or lithium carbonate (Li2CO3) could substitute CHIR99021, or Repsox may be replaced with SB-431542 or Tranilast) show similar efficacies for ciNPC induction.[182] Zhang, et al.,[183] also report highly efficient reprogramming of mouse fibroblasts into induced neural stem cell-like cells (ciNSLCs) using a cocktail of nine components.

Multiple methods of direct transformation of somatic cells into induced neural stem cells have been described.[184]

Proof of principle experiments demonstrate that it is possible to convert transplanted human fibroblasts and human astrocytes directly in the brain that are engineered to express inducible forms of neural reprogramming genes, into neurons, when reprogramming genes (Ascl1, Brn2a and Myt1l) are activated after transplantation using a drug.[185]

Astrocytesthe most common neuroglial brain cells, which contribute to scar formation in response to injurycan be directly reprogrammed in vivo to become functional neurons that formed networks in mice without the need of cell transplantation.[186] The researchers followed the mice for nearly a year to look for signs of tumor formation and reported finding none. The same researchers have turned scar-forming astrocytes into progenitor cells called neuroblasts that regenerated into neurons in the injured adult spinal cord.[187]

Without myelin to insulate neurons, nerve signals quickly lose power. Diseases that attack myelin, such as multiple sclerosis, result in nerve signals that cannot propagate to nerve endings and as a consequence lead to cognitive, motor and sensory problems. Transplantation of oligodendrocyte precursor cells (OPCs), which can successfully create myelin sheaths around nerve cells, is a promising potential therapeutic response. Direct lineage conversion of mouse and rat fibroblasts into oligodendroglial cells provides a potential source of OPCs. Conversion by forced expression of both eight[188] or of the three[189] transcription factors Sox10, Olig2 and Zfp536, may provide such cells.

Cell-based in vivo therapies may provide a transformative approach to augment vascular and muscle growth and to prevent non-contractile scar formation by delivering transcription factors[115] or microRNAs[14] to the heart.[190] Cardiac fibroblasts, which represent 50% of the cells in the mammalian heart, can be reprogrammed into cardiomyocyte-like cells in vivo by local delivery of cardiac core transcription factors ( GATA4, MEF2C, TBX5 and for improved reprogramming plus ESRRG, MESP1, Myocardin and ZFPM2) after coronary ligation.[115][191] These results implicated therapies that can directly remuscularize the heart without cell transplantation. However, the efficiency of such reprogramming turned out to be very low and the phenotype of received cardiomyocyte-like cells does not resemble those of a mature normal cardiomyocyte. Furthermore, transplantation of cardiac transcription factors into injured murine hearts resulted in poor cell survival and minimal expression of cardiac genes.[192]

Meanwhile, advances in the methods of obtaining cardiac myocytes in vitro occurred.[193][194] Efficient cardiac differentiation of human iPS cells gave rise to progenitors that were retained within infarcted rat hearts and reduced remodeling of the heart after ischemic damage.[195]

The team of scientists, who were led by Sheng Ding, used a cocktail of nine chemicals (9C) for transdifferentiation of human skin cells into beating heart cells. With this method, more than 97% of the cells began beating, a characteristic of fully developed, healthy heart cells. The chemically induced cardiomyocyte-like cells (ciCMs) uniformly contracted and resembled human cardiomyocytes in their transcriptome, epigenetic, and electrophysiological properties. When transplanted into infarcted mouse hearts, 9C-treated fibroblasts were efficiently converted to ciCMs and developed into healthy-looking heart muscle cells within the organ.[196] This chemical reprogramming approach, after further optimization, may offer an easy way to provide the cues that induce heart muscle to regenerate locally.[197]

In another study, ischemic cardiomyopathy in the murine infarction model was targeted by iPS cell transplantation. It synchronized failing ventricles, offering a regenerative strategy to achieve resynchronization and protection from decompensation by dint of improved left ventricular conduction and contractility, reduced scarring and reversal of structural remodelling.[198] One protocol generated populations of up to 98% cardiomyocytes from hPSCs simply by modulating the canonical Wnt signaling pathway at defined time points in during differentiation, using readily accessible small molecule compounds.[199]

Discovery of the mechanisms controlling the formation of cardiomyocytes led to the development of the drug ITD-1, which effectively clears the cell surface from TGF- receptor type II and selectively inhibits intracellular TGF- signaling. It thus selectively enhances the differentiation of uncommitted mesoderm to cardiomyocytes, but not to vascular smooth muscle and endothelial cells.[200]

One project seeded decellularized mouse hearts with human iPSC-derived multipotential cardiovascular progenitor cells. The introduced cells migrated, proliferated and differentiated in situ into cardiomyocytes, smooth muscle cells and endothelial cells to reconstruct the hearts. In addition, the heart's extracellular matrix (the substrate of heart scaffold) signalled the human cells into becoming the specialised cells needed for proper heart function. After 20 days of perfusion with growth factors, the engineered heart tissues started to beat again and were responsive to drugs.[201]

See also: review[202]

The elderly often suffer from progressive muscle weakness and regenerative failure owing in part to elevated activity of the p38 and p38 mitogen-activated kinase pathway in senescent skeletal muscle stem cells. Subjecting such stem cells to transient inhibition of p38 and p38 in conjunction with culture on soft hydrogel substrates rapidly expands and rejuvenates them that result in the return of their strength.[203]

In geriatric mice, resting satellite cells lose reversible quiescence by switching to an irreversible pre-senescence state, caused by derepression of p16INK4a (also called Cdkn2a). On injury, these cells fail to activate and expand, even in a youthful environment. p16INK4a silencing in geriatric satellite cells restores quiescence and muscle regenerative functions.[204]

Myogenic progenitors for potential use in disease modeling or cell-based therapies targeting skeletal muscle could also be generated directly from induced pluripotent stem cells using free-floating spherical culture (EZ spheres) in a culture medium supplemented with high concentrations (100ng/ml) of fibroblast growth factor-2 (FGF-2) and epidermal growth factor.[205]

Unlike current protocols for deriving hepatocytes from human fibroblasts, Saiyong Zhu et al., (2014)[206] did not generate iPSCs but, using small molecules, cut short reprogramming to pluripotency to generate an induced multipotent progenitor cell (iMPC) state from which endoderm progenitor cells and subsequently hepatocytes (iMPC-Heps) were efficiently differentiated. After transplantation into an immune-deficient mouse model of human liver failure, iMPC-Heps proliferated extensively and acquired levels of hepatocyte function similar to those of human primary adult hepatocytes. iMPC-Heps did not form tumours, most probably because they never entered a pluripotent state.

These results establish the feasibility of significant liver repopulation of mice with human hepatocytes generated in vitro, which removes a long-standing roadblock on the path to autologous liver cell therapy.

Complications of Diabetes mellitus such as cardiovascular diseases, retinopathy, neuropathy, nephropathy and peripheral circulatory diseases depend on sugar dysregulation due to lack of insulin from pancreatic beta cells and can be lethal if they are not treated. One of the promising approaches to understand and cure diabetes is to use pluripotent stem cells (PSCs), including embryonic stem cells (ESCs) and induced PCSs (iPSCs).[207] Unfortunately, human PSC-derived insulin-expressing cells resemble human fetal cells rather than adult cells. In contrast to adult cells, fetal cells seem functionally immature, as indicated by increased basal glucose secretion and lack of glucose stimulation and confirmed by RNA-seq of whose transcripts.[208]

An alternative strategy is the conversion of fibroblasts towards distinct endodermal progenitor cell populations and, using cocktails of signalling factors, successful differentiation of these endodermal progenitor cells into functional beta-like cells both in vitro and in vivo.[209]

Overexpression of the three transcription factors, PDX1 (required for pancreatic bud outgrowth and beta-cell maturation), NGN3 (required for endocrine precursor cell formation) and MAFA (for beta-cell maturation) combination (called PNM) can lead to the transformation of some cell types into a beta cell-like state.[210] An accessible and abundant source of functional insulin-producing cells is intestine. PMN expression in human intestinal "organoids" stimulates the conversion of intestinal epithelial cells into -like cells possibly acceptable for transplantation.[211]

Adult proximal tubule cells were directly transcriptionally reprogrammed to nephron progenitors of the embryonic kidney, using a pool of six genes of instructive transcription factors (SIX1, SIX2, OSR1, Eyes absent homolog 1(EYA1), Homeobox A11 (HOXA11) and Snail homolog 2 (SNAI2)) that activated genes consistent with a cap mesenchyme/nephron progenitor phenotype in the adult proximal tubule cell line.[212] The generation of such cells may lead to cellular therapies for adult renal disease. Embryonic kidney organoids placed into adult rat kidneys can undergo onward development and vascular development.[213]

