Literature DB >> 23302801

Negligible immunogenicity of terminally differentiated cells derived from induced pluripotent or embryonic stem cells.

Ryoko Araki1, Masahiro Uda, Yuko Hoki, Misato Sunayama, Miki Nakamura, Shunsuke Ando, Mayumi Sugiura, Hisashi Ideno, Akemi Shimada, Akira Nifuji, Masumi Abe.   

Abstract

The advantages of using induced pluripotent stem cells (iPSCs) instead of embryonic stem (ES) cells in regenerative medicine centre around circumventing concerns about the ethics of using ES cells and the likelihood of immune rejection of ES-cell-derived tissues. However, partial reprogramming and genetic instabilities in iPSCs could elicit immune responses in transplant recipients even when iPSC-derived differentiated cells are transplanted. iPSCs are first differentiated into specific types of cells in vitro for subsequent transplantation. Although model transplantation experiments have been conducted using various iPSC-derived differentiated tissues and immune rejections have not been observed, careful investigation of the immunogenicity of iPSC-derived tissue is becoming increasingly critical, especially as this has not been the focus of most studies done so far. A recent study reported immunogenicity of iPSC- but not ES-cell-derived teratomas and implicated several causative genes. Nevertheless, some controversy has arisen regarding these findings. Here we examine the immunogenicity of differentiated skin and bone marrow tissues derived from mouse iPSCs. To ensure optimal comparison of iPSCs and ES cells, we established ten integration-free iPSC and seven ES-cell lines using an inbred mouse strain, C57BL/6. We observed no differences in the rate of success of transplantation when skin and bone marrow cells derived from iPSCs were compared with ES-cell-derived tissues. Moreover, we observed limited or no immune responses, including T-cell infiltration, for tissues derived from either iPSCs or ES cells, and no increase in the expression of the immunogenicity-causing Zg16 and Hormad1 genes in regressing skin and teratoma tissues. Our findings suggest limited immunogenicity of transplanted cells differentiated from iPSCs and ES cells.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23302801     DOI: 10.1038/nature11807

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Nature        ISSN: 0028-0836            Impact factor:   49.962


  37 in total

1.  iPS cells can support full-term development of tetraploid blastocyst-complemented embryos.

Authors:  Lan Kang; Jianle Wang; Yu Zhang; Zhaohui Kou; Shaorong Gao
Journal:  Cell Stem Cell       Date:  2009-07-23       Impact factor: 24.633

2.  Identification of CT46/HORMAD1, an immunogenic cancer/testis antigen encoding a putative meiosis-related protein.

Authors:  Yao-Tseng Chen; Charis A Venditti; Gregory Theiler; Brian J Stevenson; Christian Iseli; Ali O Gure; C Victor Jongeneel; Lloyd J Old; Andrew J G Simpson
Journal:  Cancer Immun       Date:  2005-07-07

3.  Immunogenicity of induced pluripotent stem cells.

Authors:  Tongbiao Zhao; Zhen-Ning Zhang; Zhili Rong; Yang Xu
Journal:  Nature       Date:  2011-05-13       Impact factor: 49.962

4.  Variation in the safety of induced pluripotent stem cell lines.

Authors:  Kyoko Miura; Yohei Okada; Takashi Aoi; Aki Okada; Kazutoshi Takahashi; Keisuke Okita; Masato Nakagawa; Michiyo Koyanagi; Koji Tanabe; Mari Ohnuki; Daisuke Ogawa; Eiji Ikeda; Hideyuki Okano; Shinya Yamanaka
Journal:  Nat Biotechnol       Date:  2009-07-09       Impact factor: 54.908

5.  Treatment of sickle cell anemia mouse model with iPS cells generated from autologous skin.

Authors:  Jacob Hanna; Marius Wernig; Styliani Markoulaki; Chiao-Wang Sun; Alexander Meissner; John P Cassady; Caroline Beard; Tobias Brambrink; Li-Chen Wu; Tim M Townes; Rudolf Jaenisch
Journal:  Science       Date:  2007-12-06       Impact factor: 47.728

6.  iPS cells produce viable mice through tetraploid complementation.

