Literature DB >> 25900727

DNA damage response in neonatal and adult stromal cells compared with induced pluripotent stem cells.

Stefanie Liedtke1, Sophie Biebernick1, Teja Falk Radke1, Daniela Stapelkamp1, Carolin Coenen1, Holm Zaehres1, Gerhard Fritz1, Gesine Kogler1.   

Abstract

UNLABELLED: Comprehensive analyses comparing individual DNA damage response (DDR) of induced pluripotent stem cells (iPSCs) with neonatal stromal cells with respect to their developmental age are limited. The imperative necessity of providing developmental age-matched cell sources for meaningful toxicological drug safety assessments in replacement of animal-based testing strategies is evident. Here, DDR after radiation or treatment with N-methyl-N-nitrosurea (MNU) was determined in iPSCs compared with neonatal and bone marrow stromal cells. Neonatal and adult stromal cells showed no significant morphologically detectable cytotoxicity following treatment with 1 Gy or 1 mM MNU, whereas iPSCs revealed a much higher sensitivity. Foci analyses revealed an effective DNA repair in stromal cell types and iPSCs, as reflected by a rapid formation and disappearance of phosphorylated ATM and γH2AX foci. Furthermore, quantitative polymerase chain reaction analyses revealed the highest basic expression level of DDR and repair-associated genes in iPSCs, followed by neonatal stromal cells and adult stromal cells with the lowest expression levels. In addition, the influence of genotoxic stress prior to and during osteogenic differentiation of neonatal and adult stromal cells was analyzed applying common differentiation procedures. Experiments presented here suggest a developmental age-dependent basic expression level of genes involved in the processing of DNA damage. In addition a differentiation-dependent downregulation of repair genes was observed during osteogenesis. These results strongly support the requirement to provide adequate cell sources for toxicological in vitro drug testing strategies that match to the developmental age and differentiation status of the presumptive target cell of interest. SIGNIFICANCE: The results obtained in this study advance the understanding of DNA damage processing in human neonatal stromal cells as compared with adult stromal cells and induced pluripotent stem cells (iPSCs). The data suggest developmental age-dependent differences in DNA damage repair capacity. In iPSCs (closest to embryonic stem cells), the highest expression level of DNA damage response and repair genes was found, followed by neonatal stromal cells and adult stromal cells with the lowest overall expression. In addition, a differentiation-dependent downregulation of repair capacity was observed during osteogenic differentiation in neonatal stromal cells. Notably, the impact of genotoxic stress on osteogenic differentiation depended on the time the genotoxic insult took place and, moreover, was agent-specific. These results strongly support the necessity of offering and establishing adequate cell sources for informative toxicological testing matching to the developmental age and differentiation status of the respective cell of interest. ©AlphaMed Press.

Entities:  

Keywords:  DNA Repair; DNA damage response; Ionizing radiation; MNU; MSC; Neonatal and adult stromal cells; Osteogenesis; iPSC

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2015        PMID: 25900727      PMCID: PMC4449092          DOI: 10.5966/sctm.2014-0209

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Stem Cells Transl Med        ISSN: 2157-6564            Impact factor:   6.940


  54 in total

Review 1.  Cell-cycle checkpoints and cancer.

Authors:  Michael B Kastan; Jiri Bartek
Journal:  Nature       Date:  2004-11-18       Impact factor: 49.962

2.  Distinct differentiation potential of "MSC" derived from cord blood and umbilical cord: are cord-derived cells true mesenchymal stromal cells?

Authors:  Julia Bosch; Amelie Pia Houben; Teja Falk Radke; Daniela Stapelkamp; Erich Bünemann; Percy Balan; Anja Buchheiser; Stefanie Liedtke; Gesine Kögler
Journal:  Stem Cells Dev       Date:  2012-01-04       Impact factor: 3.272

3.  Human induced pluripotent cells resemble embryonic stem cells demonstrating enhanced levels of DNA repair and efficacy of nonhomologous end-joining.