As blood vessels age, they often become abnormal in structure and function, thereby contributing to numerous age-associated diseases including myocardial infarction, ischemic stroke and atherosclerosis of arteries supplying the heart, brain and lower extremities. So, an important goal is to stimulate vascular growth for the collateral circulation to prevent the exacerbation of these diseases. Induced Vascular Progenitor Cells (iVPCs) are useful for cell-based therapy designed to stimulate coronary collateral growth. They were generated by partially reprogramming endothelial cells.[150] The vascular commitment of iVPCs is related to the epigenetic memory of endothelial cells, which engenders them as cellular components of growing blood vessels. That is why, when iVPCs were implanted into myocardium, they engrafted in blood vessels and increased coronary collateral flow better than iPSCs, mesenchymal stem cells, or native endothelial cells.[214]

Ex vivo genetic modification can be an effective strategy to enhance stem cell function. For example, cellular therapy employing genetic modification with Pim-1 kinase (a downstream effector of Akt, which positively regulates neovasculogenesis) of bone marrowderived cells[215] or human cardiac progenitor cells, isolated from failing myocardium[216] results in durability of repair, together with the improvement of functional parameters of myocardial hemodynamic performance.

Stem cells extracted from fat tissue after liposuction may be coaxed into becoming progenitor smooth muscle cells (iPVSMCs) found in arteries and veins.[217]

The 2D culture system of human iPS cells[218] in conjunction with triple marker selection (CD34 (a surface glycophosphoprotein expressed on developmentally early embryonic fibroblasts), NP1 (receptor - neuropilin 1) and KDR (kinase insert domain-containing receptor)) for the isolation of vasculogenic precursor cells from human iPSC, generated endothelial cells that, after transplantation, formed stable, functional mouse blood vessels in vivo, lasting for 280 days.[219]

To treat infarction, it is important to prevent the formation of fibrotic scar tissue. This can be achieved in vivo by transient application of paracrine factors that redirect native heart progenitor stem cell contributions from scar tissue to cardiovascular tissue. For example, in a mouse myocardial infarction model, a single intramyocardial injection of human vascular endothelial growth factor A mRNA (VEGF-A modRNA), modified to escape the body's normal defense system, results in long-term improvement of heart function due to mobilization and redirection of epicardial progenitor cells toward cardiovascular cell types.[220]

RBC transfusion is necessary for many patients. However, to date the supply of RBCs remains labile. In addition, transfusion risks infectious disease transmission. A large supply of safe RBCs generated in vitro would help to address this issue. Ex vivo erythroid cell generation may provide alternative transfusion products to meet present and future clinical requirements.[221][222] Red blood cells (RBC)s generated in vitro from mobilized CD34 positive cells have normal survival when transfused into an autologous recipient.[223] RBC produced in vitro contained exclusively fetal hemoglobin (HbF), which rescues the functionality of these RBCs. In vivo the switch of fetal to adult hemoglobin was observed after infusion of nucleated erythroid precursors derived from iPSCs.[224] Although RBCs do not have nuclei and therefore can not form a tumor, their immediate erythroblasts precursors have nuclei. The terminal maturation of erythroblasts into functional RBCs requires a complex remodeling process that ends with extrusion of the nucleus and the formation of an enucleated RBC.[225] Cell reprogramming often disrupts enucleation. Transfusion of in vitro-generated RBCs or erythroblasts does not sufficiently protect against tumor formation.

The aryl hydrocarbon receptor (AhR) pathway (which has been shown to be involved in the promotion of cancer cell development) plays an important role in normal blood cell development. AhR activation in human hematopoietic progenitor cells (HPs) drives an unprecedented expansion of HPs, megakaryocyte- and erythroid-lineage cells.[226] See also Concise Review:[227][228] The SH2B3 gene encodes a negative regulator of cytokine signaling and naturally occurring loss-of-function variants in this gene increase RBC counts in vivo. Targeted suppression of SH2B3 in primary human hematopoietic stem and progenitor cells enhanced the maturation and overall yield of in-vitro-derived RBCs. Moreover, inactivation of SH2B3 by CRISPR/Cas9 genome editing in human pluripotent stem cells allowed enhanced erythroid cell expansion with preserved differentiation.[229] (See also overview.[228][230])

Platelets help prevent hemorrhage in thrombocytopenic patients and patients with thrombocythemia. A significant problem for multitransfused patients is refractoriness to platelet transfusions. Thus, the ability to generate platelet products ex vivo and platelet products lacking HLA antigens in serum-free media would have clinical value. An RNA interference-based mechanism used a lentiviral vector to express short-hairpin RNAi targeting 2-microglobulin transcripts in CD34-positive cells. Generated platelets demonstrated an 85% reduction in class I HLA antigens. These platelets appeared to have normal function in vitro[231]

One clinically-applicable strategy for the derivation of functional platelets from human iPSC involves the establishment of stable immortalized megakaryocyte progenitor cell lines (imMKCLs) through doxycycline-dependent overexpression of BMI1 and BCL-XL. The resulting imMKCLs can be expanded in culture over extended periods (45 months), even after cryopreservation. Halting the overexpression (by the removal of doxycycline from the medium) of c-MYC, BMI1 and BCL-XL in growing imMKCLs led to the production of CD42b+ platelets with functionality comparable to that of native platelets on the basis of a range of assays in vitro and in vivo.[232] Thomas et al., describe a forward programming strategy relying on the concurrent exogenous expression of 3 transcription factors: GATA1, FLI1 and TAL1. The forward programmed megakaryocytes proliferate and differentiate in culture for several months with megakaryocyte purity over 90% reaching up to 2x105 mature megakaryocytes per input hPSC. Functional platelets are generated throughout the culture allowing the prospective collection of several transfusion units from as few as one million starting hPSCs.[233] See also overview[234]

A specialised type of white blood cell, known as cytotoxic T lymphocytes (CTLs), are produced by the immune system and are able to recognise specific markers on the surface of various infectious or tumour cells, causing them to launch an attack to kill the harmful cells. Thence, immunotherapy with functional antigen-specific T cells has potential as a therapeutic strategy for combating many cancers and viral infections.[235] However, cell sources are limited, because they are produced in small numbers naturally and have a short lifespan.

A potentially efficient approach for generating antigen-specific CTLs is to revert mature immune T cells into iPSCs, which possess indefinite proliferative capacity in vitro and after their multiplication to coax them to redifferentiate back into T cells.[236][237][238]

Another method combines iPSC and chimeric antigen receptor (CAR)[239] technologies to generate human T cells targeted to CD19, an antigen expressed by malignant B cells, in tissue culture.[240] This approach of generating therapeutic human T cells may be useful for cancer immunotherapy and other medical applications.

Invariant natural killer T (iNKT) cells have great clinical potential as adjuvants for cancer immunotherapy. iNKT cells act as innate T lymphocytes and serve as a bridge between the innate and acquired immune systems. They augment anti-tumor responses by producing interferon-gamma (IFN-).[241] The approach of collection, reprogramming/dedifferentiation, re-differentiation and injection has been proposed for related tumor treatment.[242]

Dendritic cells (DC) are specialized to control T-cell responses. DC with appropriate genetic modifications may survive long enough to stimulate antigen-specific CTL and after that be completely eliminated. DC-like antigen-presenting cells obtained from human induced pluripotent stem cells can serve as a source for vaccination therapy.[243]

CCAAT/enhancer binding protein- (C/EBP) induces transdifferentiation of B cells into macrophages at high efficiencies[244] and enhances reprogramming into iPS cells when co-expressed with transcription factors Oct4, Sox2, Klf4 and Myc.[245] with a 100-fold increase in iPS cell reprogramming efficiency, involving 95% of the population.[246] Furthermore, C/EBPa can convert selected human B cell lymphoma and leukemia cell lines into macrophage-like cells at high efficiencies, impairing the cells' tumor-forming capacity.[247]

The thymus is the first organ to deteriorate as people age. This shrinking is one of the main reasons the immune system becomes less effective with age. Diminished expression of the thymic epithelial cell transcription factor FOXN1 has been implicated as a component of the mechanism regulating age-related involution.[248][249]

Clare Blackburn and colleagues show that established age-related thymic involution can be reversed by forced upregulation of just one transcription factor - FOXN1 in the thymic epithelial cells in order to promote rejuvenation, proliferation and differentiation of these cells into fully functional thymic epithelium.[250] This rejuvenation and increased proliferation was accompanied by upregulation of genes that promote cell cycle progression (cyclin D1, Np63, FgfR2IIIb) and that are required in the thymic epithelial cells to promote specific aspects of T cell development (Dll4, Kitl, Ccl25, Cxcl12, Cd40, Cd80, Ctsl, Pax1).