Authors:  Xiao-yang Zhao; Wei Li; Zhuo Lv; Lei Liu; Man Tong; Tang Hai; Jie Hao; Chang-long Guo; Qing-wen Ma; Liu Wang; Fanyi Zeng; Qi Zhou
Journal:  Nature       Date:  2009-09-03       Impact factor: 49.962

7.  Derivation of completely cell culture-derived mice from early-passage embryonic stem cells.

Authors:  A Nagy; J Rossant; R Nagy; W Abramow-Newerly; J C Roder
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  1993-09-15       Impact factor: 11.205

8.  The transcriptional and epigenomic foundations of ground state pluripotency.

Authors:  Hendrik Marks; Tüzer Kalkan; Roberta Menafra; Sergey Denissov; Kenneth Jones; Helmut Hofemeister; Jennifer Nichols; Andrea Kranz; A Francis Stewart; Austin Smith; Hendrik G Stunnenberg
Journal:  Cell       Date:  2012-04-27       Impact factor: 41.582

9.  Ascorbic acid prevents loss of Dlk1-Dio3 imprinting and facilitates generation of all-iPS cell mice from terminally differentiated B cells.

Authors:  Matthias Stadtfeld; Effie Apostolou; Francesco Ferrari; Jiho Choi; Ryan M Walsh; Taiping Chen; Steen S K Ooi; Sang Yong Kim; Timothy H Bestor; Toshi Shioda; Peter J Park; Konrad Hochedlinger
Journal:  Nat Genet       Date:  2012-03-04       Impact factor: 38.330

10.  Somatic coding mutations in human induced pluripotent stem cells.

Authors:  Athurva Gore; Zhe Li; Ho-Lim Fung; Jessica E Young; Suneet Agarwal; Jessica Antosiewicz-Bourget; Isabel Canto; Alessandra Giorgetti; Mason A Israel; Evangelos Kiskinis; Je-Hyuk Lee; Yuin-Han Loh; Philip D Manos; Nuria Montserrat; Athanasia D Panopoulos; Sergio Ruiz; Melissa L Wilbert; Junying Yu; Ewen F Kirkness; Juan Carlos Izpisua Belmonte; Derrick J Rossi; James A Thomson; Kevin Eggan; George Q Daley; Lawrence S B Goldstein; Kun Zhang
Journal:  Nature       Date:  2011-03-03       Impact factor: 49.962

View more
  214 in total

1.  Impaired neural differentiation potency by retinoic acid receptor-α pathway defect in induced pluripotent stem cells.

Authors:  Pei-Shan Hou; Wen-Chin Huang; Wei Chiang; Wei-Che Lin; Chung-Liang Chien
Journal:  Cell Reprogram       Date:  2014-11-03       Impact factor: 1.987

Review 2.  Induced pluripotent stem cells in dermatology: potentials, advances, and limitations.

Authors:  Ganna Bilousova; Dennis R Roop
Journal:  Cold Spring Harb Perspect Med       Date:  2014-11-03       Impact factor: 6.915

Review 3.  Present and future challenges of induced pluripotent stem cells.

Authors:  Mari Ohnuki; Kazutoshi Takahashi
Journal:  Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci       Date:  2015-10-19       Impact factor: 6.237

Review 4.  Stem Cells in Skeletal Tissue Engineering: Technologies and Models.

Authors:  Mark T Langhans; Shuting Yu; Rocky S Tuan
Journal:  Curr Stem Cell Res Ther       Date:  2016       Impact factor: 3.828

Review 5.  Tissue Engineering and Regenerative Medicine 2015: A Year in Review.

Authors:  Holly Wobma; Gordana Vunjak-Novakovic
Journal:  Tissue Eng Part B Rev       Date:  2016-02-23       Impact factor: 6.389

Review 6.  Regenerative medicine: Current therapies and future directions.

Authors:  Angelo S Mao; David J Mooney
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2015-11-24       Impact factor: 11.205

7.  Induced pluripotent stem cells have similar immunogenic and more potent immunomodulatory properties compared with bone marrow-derived stromal cells in vitro.

Authors:  Lauren V Schnabel; Christian M Abratte; John C Schimenti; M Julia Bevilaqua Felippe; Jennifer M Cassano; Teresa L Southard; Jessica A Cross; Lisa A Fortier
Journal:  Regen Med       Date:  2014-04-28       Impact factor: 3.806

Review 8.  Pluripotent stem cells in regenerative medicine: challenges and recent progress.

Authors:  Viviane Tabar; Lorenz Studer
Journal:  Nat Rev Genet       Date:  2014-02       Impact factor: 53.242

9.  The Potentials and Pitfalls of Using Adult Stem Cells in Cancer Treatment.

Authors:  Mrinal K Das; Taral R Lunavat; Hrvoje Miletic; Jubayer A Hossain
Journal:  Adv Exp Med Biol       Date:  2021       Impact factor: 2.622

Review 10.  Allogeneic blood and bone marrow cells for the treatment of severe epidermolysis bullosa: repair of the extracellular matrix.

Authors:  Jakub Tolar; John E Wagner
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  2013-10-05       Impact factor: 79.321

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.