Cellular reprogramming最新文献

Chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T cell therapy is a promising cell-based immunotherapy applicable to various cancers. High cost of production, immune rejection, heterogeneity of cell product, limited cell source, limited expandability, and relatively long production time have created the need to achieve a universal allogeneic CAR-T cell product for "off-the-shelf" application. Since the innovation of induced pluripotent stem cells (iPSCs) by Yamanaka et al., extensive efforts have been made to prepare an unlimited cell source for regenerative medicine, that is, immunotherapy. In the autologous grafting approach, iPSCs prepare the desired cell source for generating autologous CAR-T cells through more accessible and available sources. In addition, generating iPSC-derived CAR-T cells is a promising approach to achieving a suitable source for producing an allogeneic CAR-T cell product. In brief, the first step is reprogramming somatic cells (accessible from peripheral blood, skin, etc.) to iPSCs. In the next step, CAR expression and T cell lineage differentiation should be applied in different arrangements. In addition, in an allogeneic manner, human leukocyte antigen/T cell receptor (TCR) deficiency should be applied in iPSC colonies. The allogeneic iPSC-derived CAR-T cell experiments showed that simultaneous performance of HLA/TCR deficiency, CAR expression, and T cell lineage differentiation could bring the production to the highest efficacy in generating allogeneic iPSC-derived CAR-T cells.

Generating A-to-C transversions to correct defective alleles or introduce novel alleles has posed significant challenges. However, two recent studies focusing on adenine transversions have achieved successful A-to-C transversions in mouse embryos and plant cell. These remarkable accomplishments notably broaden the range of base editing and their applications both in fundamental research and in therapeutics.

Reprogramming is traditionally defined as the fate conversion of a cell to a stage of increased developmental potential. In its broader meaning, the reprogramming term is also applied to all forms of cell fate conversion that do not follow a developmental trajectory. Reprogramming is now a well-established field of research that gained rapid progress upon the advent of induced pluripotency. In this perspective, I reflect on the reprogramming lessons of the past, in the contributions to other fields of research and on the potential transformative future use of reprogrammed cells and of its cell derivatives.

Oocytes contain reprogramming machinery that can transform somatic cells into totipotent cells. In this study, we aimed to isolate and characterize nanovesicles from mature porcine oocytes and described them for the first time as "intra-ooplasmic vesicles (IOVs)". Isolated IOVs had an average diameter of 186.3 ± 10.8 nm. Proteomic analysis revealed 467 peptide reads, with the top 20 proteins related to reprogramming, antioxidative defense, cytoskeleton, heat shock proteins, and metabolism. Protein-protein interaction and gene ontology analysis indicated that these proteins were involved in various biological pathways, including protein folding, metabolism, and cellular responses to stress. Supplementing cultured fibroblasts with IOVs resulted in the expression of the pluripotency marker OCT4 and the early trophoblastic marker CDX2 and increased expression of the corresponding mRNAs together with increasing KLF4 and SALL4 expression. IOV treatment of fibroblasts for 14 consecutive days resulted in changes in cell morphology, with increased expression of ZEB2 and YBX3 as markers for epithelial-to-mesenchymal transition (EMT). These results provide a rationale for further characterization of IOVs, investigation of potential reprogramming capabilities for EMT, and the generation of induced pluripotent or oligopotent stem cells.

Louise Brown's birth in 1978 heralded a new era not just in reproductive technology, but in the relationship between science, cells, and society. For the first time, human embryos could be created, selected, studied, manipulated, frozen, altered, or destroyed, outside the human body. But with this possibility came a plethora of ethical questions. Is it acceptable to destroy a human embryo for the purpose of research? Or to create an embryo with the specific purpose of destroying it for research? In an attempt to construct ethical and legal frameworks for the new era of cellular reprogramming, legislators and ethicists have tried to distinguish between different kinds of biological entity. We treat cells differently depending on whether they are human or animal, somatic cells or gametes, and on whether they are embryos or not. But this approach to the ethics of cellular reprogramming is doomed to failure for the simple reason that cellular reprogramming in itself destroys the distinctions that the law requires to function. In this article, we explore the historical trajectory of cellular reprogramming and its relationship with ethics and society. We suggest that the early hype of embryo research has not obviously fulfilled expectations, but since new avenues of research are continuously opening, it is hard to say definitely that these promises have been broken. We explore the forthcoming challenges posed by the creation of DNA from scratch in the laboratory, and the implications of this for understandings of identity, privacy, and reproduction. We conclude that while ethics used to seek answers in biological facts, this is no longer possible, and a new approach is required.

Studying human somatic cell-to-neuron conversion using primary brain-derived cells as starting cell source is hampered by limitations and variations in human biopsy material. Thus, delineating the molecular variables that allow changing the identity of somatic cells, permit adoption of neuronal phenotypes, and foster maturation of induced neurons (iNs) is challenging. Based on our previous results that pericytes derived from the adult human cerebral cortex can be directly converted into iNs (Karow et al., 2018; Karow et al., 2012), we here introduce human induced pluripotent stem cell (hiPSC)-derived pericytes (hiPSC-pericytes) as a versatile and more uniform tool to study the pericyte-to-neuron conversion process. This strategy enables us to derive scalable cell numbers and allows for engineering of the starting cell population such as introducing reporter tools before differentiation into hiPSC-pericytes and subsequent iN conversion. Harvesting the potential of this approach, we established hiPSC-derived human-human neuronal cocultures that not only allow for independent manipulation of each coculture partner but also resulted in morphologically more mature iNs. In summary, we exploit hiPSC-based methods to facilitate the analysis of human somatic cell-to-neuron conversion.

In mammals, differentiated cells generally do not de-differentiate nor undergo cell fate alterations. However, they can be experimentally guided toward a different lineage. Cell fusion involving two different cell types has long been used to study this process, as this method induces cell fate alterations within hours to days in a subpopulation of fused cells, as evidenced by changes in gene-expression profiles. Despite the robustness of this system, its use has been restricted by low fusion rates and difficulty in eliminating unfused populations, thereby compromising resolution. In this study, we address these limitations by isolating fused cells using antibody-conjugated beads. This approach enables the microscopic tracking of fused cells starting as early as 5 hours after fusion. By taking advantage of species-specific FISH probes, we show that a small population of fused cells resulting from the fusion of mouse ES and human B cells, expresses OCT4 from human nuclei at levels comparable to human induced pluripotent stem cells (iPSCs) as early as 25 hours after fusion. We also show that this response can vary depending on the fusion partner. Our study broadens the usage of the cell fusion system for comprehending the mechanisms underlying cell fate alterations. These findings hold promise for diverse fields, including regenerative medicine and cancer.

In the era of stem cell research and regenerative medicine, understanding the regulatory networks that drive cellular reprogramming is fundamental. The study entitled "Cross-lineage potential of Ascl1 uncovered by comparing diverse reprogramming regulatomes" published in Stem Cell Reports sheds light on the remarkable versatility of Ascl1, a transcription factor known for its pivotal role in neurogenesis. By comparing regulatomes across multiple cell lineages, the authors have elucidated the potential of Ascl1 to facilitate the conversion of non-neural cells into various lineages beyond its canonical neural fate, suggesting its potential as a master regulator for lineage reprogramming. These observations challenge our current understanding of cell fate determination and open exciting avenues for regenerative medicine.