Read more here:
Induced stem cells - Wikipedia

Stem Cell Basics VI. | stemcells.nih.gov

Induced pluripotent stem cells (iPSCs) are adult cells that have been genetically reprogrammed to an embryonic stem celllike state by being forced to express genes and factors important for maintaining the defining properties of embryonic stem cells. Although these cells meet the defining criteria for pluripotent stem cells, it is not known if iPSCs and embryonic stem cells differ in clinically significant ways. Mouse iPSCs were first reported in 2006, and human iPSCs were first reported in late 2007. Mouse iPSCs demonstrate important characteristics of pluripotent stem cells, including expressing stem cell markers, forming tumors containing cells from all three germ layers, and being able to contribute to many different tissues when injected into mouse embryos at a very early stage in development. Human iPSCs also express stem cell markers and are capable of generating cells characteristic of all three germ layers.

Although additional research is needed, iPSCs are already useful tools for drug development and modeling of diseases, and scientists hope to use them in transplantation medicine. Viruses are currently used to introduce the reprogramming factors into adult cells, and this process must be carefully controlled and tested before the technique can lead to useful treatment for humans. In animal studies, the virus used to introduce the stem cell factors sometimes causes cancers. Researchers are currently investigating non-viral delivery strategies. In any case, this breakthrough discovery has created a powerful new way to "de-differentiate" cells whose developmental fates had been previously assumed to be determined. In addition, tissues derived from iPSCs will be a nearly identical match to the cell donor and thus probably avoid rejection by the immune system. The iPSC strategy creates pluripotent stem cells that, together with studies of other types of pluripotent stem cells, will help researchers learn how to reprogram cells to repair damaged tissues in the human body.

Previous|VI. What are induced pluripotent stem cells?|Next

Originally posted here:
Stem Cell Basics VI. | stemcells.nih.gov

Induced Pluripotent Stem Cell Initiative | California’s …

The Induced Pluripotent Stem Cell (iPSC) Initiative is a major effort from CIRM to create a collection of stem cells developed from thousands of individuals.

CIRM is creating the iPSC bank so that scientists can use the cells, either in a petri dish or transplanted into animals, to study how disease develops and progresses and develop and test new drugs or other therapies. The iPSC bank is now open and cell lines are available at catalog.coriell.org/CIRM.

The large size of the collection will provide researchers with a powerful tool for studying genetic variation between individuals, helping scientists understand how disease and treatment may vary in a diverse population like Californias.

Outside Stem Cell Lines

The CIRM iPSC Repository is now accepting up to 300 human pluripotent stem cell lines (including human Embryonic Stem Cells or human induced Pluripotent Stem Cells) from outside laboratories. Submitted lines can be expanded, at no cost to the investigator, for storage and distribution in the Repository.

The deadline for cell line submission is October 12, 2016. For more information about this opportunity and for submission criteria, see attached document below:

What is the iPSC Initative? How does it work? Why iPS cells? Who is generating the cells? Which diseases will be represented? How many samples are being collected for each condition?

What is the iPSC Initiative? The Human Induced Pluripotent Stem Cell (hiPSC) Initiative is one of the California stem cell agencys major efforts to provide valuable resources to the research community. The goal is to create a bank of high quality stem cell lines developed from thousands of individuals for use in research.

How does it work? Blood or skin samples collected from approximately 3,000 individuals will be turned into stem cell lines. These lines will be made available to researchers throughout California and around the world.

Why iPS cells? iPS cells are generated from cells easily obtained from living humans, i.e. blood or a small piece of skin; they have unlimited expansion potential in the petri dish, so huge numbers of cells can be generated for research studies or drug development; and they can be coaxed into the types of cells affected in various diseases, such as heart or brain disorders. This provides an unprecedented opportunity to study the cell types from patients that are affected in disease but cannot otherwise be easily obtained in large quantities from them.

Who is generating the cells? Seven clinician scientists from four California institutions recruit tissue donors who suffer from one of the included diseases or are healthy controls. Some blood or a small piece of skin is collected from those donors, and these samples are shipped to the company Cellular Dynamics International (CDI). CDI generates iPS cells from the samples, and then transfers the iPS cells to the Coriell Institute for Biomedical Research. Coriell operates a cell bank that will distribute the iPS cells to interested researchers at academic and other non-profit institutions, and also to pharmaceutical companies that may want to use them to find new drugs for the diseases that are included in this bank. While CDI and Coriell are located outside California, they have set up facilities at the Buck Institute in Novato, CA, where they generate and bank the iPS cells for this Initiative.

Which diseases will be represented? The stem cell lines created will represent a variety of diseases or conditions that affect brain, heart, lung, liver or eyes. Grantees come from a variety of California-based institutions:

How many samples are being collected? Below is a table that outlines CIRM's collection goalsfor each condition, along with control samples.

* these control donors will be specifically tested for the absence of lung disease

CIRM's New Stem Cell Bank Up, Running (California Healthline)

iPSC Initiative Brochure [PDF] Stem Cell FAQ How do scientists model disease with iPSC's

See original here:
Induced Pluripotent Stem Cell Initiative | California's ...

Induced Pluripotent Stem Cells: 10 Years After the …

Human cortex grown in a petri dish. Eye diseases treated with retinal cells derived from a patients own skin cells. New drugs tested on human cells instead of animal models.

Research and emerging treatments with stem cells today can be traced to a startling discovery 10 years ago when Shinya Yamanaka, M.D., Ph.D., and his graduate student Kazutoshi Takahashi, Ph.D., reported a way to reprogram adult mouse cells and coax them back to their embryonic state pluripotent stem cells.

A year later, they accomplished the feat with human cells. For this research coup and his leading role pioneering stem cell work, Yamanaka who holds academic appointments at Kyoto University and UC San Francisco was the co-recipient of the 2012 Nobel Prize in Medicine or Physiology.

The breakthrough provides a limitless supply of induced pluripotent stem cells (iPSCs) that can then be directed down any developmental path to generate specific types of adult cells, from skin to heart to neuron, for use in basic research, drug discovery and treating disease.

The achievement opened up a practical way and in some critical cases, the only way to directly study human diseases in a dish, and track the early stages of both healthy and abnormal development. It also allowed researchers to screen new drugs directly in human cells rather than relying on animal models, which more often than not fail to accurately predict a new drugs effects on people.

The dazzling iPSC breakthrough has spurred rapid progress in some areas and posed major challenges in others. It has already proved a boon to basic research, but applying the new technology to treat diseases remains daunting. Some types of cells have proved difficult to reprogram, and even the protocols for doing so are still in flux as this is still a very young field.

For many basic biomedical scientists, the capability offered by iPSCs technology is like a dream come true, says neuroscientist Arnold Kriegstein, M.D., Ph.D., director of UCSFs Eli and Edythe Broad Center of Regeneration Medicine and Stem Cell Research.

Induced pluripotent stem cells have given us a window into human development unlike anything we had before, Kriegstein said. Im interested in the early development of the brains cortex. Of course, weve never had unrestricted access to living human brain cells. Now we can take skin cells and grow human cortex in a dish. Its a game-changer for discovery about early human development.

Kriegstein is enthusiastic about what researchers can learn from organoids a pea-sized stage of a developing organ derived from iPSCs. By this stage, cells are already clumping together and starting to signal and differentiate into what will become the adult organ.

Its a very close model of the real thing, Kriegstein says. We have recently discovered that even in this early stage, the organoids are able to develop intrinsic organization, including a front-and-back orientation, and different parts start to look like they do in the embryonic brain.

Some scientific papers have suggested that organoids can model diseases found in adulthood even disorders of late adulthood such as Alzheimers disease.

Even though organoids can reveal developmental steps not seen before, Kriegstein worries that some researchers are getting too far ahead of themselves.

Its an embryonic brain, he stresses. The longest period of growth we can model would be full fetal development. How likely is it that gene expression, cell signaling and a myriad of other interactions at this organoid stage could accurately represent the development of Alzheimers disease, a disease that affects people at 60 or 70?

