Induced pluripotent stem cell – Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Posted: November 3, 2013 at 1:45 am

Induced pluripotent stem cells,[1] commonly abbreviated as iPS cells or iPSCs are a type of pluripotent stem cell artificially derived from a non-pluripotent cell typically an adult somatic cell by inducing a "forced" expression of specific genes.

Induced pluripotent stem cells are similar to natural pluripotent stem cells, such as embryonic stem (ES) cells, in many aspects, such as the expression of certain stem cell genes and proteins, chromatin methylation patterns, doubling time, embryoid body formation, teratoma formation, viable chimera formation, and potency and differentiability, but the full extent of their relation to natural pluripotent stem cells is still being assessed.[2] Induced pluripotent cells have been made from adult stomach, liver, skin cells, blood cells, prostate cells and urinary tract cells.[3]

iPSCs were first produced in 2006 from mouse cells and in 2007 from human cells in a series of experiments by Shinya Yamanaka's team at Kyoto University, Japan, and by James Thomson's team at the University of Wisconsin-Madison. For her iPSC research, Dr. Nancy Bachman, of Oneonta, NY, was awarded the Wolf Prize in Medicine in 2012 (along with John B. Gurdon).[4][5][6] For his iPSC discovery (and for deriving the first human embryonic stem cell), James Thomson received the 2011 Albany Medical Center Prize for Biomedical Research and the 2011 King Faisal International Prize, which he shared with Yamanaka. In October 2012, Yamanaka and fellow stem cell researcher John Gurdon were awarded the Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine "for the discovery that mature cells can be reprogrammed to become pluripotent."[7]

iPSCs are an important advance in stem cell research, as they may allow researchers to obtain pluripotent stem cells, which are important in research and potentially have therapeutic uses, without the controversial use of embryos. Because iPSCs are developed from a patient's own somatic cells, it was believed that treatment of iPSCs would avoid any immunogenic responses; however, Zhao et al. have challenged this assumption.[8]

Depending on the methods used, reprogramming of adult cells to obtain iPSCs may pose significant risks that could limit their use in humans. For example, if viruses are used to genomically alter the cells, the expression of cancer-causing genes "oncogenes" may potentially be triggered. In February 2008, scientists announced the discovery of a technique that could remove oncogenes after the induction of pluripotency, thereby increasing the potential use of iPS cells in human diseases.[9] In April 2009, it was demonstrated that generation of iPS cells is possible without any genetic alteration of the adult cell: a repeated treatment of the cells with certain proteins channeled into the cells via poly-arginine anchors was sufficient to induce pluripotency.[10] The acronym given for those iPSCs is piPSCs (protein-induced pluripotent stem cells).

Dedifferentiation to totipotency or pluripotency: an overview of methods. Various methods exist to revert adult somatic cells to pluripotency or totipotency. In the case of totipotency, reprogramming is mediated through a mature metaphase II oocyte as in somatic cell nuclear transfer (Wilmut et al., 1997). Recent work has demonstrated the feasibility of enucleated zygotes or early blastomeres chemically arrested during mitosis, such that nuclear envelope break down occurs, to support reprogramming to totipotency in a process called chromosome transfer (Egli and Eggan, 2010). Direct reprogramming methods support reversion to pluripotency; though, vehicles and biotypes vary considerably in efficiencies (Takahashi and Yamanaka, 2006). Viral-mediated transduction robustly supports dedifferentiation to pluripotency through retroviral or DNA-viral routes but carries the onus of insertional inactivation. Additionally, epigenetic reprogramming by enforced expression of OSKM through DNA routes exists such as plasmid DNA, minicircles, transposons, episomes and DNA mulicistronic construct targeting by homologous recombination has also been demonstrated; however, these methods suffer from the burden to potentially alter the recipient genome by gene insertion (Ho et al., 2010). While protein-mediated transduction supports reprogramming adult cells to pluripotency, the method is cumbersome and requires recombinant protein expression and purification expertise, and reprograms albeit at very low frequencies (Kim et al., 2009). A major obstacle of using RNA for reprogramming is its lability and that single-stranded RNA biotypes trigger innate antiviral defense pathways such as interferon and NF-B-dependent pathways. In vitro transcribed RNA, containing stabilizing modifications such as 5-methylguanosine capping or substituted ribonucleobases, e.g. pseudouracil, is 35-fold more efficient than viral transduction and has the additional benefit of not altering the somatic genome (Warren et al., 2010). An overarching goal of reprogramming methods is to replace genes with small molecules to assist in reprogramming. No cocktail has been identified to completely reprogram adult cells to totipotency or pluripotency, but many examples exist that improve the overall efficiency of the process and can supplant one or more genes by direct reprogramming routes (Feng et al., 2009; Zhu et al., 2010).

iPS cells are typically derived by transfection of certain stem cell-associated genes into non-pluripotent cells, such as adult fibroblasts, although this technique is becoming less popular since it is known to be prone to inducing cancer formation. Transfection is typically achieved through viral vectors, such as retroviruses. Transfected genes include the master transcriptional regulators Oct-3/4 (Pou5f1) and Sox2, although it is suggested that other genes enhance the efficiency of induction. After 34 weeks, small numbers of transfected cells begin to become morphologically and biochemically similar to pluripotent stem cells, and are typically isolated through morphological selection, doubling time, or through a reporter gene and antibiotic selection.

Induced pluripotent stem cells were first generated by Shinya Yamanaka's team at Kyoto University, Japan in 2006. Yamanaka used genes that had been identified as particularly important in embryonic stem cells (ESCs), and used retroviruses to transduce mouse fibroblasts with a selection of those genes. Eventually, four key pluripotency genes essential for the production of pluripotent stem cells were isolated; Oct-3/4, SOX2, c-Myc, and Klf4. Cells were isolated by antibiotic selection of Fbx15+ cells. However, this iPS cell line showed DNA methylation errors compared to original patterns in ESC lines and failed to produce viable chimeras if injected into developing embryos.

In June 2007, the same group published a breakthrough study along with two other independent research groups from Harvard, MIT, and the University of California, Los Angeles, showing successful reprogramming of mouse fibroblasts into iPS cells and even producing viable chimera. These cell lines were also derived from mouse fibroblasts by retroviral mediated reactivation of the same four endogenous pluripotent factors, but the researchers now selected a different marker for detection. Instead of Fbx15, they used Nanog which is an important gene in ESCs. DNA methylation patterns and production of viable chimeras (and thereby contributing to subsequent germ-line production) indicated that Nanog is a major determinant of cellular pluripotency.[11][12][13][14][15]

Unfortunately, two of the four genes used (namely, c-Myc and KLF4) are oncogenic, and 20% of the chimeric mice developed cancer. In a later study, Yamanaka reported that one can create iPSCs even without c-Myc. The process takes longer and is not as efficient, but the resulting chimeras didn't develop cancer.[16]

Link:
Induced pluripotent stem cell - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Related Posts

Comments are closed.

Archives