I think we need to take some of these studies with a grain of salt. Stem cell technology now is so variable that replication is difficult. We need to establish protocols to reliably compare different methods and then use these standardized methodologies to advance research and treatment. But I am 100 percent convinced that we will get there.

Yamanaka currently directs the 500-person Center for iPS Cell Research and Application at Kyoto University, runs a research lab at the Gladstone Institute for Cardiovascular Disease in San Francisco, and serves as a professor of anatomy at UCSF, and Takahashi is a visiting scientist at the Gladstone Institutes and runs Yamanakas lab there. Both have continued to build on their iPSC work, as have other researchers.

In their seminal work, Yamanaka and Takahashi had introduced four genetic factors to prompt adult cells back to the pluripotent state. Soon after their iPSC breakthrough, Sheng Ding, Ph.D., who has a lab at the Gladstone Institutes and is a professor in UCSF's Department of Pharmaceutical Chemistry, began refining the reprogramming cocktail.

Eventually, Ding was able to substitute drug-like molecules for these gene transcription factors, eliminating the risk of new genetic material altering the cells. Today, labs around the world pursue and tout different chemical recipes, often depending on the type of cell they are trying to reprogram.

Other recent advances to induce pluripotency harness different kinds of proteins that influence gene activity in the cell nucleus. Robert Blelloch, M.D., Ph.D., a stem cell scientist at UCSFs Broad Center, has shown that some small RNA molecules called microRNAs promote adult cell de-differentiation and others promote the reverse: ability of stem cells to differentiate into adult cells. By tweaking microRNA activity, his lab has been able to improve reprogramming yields a hundred-fold.

He and colleagues have also become intrigued by the role of so-called epigenetic factors naturally occurring or introduced molecules that modify proteins in the nucleus. Manipulation of these molecules too can affect the efficiency of inducing pluripotent cells.

Six years after Yamanakas iPSCs discovery, researchers in a very different field developed a new gene-editing technology of unprecedented speed and precision, known as CRISPR-Cas9. The potent new tool has revolutionized efforts to cut and paste genes and has been very quickly adopted by thousands of researchers in basic biology and drug development.

CRISPR has provided us with an extraordinary new capability, Kriegstein says. It allows us to tease apart the genetic causes or contributors to developmental diseases. We can edit out mutations to determine if they are critical to early developmental defects.

CRISPRs speed and precision may some day allow stem cell researchers to reach their most ambitious goal: Genetically abnormal cells from patients with inherited diseases such as sickle cell anemia or Huntingtons could be reprogrammed to the pluripotent stem cell state; their genetic defects could be edited in a petri dish before being differentiated into healthy adult cells. These cells could then be transplanted into patients to restore normal function.

Go here to see the original:
Induced Pluripotent Stem Cells: 10 Years After the ...

The Promise of Induced Pluripotent Stem Cells (iPSCs …

Charles A. Goldthwaite, Jr., Ph.D.

In 2006, researchers at Kyoto University in Japan identified conditions that would allow specialized adult cells to be genetically "reprogrammed" to assume a stem cell-like state. These adult cells, called induced pluripotent stem cells (iPSCs), were reprogrammed to an embryonic stem cell-like state by introducing genes important for maintaining the essential properties of embryonic stem cells (ESCs). Since this initial discovery, researchers have rapidly improved the techniques to generate iPSCs, creating a powerful new way to "de-differentiate" cells whose developmental fates had been previously assumed to be determined.

Although much additional research is needed, investigators are beginning to focus on the potential utility of iPSCs as a tool for drug development, modeling of disease, and transplantation medicine. The idea that a patient's tissues could provide him/ her a copious, immune-matched supply of pluripotent cells has captured the imagination of researchers and clinicians worldwide. Furthermore, ethical issues associated with the production of ESCs do not apply to iPSCs, which offer a non-controversial strategy to generate patient-specific stem cell lines. As an introduction to this exciting new field of stem cell research, this chapter will review the characteristics of iPSCs, the technical challenges that must be overcome before this strategy can be deployed, and the cells' potential applications to regenerative medicine.

As noted in other chapters, stem cells represent a precious commodity. Although present in embryonic and adult tissues, practical considerations such as obtaining embryonic tissues and isolating relatively rare cell types have limited the large-scale production of populations of pure stem cells (see the Chapter, "Alternate Methods for Preparing Pluripotent Stem Cells" for details). As such, the logistical challenges of isolating, culturing, purifying, and differentiating stem cell lines that are extracted from tissues have led researchers to explore options for "creating" pluripotent cells using existing non-pluripotent cells. Coaxing abundant, readily available differentiated cells to pluripotency would in principle eliminate the search for rare cells while providing the opportunity to culture clinically useful quantities of stem-like cells.

One strategy to accomplish this goal is nuclear reprogramming, a technique that involves experimentally inducing a stable change in the nucleus of a mature cell that can then be maintained and replicated as the cell divides through mitosis. These changes are most frequently associated with the reacquisition of a pluripotent state, thereby endowing the cell with developmental potential. The strategy has historically been carried out using techniques such as somatic cell nuclear transfer (SCNT),1,2 altered nuclear transfer (ANT),3,4 and methods to fuse somatic cells with ESCs5,6 (see "Alternate Methods for Preparing Pluripotent Stem Cells" for details of these approaches). From a clinical perspective, these methods feature several drawbacks, such as the creation of an embryo or the development of hybrid cells that are not viable to treat disease. However, in 2006, these efforts informed the development of nuclear reprogramming in vitro, the breakthrough method that creates iPSCs.

This approach involves taking mature "somatic" cells from an adult and introducing the genes that encode critical transcription factor proteins, which themselves regulate the function of other genes important for early steps in embryonic development (See Fig. 10.1). In the initial 2006 study, it was reported that only four transcription factors (Oct4, Sox2, Klf4, and c-Myc) were required to reprogram mouse fibroblasts (cells found in the skin and other connective tissue) to an embryonic stem celllike state by forcing them to express genes important for maintaining the defining properties of ESCs.7 These factors were chosen because they were known to be involved in the maintenance of pluripotency, which is the capability to generate all other cell types of the body. The newly-created iPSCs were found to be highly similar to ESCs and could be established after several weeks in culture.7,8 In 2007, two different research groups reached a new milestone by deriving iPSCs from human cells, using either the original four genes9 or a different combination containing Oct4, Sox2, Nanog, and Lin28.10 Since then, researchers have reported generating iPSCs from somatic tissues of the monkey11 and rat.12,13

However, these original methods of reprogramming are inefficient, yielding iPSCs in less than 1% of the starting adult cells.14,15 The type of adult cell used also affects efficiency; fibroblasts require more time for factor expression and have lower efficiency of reprogramming than do human keratinocytes, mouse liver and stomach cells, or mouse neural stem cells.1419

Several approaches have been investigated to improve reprogramming efficiency and decrease potentially detrimental side effects of the reprogramming process. Since the retroviruses used to deliver the four transcription factors in the earliest studies can potentially cause mutagenesis (see below), researchers have investigated whether all four factors are absolutely necessary. In particular, the gene c-Myc is known to promote tumor growth in some cases, which would negatively affect iPSC usefulness in transplantation therapies. To this end, researchers tested a three-factor approach that uses the orphan nuclear receptor Esrrb with Oct4 and Sox2, and were able to convert mouse embryonic fibroblasts to iPSCs.20 This achievement corroborates other reports that c-Myc is dispensable for direct reprogramming of mouse fibroblasts.21 Subsequent studies have further reduced the number of genes required for reprogramming,2226 and researchers continue to identify chemicals that can either substitute for or enhance the efficiency of transcription factors in this process.27 These breakthroughs continue to inform and to simplify the reprogramming process, thereby advancing the field toward the generation of patient-specific stem cells for clinical application. However, as the next section will discuss, the method by which transcription factors are delivered to the somatic cells is critical to their potential use in the clinic.

Figure 10.1. Generating Induced Pluripotent Stem Cells (iPSCs).

2008 Terese Winslow

Reprogramming poses several challenges for researchers who hope to apply it to regenerative medicine. To deliver the desired transcription factors, the DNA that encodes their production must be introduced and integrated into the genome of the somatic cells. Early efforts to generate iPSCs accomplished this goal using retroviral vectors. A retrovirus is an RNA virus that uses an enzyme, reverse transcriptase, to replicate in a host cell and subsequently produce DNA from its RNA genome. This DNA incorporates into the host's genome, allowing the virus to replicate as part of the host cell's DNA. However, the forced expression of these genes cannot be controlled fully, leading to unpredictable effects.28 While other types of integrating viruses, such as lentiviruses, can increase the efficiency of reprogramming,16 the expression of viral transgenes remains a critical clinical issue. Given the dual needs of reducing the drawbacks of viral integration and maximizing reprogramming efficiency, researchers are exploring a number of strategies to reprogram cells in the absence of integrating viral vectors2730 or to use potentially more efficient integrative approaches.31,32

Before reprogramming can be considered for use as a clinical tool, the efficiency of the process must improve substantially. Although researchers have begun to identify the myriad molecular pathways that are implicated in reprogramming somatic cells,15 much more basic research will be required to identify the full spectrum of events that enable this process. Simply adding transcription factors to a population of differentiated cells does not guarantee reprogrammingthe low efficiency of reprogramming in vitro suggests that additional rare events are necessary to generate iPSCs, and the efficiency of reprogramming decreases even further with fibroblasts that have been cultured for long time periods.33 Furthermore, the differentiation stage of the starting cell appears to impact directly the reprogramming efficiency; mouse hematopoietic stem and progenitor cells give rise to iPSCs up to 300 times more efficiently than do their terminally-differentiated B- and T-cell counterparts.34 As this field continues to develop, researchers are exploring the reprogramming of stem or adult progenitor cells from mice24,25,34,35 and humans23,26 as one strategy to increase efficiency compared to that observed with mature cells.

As these discussions suggest, clinical application of iPSCs will require safe and highly efficient generation of stem cells. As scientists increase their understanding of the molecular mechanisms that underlie reprogramming, they will be able to identify the cell types and conditions that most effectively enable the process and use this information to design tools for widespread use. Clinical application of these cells will require methods to reprogram cells while minimizing DNA alterations. To this end, researchers have found ways to introduce combinations of factors in a single viral "cassette" into a known genetic location.36 Evolving tools such as these will enable researchers to induce programming more safely, thereby informing basic iPSC research and moving this technology closer to clinical application.

ESCs and iPSCs are created using different strategies and conditions, leading researchers to ask whether the cell types are truly equivalent. To assess this issue, investigators have begun extensive comparisons to determine pluripotency, gene expression, and function of differentiated cell derivatives. Ultimately, the two cell types exhibit some differences, yet they are remarkably similar in many key aspects that could impact their application to regenerative medicine. Future experiments will determine the clinical significance (if any) of the observed differences between the cell types.

Other than their derivation from adult tissues, iPSCs meet the defining criteria for ESCs. Mouse and human iPSCs demonstrate important characteristics of pluripotent stem cells, including expressing stem cell markers, forming tumors containing cell types from all three primitive embryonic layers, and displaying the capacity to contribute to many different tissues when injected into mouse embryos at a very early stage of development. Initially, it was unclear that iPSCs were truly pluripotent, as early iPSC lines contributed to mouse embryonic development but failed to produce live-born progeny as do ESCs. In late 2009, however, several research groups reported mouse iPSC lines that are capable of producing live births,37,38 noting that the cells maintain a pluripotent potential that is "very close to" that of ESCs.38 Therefore, iPSCs appear to be truly pluripotent, although they are less efficient than ESCs with respect to differentiating into all cell types.38 In addition, the two cell types appear to have similar defense mechanisms to thwart the production of DNA-damaging reactive oxygen species, thereby conferring the cells with comparable capabilities to maintain genomic integrity.39

Undifferentiated iPSCs appear molecularly indistinguishable from ESCs. However, comparative genomic analyses reveal differences between the two cell types. For example, hundreds of genes are differentially expressed in ESCs and iPSCs,40 and there appear to be subtle but detectable differences in epigenetic methylation between the two cell types.41,42 Genomic differences are to be expected; it has been reported that gene-expression profiles of iPSCs and ESCs from the same species differ no more than observed variability among individual ESC lines.43 It should be noted that the functional implications of these findings are presently unknown, and observed differences may ultimately prove functionally inconsequential.44

Recently, some of the researchers who first generated human iPSCs compared the ability of iPSCs and human ESCs to differentiate into neural cells (e.g., neurons and glia).45 Their results demonstrated that both cell types follow the same steps and time course during differentiation. However, although human ESCs differentiate into neural cells with a similar efficiency regardless of the cell line used, iPSC-derived neural cells demonstrate lower efficiency and greater variability when differentiating into neural cells. These observations occurred regardless of which of several iPSC-generation protocols were used to reprogram the original cell to the pluripotent state. Experimental evidence suggests that individual iPSC lines may be "epigenetically unique" and predisposed to generate cells of a particular lineage. However, the authors believe that improvements to the culturing techniques may be able to overcome the variability and inefficiency described in this report.

These findings underpin the importance of understanding the inherent variability among discrete cell populations, whether they are iPSCs or ESCs. Characterizing the variability among iPSC lines will be crucial to apply the cells clinically. Indeed, the factors that make each iPSC line unique may also delay the cells' widespread use, as differences among the cell lines will affect comparisons and potentially influence their clinical behavior. For example, successfully modeling disease requires being able to identify the cellular differences between patients and controls that lead to dysfunction. These differences must be framed in the context of the biologic variability inherent in a given patient population. If iPSC lines are to be used to model disease or screen candidate drugs, then variability among lines must be minimized and characterized fully so that researchers can understand how their observed results match to the biology of the disease being studied. As such, standardized assays and methods will become increasingly important for the clinical application of iPSCs, and controls must be developed that account for variability among the iPSCs and their derivatives.

Additionally, researchers must understand the factors that initiate reprogramming towards pluripotency in different cell types. A recent report has identified one factor that initiates reprogramming in human fibroblasts,46 setting the groundwork for developing predictive models to identify those cells that will become iPSCs. An iPSC may carry a genetic "memory" of the cell type that it once was, and this "memory" will likely influence its ability to be reprogrammed. Understanding how this memory varies among different cell types and tissues will be necessary to reprogram successfully.

iPSCs have the potential to become multipurpose research and clinical tools to understand and model diseases, develop and screen candidate drugs, and deliver cell-replacement therapy to support regenerative medicine. This section will explore the possibilities and the challenges that accompany these medical applications, with the caveat that some uses are more immediate than others. For example, researchers currently use stem cells to test/screen drugs or as study material to identify molecules or genes implicated in regeneration. Conducting experiments or testing candidate drugs on human cells grown in culture enables researchers to understand fundamental principles and relationships that will ultimately inform the use of stem cells as a source of tissue for transplantation. Therefore, using iPSCs in cell-replacement therapies is a future application of these cells, albeit one that has tremendous clinical potential. The following discussion will highlight recent efforts toward this goal while recognizing the challenges that must be overcome for these cells to reach the clinic.

Reprogramming technology offers the potential to treat many diseases, including Alzheimer's disease, Parkinson's disease, cardiovascular disease, diabetes, and amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS; also known as Lou Gehrig's disease). In theory, easily-accessible cell types (such as skin fibroblasts) could be biopsied from a patient and reprogrammed, effectively recapitulating the patient's disease in a culture dish. Such cells could then serve as the basis for autologous cell replacement therapy. Because the source cells originate within the patient, immune rejection of the differentiated derivatives would be minimized. As a result, the need for immunosuppressive drugs to accompany the cell transplant would be lessened and perhaps eliminated altogether. In addition, the reprogrammed cells could be directed to produce the cell types that are compromised or destroyed by the disease in question. A recent experiment has demonstrated the proof of principle in this regard,47 as iPSCs derived from a patient with ALS were directed to differentiate into motor neurons, which are the cells that are destroyed in the disease.

Although much additional basic research will be required before iPSCs can be applied in the clinic, these cells represent multi-purpose tools for medical research. Using the techniques described in this article, researchers are now generating myriad disease-specific iPSCs. For example, dermal fibroblasts and bone marrow-derived mesencyhmal cells have been used to establish iPSCs from patients with a variety of diseases, including ALS, adenosine deaminase deficiency-related severe combined immunodeficiency, Shwachman- Bodian-Diamond syndrome, Gaucher disease type III, Duchenne and Becker muscular dystrophies, Parkinson's disease, Huntington's disease, type 1 diabetes mellitus, Down syndrome/trisomy 21, and spinal muscular atrophy.4749 iPSCs created from patients diagnosed with a specific genetically-inherited disease can then be used to model disease pathology. For example, iPSCs created from skin fibroblasts taken from a child with spinal muscular atrophy were used to generate motor neurons that showed selective deficits compared to those derived from the child's unaffected mother.48 As iPSCs illuminate the development of normal and disease-specific pathologic tissues, it is expected that discoveries made using these cells will inform future drug development or other therapeutic interventions.

One particularly appealing aspect of iPSCs is that, in theory, they can be directed to differentiate into a specified lineage that will support treatment or tissue regeneration. Thus, somatic cells from a patient with cardiovascular disease could be used to generate iPSCs that could then be directed to give rise to functional adult cardiac muscle cells (cardiomyocytes) that replace diseased heart tissue, and so forth. Yet while iPSCs have great potential as sources of adult mature cells, much remains to be learned about the processes by which these cells differentiate. For example, iPSCs created from human50 and murine fibroblasts5153 can give rise to functional cardiomyocytes that display hallmark cardiac action potentials. However, the maturation process into cardiomyocytes is impaired when iPSCs are usedcardiac development of iPSCs is delayed compared to that seen with cardiomyocytes derived from ESCs or fetal tissue. Furthermore, variation exists in the expression of genetic markers in the iPSC-derived cardiac cells as compared to that seen in ESC-derived cardiomyocytes. Therefore, iPSC-derived cardiomyocytes demonstrate normal commitment but impaired maturation, and it is unclear whether observed defects are due to technical (e.g., incomplete reprogramming of iPSCs) or biological barriers (e.g., functional impairment due to genetic factors). Thus, before these cells can be used for therapy, it will be critical to distinguish between iPSC-specific and disease-specific phenotypes.

However, it must be noted that this emerging field is continually evolving; additional basic iPSC research will be required in parallel with the development of disease models. Although the reprogramming technology that creates iPSCs is currently imperfect, these cells will likely impact future therapy, and "imperfect" cells can illuminate many areas related to regenerative medicine. However, iPSC-derived cells that will be used for therapy will require extensive characterization relative to what is sufficient to support disease modeling studies. To this end, researchers have begun to use imaging techniques to observe cells that are undergoing reprogramming to distinguish true iPSCs from partially-reprogrammed cells.54 The potential for tumor formation must also be addressed fully before any iPSC derivatives can be considered for applied cell therapy. Furthermore, in proposed autologous therapy applications, somatic DNA mutations (e.g., non-inherited mutations that have accumulated during the person's lifetime) retained in the iPSCs and their derivatives could potentially impact downstream cellular function or promote tumor formation (an issue that may possibly be circumvented by creating iPSCs from a "youthful" cell source such as umbilical cord blood).55 Whether these issues will prove consequential when weighed against the cells' therapeutic potential remains to be determined. While the promise of iPSCs is great, the current levels of understanding of the cells' biology, variability, and utility must also increase greatly before iPSCs become standard tools for regenerative medicine.

Since their discovery four years ago, induced pluripotent stem cells have captured the imagination of researchers and clinicians seeking to develop patient-specific therapies. Reprogramming adult tissues to embryonic-like states has countless prospective applications to regenerative medicine, drug development, and basic research on stem cells and developmental processes. To this point, a PubMed search conducted in April 2010 using the term "induced pluripotent stem cells" (which was coined in 2006) returned more than 1400 publications, indicating a highly active and rapidlydeveloping research field.

However, many technical and basic science issues remain before the promise offered by iPSC technology can be realized fully. For putative regenerative medicine applications, patient safety is the foremost consideration. Standardized methods must be developed to characterize iPSCs and their derivatives. Furthermore, reprogramming has demonstrated a proof of-principle, yet the process is currently too inefficient for routine clinical application. Thus, unraveling the molecular mechanisms that govern reprogramming is a critical first step toward standardizing protocols. A grasp on the molecular underpinnings of the process will shed light on the differences between iPSCs and ESCs (and determine whether these differences are clinically significant). Moreover, as researchers delve more deeply into this field, the effects of donor cell populations can be compared to support a given application; i.e., do muscle-derived iPSCs produce more muscle than skin-derived cells? Based on the exciting developments in this area to date, induced pluripotent stem cells will likely support future therapeutic interventions, either directly or as research tools to establish novel models for degenerative disease that will inform drug development. While much remains to be learned in the field of iPSC research, the development of reprogramming techniques represents a breakthrough that will ultimately open many new avenues of research and therapy.

Chapter 9|Table of Contents|Chapter 11

Link:
The Promise of Induced Pluripotent Stem Cells (iPSCs ...

Induced Pluripotent Stem Cells Market 2016: Hepatocytes …

Pluripotent stem cells are embryonic stem cells that have the potential to form all adult cell types and help in repairing of damaged tissues in the human body. An Induced pluripotent stem cells, or iPSCs, are taken from any tissue (usually skin or blood) from a child or an adult and is genetically modified to behave like pluripotent stem cells or embryonic stem cells.

iPSCs market is in emerging state mainly due to its ability to make any cell or tissue the body might need to encounter wide range of diseases like diabetes, spinal cord injury, leukaemia or heart disease, these cells can potentially be customized to provide a perfect genetic match for any patient. Furthermore, these cells are very useful in understanding the earliest stage of human development and offer the opportunity to create customized, rejection-proof cells and tissues for transplantation. Also, government and private sectors are increasing funding and growing industry that focuses on different research work related to iPSCs and people are getting more aware about the stem cells through different organisations. However, factors such as high cost associated with the reprograming of cells, ethical issues and lengthy processes are impeding the market growth. Low efficiency, potential tumor risk and incomplete programming are added factors limiting iPSCs market growth.

Request a Brochure of This Report, here: http://www.intenseresearch.com/market-analysis/world-induced-pluripotent-stem-cells-market-opportunities-and.html#request-sample

The world iPSCs market has been segmented based on derived cell type, application, end-user and geography. Based on derived cell type, the market is segmented into hepatocytes, fibroblasts, keratinocytes, amniotic cells and others. Based on application, the market is segmented into academic research, drug development and toxicity testing and regenerative medicine. Based on end-user, the market is segmented into hospitals and research laboratories. The market is analyzed on the basis of four regions, namely, North America, Europe, Asia-Pacific, and LAMEA.

Product launch, collaboration & merger, and acquisition are the key strategies adopted by market players. Healthcare giant such as Fujifilm Holding Corporation has acquired Cellular Dynamics International, Inc. in March 2015 creating a high growth in iPSCs market. Also, Juno Therapeutics and Fate Therapeutics collaborated to improve the products market.

Do Inquiry Before Purchasing Report: http://www.intenseresearch.com/market-analysis/world-induced-pluripotent-stem-cells-market-opportunities-and.html#inquiry-for-buying

Comprehensive competitive analysis and profiles of major market players such as Fujifilm Holding Corporation, Astellas Pharma Inc., Fate Therapeutics, Inc., Bristol-Myers Squibb Company, ViaCyte, Inc., Celgene Corporation, Aastrom Biosciences, Inc., Acelity Holdings, Inc., StemCells, Inc., Japan Tissue Engineering Co., Ltd. and Organogenesis Inc. is also provided in this report.

KEY MARKET BENEFITS:

INDUCED PLURIPOTENT STEM CELLS MARKET SEGMENT:

The world iPSCs market is segmented as follows:

By Derived Cell Type

By Application

By End-User

By Geography

About Intense Research

Intense Research provides a range of marketing and business research solutions designed for our clients specific needs based on our expert resources. The business scopes of Intense Research cover more than 30 industries includsing energy, new materials, transportation, daily consumer goods, chemicals, etc. We provide our clients with one-stop solution for all the research requirements.

Contact Us:

Joel John 3422 SW 15 Street, Suit #8138, Deerfield Beach, Florida 33442, United States Tel: +1-386-310-3803 GMT Tel: +49-322 210 92714 USA/Canada Toll Free No. 1-855-465-4651 Email: sales@intenseresearch.com Web: http://www.intenseresearch.com/

Excerpt from:
Induced Pluripotent Stem Cells Market 2016: Hepatocytes ...

World Induced Pluripotent Stem Cells Market – Opportunities …

Country Name

-- Select Country -- Andorra United Arab Emirates Afghanistan Antigua and Barbuda Anguilla Albania Armenia Angola Antarctica Argentina American Samoa Austria Australia Aruba land Islands Azerbaijan Bosnia and Herzegovina Barbados Bangladesh Belgium Burkina Faso Bulgaria Bahrain Burundi Benin Saint Barthlemy Bermuda Brunei Darussalam Bolivia Caribbean Netherlands Brazil Bahamas Bhutan Bouvet Island Botswana Belarus Belize Canada Cocos (Keeling) Islands Congo, Democratic Republic of Central African Republic Congo Switzerland Cte d'Ivoire Cook Islands Chile Cameroon China Colombia Costa Rica Cuba Cape Verde Curaao Christmas Island Cyprus Czech Republic Germany Djibouti Denmark Dominica Dominican Republic Algeria Ecuador Estonia Egypt Western Sahara Eritrea Spain Ethiopia Finland Fiji Falkland Islands Micronesia, Federated States of Faroe Islands France Gabon United Kingdom Grenada Georgia French Guiana Guernsey Ghana Gibraltar Greenland Gambia Guinea Guadeloupe Equatorial Guinea Greece South Georgia and the South Sandwich Islands Guatemala Guam Guinea-Bissau Guyana Hong Kong Heard and McDonald Islands Honduras Croatia Haiti Hungary Indonesia Ireland Israel Isle of Man India British Indian Ocean Territory Iraq Iran Iceland Italy Jersey Jamaica Jordan Japan Kenya Kyrgyzstan Cambodia Kiribati Comoros Saint Kitts and Nevis North Korea South Korea Kuwait Cayman Islands Kazakhstan Lao People's Democratic Republic Lebanon Saint Lucia Liechtenstein Sri Lanka Liberia Lesotho Lithuania Luxembourg Latvia Libya Morocco Monaco Moldova Montenegro Saint-Martin (France) Madagascar Marshall Islands Macedonia Mali Myanmar Mongolia Macau Northern Mariana Islands Martinique Mauritania Montserrat Malta Mauritius Maldives Malawi Mexico Malaysia Mozambique Namibia New Caledonia Niger Norfolk Island Nigeria Nicaragua The Netherlands Norway Nepal Nauru Niue New Zealand Oman Panama Peru French Polynesia Papua New Guinea Philippines Pakistan Poland St. Pierre and Miquelon Pitcairn Puerto Rico Palestine, State of Portugal Palau Paraguay Qatar Runion Romania Serbia Russian Federation Rwanda Saudi Arabia Solomon Islands Seychelles Sudan Sweden Singapore Saint Helena Slovenia Svalbard and Jan Mayen Islands Slovakia Sierra Leone San Marino Senegal Somalia Suriname South Sudan Sao Tome and Principe El Salvador Sint Maarten (Dutch part) Syria Swaziland Turks and Caicos Islands Chad French Southern Territories Togo Thailand Tajikistan Tokelau Timor-Leste Turkmenistan Tunisia Tonga Turkey Trinidad and Tobago Tuvalu Taiwan Tanzania Ukraine Uganda United States Minor Outlying Islands United States Uruguay Uzbekistan Vatican Saint Vincent and the Grenadines Venezuela Virgin Islands (British) Virgin Islands (U.S.) Vietnam Vanuatu Wallis and Futuna Islands Samoa Yemen Mayotte South Africa Zambia Zimbabwe Country name is required

Read more here:
World Induced Pluripotent Stem Cells Market - Opportunities ...

Purest yet liver-like cells generated from induced …

This image shows induced pluripotent stem cells expressing a characteristic cell surface protein called SSEA4 (green). A research team including developmental biologist Stephen A. Duncan, D. Phil., SmartStateTM Chair of Regenerative Medicine at the Medical University of South Carolina (MUSC), has found a better way to purify liver cells made from induced pluripotent stem cells (iPSCs). Their efforts, published August 25, 2016 in Stem Cell Reports, will aid studies of liver disease for the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (NHLBI)'s $80 million Next Generation Genetic Association Studies (Next Gen) Program. The University of Minnesota (Minneapolis) and the Medical College of Wisconsin (Milwaukee) contributed to the study.

This new methodology could facilitate progress toward an important clinical goal: the treatment of patients with disease-causing mutations in their livers by transplant of unmutated liver cells derived from their own stem cells. Previous attempts to generate liver-like cells from stem cells have yielded heterogeneous cell populations that bear little resemblance to diseased livers in patients.

NHLBI's Next Gen was created to bank stem cell lines sourced from patients in genome-wide association studies (GWAS). The goal of the NHLBI Next Gen Lipid Conditions sub-section--a collaborative effort between Duncan and Daniel J. Rader, M.D., and Edward E. Morrisey, Ph.D., both at the University of Pennsylvania--is to help determine the genetic sources of heart, lung, or blood conditions that also encompass the liver. These GWAS studies map the genomes in hundreds of people as a way to look for genetic mutation patterns that differ from the genomes of healthy individuals.

A GWAS study becomes more powerful--more likely to find the correct genetic mutations that cause a disease--as more genomes are mapped. Once a panel of suspected mutations is built, stem cells from these individuals can be "pushed" in culture dishes to differentiate into any of the body's cells, as for example liver-, heart-, or vascular-like cells. The cells can be screened in high-throughput formats (i.e., cells are expanded and cultured in many dishes) to learn more about the mutations and to test panels of drugs that might ultimately help treat patients harboring a disease.

The problem arises during the "pushing." For example, iPSCs stubbornly refuse to mature uniformly into liver-like cells when fed growth factors. Traditionally, antibodies have been used to recognize features of maturity on the surfaces of cells and purify cells that are alike. This approach has been crucial to stem cell research, but available antibodies that recognize mature liver cells are few and tend to recognize many different kinds of cells. The many types of cells in mixed populations have diverse characteristics that can obscure underlying disease-causing genetic variations, which tend to be subtle.

"Without having a pure population of liver cells, it was incredibly difficult to pick up these relatively subtle differences caused by the mutations, but differences that are important in the life of an individual," said Duncan.

Instead of relying on antibodies, Duncan and his crew embraced a new technology called chemoproteomic cell surface capture (CSC) technology. True to its name, CSC technology allowed the group to map the proteins on the surface of liver cells that were most highly produced during the final stages of differentiation of stem cells into liver cells. The most abundant protein was targeted with an antibody labeled with a fluorescent marker and used to sort the mature liver cells from the rest.

The procedure was highly successful: the team had a population of highly pure, homogeneous, and mature liver-like cells. Labeled cells had far more similar traits of mature hepatocytes than unlabeled cells. Pluripotent stem cells that had not differentiated were excluded from the group of labeled cells.

"That's important," said Duncan. "If you're wanting to transplant cells into somebody that has liver disease, you really don't want to be transplanting pluripotent cells because pluripotent cells form tumors called teratocarcinomas."

Duncan cautions that transplantation of iPSC-derived liver cells is not yet ready for translation to the clinic. But the technology for sorting homogeneous liver cells can be used now to successfully and accurately model and study disease in the cell culture dish.

"We think that by being able to generate pure populations, it will get rid of the variability, and therefore really help us combine with GWAS studies to identify allelic variations that are causative of a disease, at least in the liver," said Duncan.

Source: Medical University of South Carolina

Read more here:
Purest yet liver-like cells generated from induced ...

Derivation of Ethnically Diverse Human Induced Pluripotent …

In vitro culture of primary human fibroblasts and lentivirus reprogramming

Human fibroblasts for iPSCs derivation were obtained from Coriell Institute (Camden, NJ) and reprogrammed using a single polycistronic vector using four-factor 2A (4F2A) doxycycline (DOX)-inducible lentivirus encoding mouse cDNAs for Oct4, Sox2, Klf4, and c-Myc separated by three different 2A peptides (P2A, T2A, and E2A, respectively). The lentiviral plasmids are p20321 (TetO-FUW-OSKM) and p20342 (FUW-M2rtTA) (Addgene, Cambridge, MA) originally developed by Carey et al.9. Lentiviral particles (4F2A and M2rtTA) were packaged in HEK 293T cells. The primary fibroblast cells were co-transfected using the lentivirus construct, psPAX and pCMV-VSVG vectors by calcium phosphate co-precipitation. Viral supernatants from cultures packaging each of the two viruses were pooled, filtered through a 0.45 m filter and concentrated by ultracentrifugation and stored at 80C.

The 5 human fibroblast lines were transduced by viral particles in xenofree human fibroblast culture medium10 in the presence of polybrene (8g/mL). Forty-eight hours after infection, less than 15% of fibroblasts tested immunopositive for viral-derived OCT4. The procedure was carried out in 1 well of a 6-well plate with cells at 70% confluence to allow for cell growth after viral infection an appearance of stem cell colonies. The medium was replaced two days after infection, and then daily, with xenofree hES medium plus doxycycline (1g/ml) formulated to maintain stem cell pluripotency10,11,12. After 35 days of culture, small cell clumps distinguishable from the fibroblast morphology appeared. Those that formed cell colonies with hESC-like morphology were mechanically isolated and passed on to mitotically inactivated xenofree human foreskin feeder cells (ATCC PCS-201010). Overall reprogramming efficiency by this method was calculated to be 0.002 ~ 0.004%. The iPSC colonies were expanded for several passages under xenofree conditions without doxycycline and evaluated for expression of markers of pluripotency by quantitative RT-PCR (qRT-PCR) and immunocytology.

Quantitative PCR analysis was done by isolation of total RNA from the hESC or iPSC lines and parental fibroblast lines and purification using the NucleoSpin RNA XS Total RNA isolation kit (Clontech). Reverse transcription (RT) was performed in a 20ul reaction volume using Superscript II (Invitrogen) and the cDNA reaction was diluted to a 300ul working stock volume. Primers for use in qPCR were first validated by maximally amplifying cDNA from a range of samples to confirm that a single PCR reaction product was produced and that the amplicon was of the predicted length. For validation, 10ul of cDNA from H9 hESCs (WA09, Wicell, Madison, WI), control fibroblasts (line A-2), and two of iPSC lines (A-2.2.1 & A-2.2.2) for each primer set was amplified for 36 cycles (95C 30s, 55C 30s, 72C 30s). For endogenous and transgene expression, 5ul of cDNA from each iPSC lines for each primer set was amplified for 32 cycles and resolved on a 3% nusieve agarose gel and visualized by ethidium bromide staining. Quantitative PCRs contained 10ng of cDNA, 400nM of each primer, and SYBR Green PCR Master Mix (AppliedBiosystems). Each sample was analyzed by triplicate by an ABI PRISM 7000 sequence detection system. Data was analyzed using the systems software. The expression of gene of interest was normalized to GAPDH in all cases and compared with hESCs.

We used the MycoAlertTM PLUS Assay mycoplasma detection kit (Lonza, Allendale, NJ) essentially as manufacturers instructions. Briefly, after centrifugation (1500rpm, 5min) of cell supernatant during passage of suspension iPSC cultures, the supernatants were transferred into luminescence compatible tubes (Corning Inc., Corning, NJ). The viable mycoplasma was lysed to allow enzymes to react with MycoAlertTM PLUS substrate, catalyzing the conversion of ADP to ATP. The level of ATP in the sample both before (reading A; ATP background) and after (reading B) the addition of MycoAlertTM PLUS substrate was assessed using a luminometer (Victor3, Perkin-Elmer, Waltham, Massachusetts, USA), so that a ratio B/A was obtained. Reading B assesses the conversion of ADP to ATP and is a monitor of contaminated samples. If the ratio of B/A is greater than 1 the cell culture was considered to be contaminated by mycoplasma. For control samples, the MycoAlert TM assay positive and negative control set was used.

Ethnically diverse-induced pluripotent stem cell (ED-iPSC) lines maintained on human foreskin fibroblast feeders were transferred to feeder-free conditions in non-tissue culture treated dishes coated with xenofree vitronectin (StemCell Technologies, Vancouver, Canada) or 1:100 Matrigel (10mg/ml; BD Biosciences, San Jose, CA) diluted into Hanks Buffered Saline Solution (Gibco HBSS; Life Technologies, Grand Island, NY). Cells were maintained in mTeSR2 complete media (StemCell Technologies, Vancouver, Canada) and mechanically passaged between days 5 and 7. Media was replaced on day 1 after the first passage of the series and cells grown overnight. On day 2, slow release Stem Beads FGF2 (20 microliters of PLGA beads loaded with hFGF2; StemBeads; Stem Culture Inc., Rensselaer, NY) were added with fresh mTeSR2 media. Media changes were done every 3 days with Stem Beads FGF2 and mTeSR2. Preparation of uniform sized EBs from iPSCs colonies was done in custom lithography template microarrays (LTA) generated in-house. Chemical dissociation of the stem cell colonies into single cell suspension was done before and loading of the cells into LTA- polydimethylsiloxane (PDMS) grids in mTeSR2 media in the presence of 10M Rock inhibitor (Sigma-Aldrich, St. Louis, MO) at day 0. Stem cells were maintained in grids for five days with media changes every two days. For directed multi-lineage early differentiation we used the Human Pluripotent Stem Cell Functional Identification Kit (R&D Systems, Minneapolis, MN).

For immunocytology of biomarkers in iPSC colonies, cells were prepared by two methods. Cells were fixed using 4% paraformaldehyde in PBS for 15min at room temperature and blocked by incubating cells for 90min in a solution containing 3% normal donkey serum and permeabilized by 0.1% Triton-X 100 for 10min before antibody addition. Incubations with the primary antibodies of anti-Nanog (Santa Cruz Biotechnology, Dallas, TX) and anti-SSEA4 (Santa Cruz Biotechnology, Dallas, TX) were done at 4C overnight, followed by incubation with a secondary antibody conjugated with Alexa 647 or Alexa 488 (Abcam, Cambridge, MA). After rinsing with phosphate buffered saline (PBS), the DNA was stained with bisBenzimide H 33258 (Sigma-Aldrich, St. Louis, MO) and cells imaged using a digital camera connected to a Nikon TE-2000 inverted microscope.

Phase imaging for in vitro differentiated samples was done on a Nikon 80i epifluorescence microscope using a PLAN 100.30 NA DL objective and images captured with a cooled QICam CCD camera. Fluorescent images were obtained on a Leica SP5 Laser Scanning Confocal Microscope using either HC PL FLUOTAR 100.30 NA or HCX PL APO CS 20X .70 NA objectives and also on a Zeiss AxioObserver Z1 Inverted Microscope with Colibri LED illumination, using a 100X oil 1.45 NA PlanFLUAR or 63X Plan-Apochromat 1.4 NA oil DIC objectives. Images were captured with a Hamamatsu ORCA ER CCD camera and Zeiss Axiovision Rel 4.8 acquisition software. Figures were compiled using Adobe Photoshop (Adobe Systems Inc., San Jose, CA) and Microsoft PowerPoint (Microsoft Corp., Redmond, WA) software.

The immunocytology of 2D cell cultures or three dimensional EBs was done by first fixing cells for 10 minutes at room temperature in 4% paraformaldehyde and stored overnight in PBS+0.1% Tween20 at 4C. Immediately before incubation with antibodies, the cells were permeabilized with PBS+0.5% Triton X-100 for 1 hour at 4C. Nonspecific binding was blocked by 20 minute incubation in 1% BSA in HBSS and followed by a single HBSS wash. Antibodies used for gauging pluripotency recognized Oct4A C-10 (Santa Cruz Biotechnology, Dallas, TX) and anti-SSEA4 (Millipore, Billerica, MA) (1:1000 each). Analysis of lineage commitment to differentiation was done using antibodies to OTX2 (ectoderm), SOX17 (endoderm), and Brachyury (mesoderm; 1:100 each) provided in the Human Pluripotent Stem Cell Functional Identification Kit (R&D Systems, Minneapolis, MN). Secondary antibodies were either AlexaFluor 488 or AlexaFluor 594 (A-11001, A-11037, Invitrogen, Carlsbad, CA). Nuclei were stained with bisBenzimide H 33258 (Sigma-Aldrich, St. Louis, MO) at 4C overnight and followed by washing one hour in HBSS at 4C. Samples were mounted in ProLong Gold antifade reagent (Life Technologies, Grand Island, NY) at 20C overnight in the dark before imaging immediately or storing at 4C.

Approximately 2 million ED-iPSCs were injected subcutaneously in the flank region of NOD scid gamma (NSG) mice (The Jackson Lab, Bar harbor, ME). After 1224 weeks, teratomas were formed from 10 iPSC lines, and tumors were excised & fixed in 10% normal buffered formalin (NBF) overnight. The samples were processed for histology by the Division of Human Pathology at MSU. Hematoxylin- and eosin (H&E)-stained sections were examined under a microscope.

Follow this link:
Derivation of Ethnically Diverse Human Induced Pluripotent ...