Authors:  Jinshui Fan; Carine Robert; Yoon-Young Jang; Hua Liu; Saul Sharkis; Stephen Bruce Baylin; Feyruz Virgilia Rassool
Journal:  Mutat Res       Date:  2011-06-28       Impact factor: 2.433

4.  Differentiation-related response to DNA breaks in human mesenchymal stem cells.

Authors:  Lisa Oliver; Erika Hue; Quentin Séry; Audrey Lafargue; Claire Pecqueur; François Paris; François M Vallette
Journal:  Stem Cells       Date:  2013-04       Impact factor: 6.277

Review 5.  An integrated approach for detecting embryotoxicity and developmental toxicity of environmental contaminants using in vitro alternative methods.

Authors:  Miguel A Sogorb; David Pamies; Joaquín de Lapuente; Carmen Estevan; Jorge Estévez; Eugenio Vilanova
Journal:  Toxicol Lett       Date:  2014-02-03       Impact factor: 4.372

6.  Activation of DNA damage response pathways in human mesenchymal stem cells exposed to cisplatin or γ-irradiation.

Authors:  Áine M Prendergast; Séverine Cruet-Hennequart; Georgina Shaw; Frank P Barry; Michael P Carty
Journal:  Cell Cycle       Date:  2011-11-01       Impact factor: 4.534

Review 7.  DNA double-strand break response in stem cells: mechanisms to maintain genomic integrity.

Authors:  Pratik Nagaria; Carine Robert; Feyruz V Rassool
Journal:  Biochim Biophys Acta       Date:  2012-09-17

8.  TopBP1 activates ATR through ATRIP and a PIKK regulatory domain.

Authors:  Daniel A Mordes; Gloria G Glick; Runxiang Zhao; David Cortez
Journal:  Genes Dev       Date:  2008-06-01       Impact factor: 11.361

9.  Comparing the gene expression profile of stromal cells from human cord blood and bone marrow: lack of the typical "bone" signature in cord blood cells.

Authors:  Julia Bosch; Amelie Pia Houben; Tatiana Hennicke; René Deenen; Karl Köhrer; Stefanie Liedtke; Gesine Kögler
Journal:  Stem Cells Int       Date:  2013-09-16       Impact factor: 5.443

Review 10.  Potential application of cord blood-derived stromal cells in cellular therapy and regenerative medicine.

Authors:  Simone Maria Kluth; Teja Falk Radke; Gesine Kogler
Journal:  J Blood Transfus       Date:  2012-11-14
View more
  6 in total

Review 1.  DNA repair fidelity in stem cell maintenance, health, and disease.

Authors:  Chinnadurai Mani; P Hemachandra Reddy; Komaraiah Palle
Journal:  Biochim Biophys Acta Mol Basis Dis       Date:  2019-04-04       Impact factor: 5.187

Review 2.  Pluripotent Stem Cells and DNA Damage Response to Ionizing Radiations.

Authors:  Kalpana Mujoo; E Brian Butler; Raj K Pandita; Clayton R Hunt; Tej K Pandita
Journal:  Radiat Res       Date:  2016-06-22       Impact factor: 2.841

3.  Targeting the Cohesive Cluster Phenotype in Chordoma via β1 Integrin Increases Ionizing Radiation Efficacy.

Authors:  William L Harryman; Jaime M C Gard; Kelvin W Pond; Skyler J Simpson; Lucas H Heppner; Daniel Hernandez-Cortes; Andrew S Little; Jennifer M Eschbacher; Anne E Cress
Journal:  Neoplasia       Date:  2017-09-24       Impact factor: 5.715

4.  Quantification of Etoposide Hypersensitivity: A Sensitive, Functional Method for Assessing Pluripotent Stem Cell Quality.

Authors:  Frank J Secreto; Xing Li; Alyson J Smith; Elizabeth S Bruinsma; Ester Perales-Clemente; Saji Oommen; Gresin Hawse; Sybil C L Hrstka; Bonnie K Arendt; Emma B Brandt; Dennis A Wigle; Timothy J Nelson
Journal:  Stem Cells Transl Med       Date:  2017-09-19       Impact factor: 6.940

5.  Sirtuin1 meditated modification of Notch1 intracellular domain regulates nucleolar localization and activation of distinct signaling cascades.

Authors:  Neetu Saini; Geetha Bheeshmachar; Apurva Sarin
Journal:  Front Cell Dev Biol       Date:  2022-09-23

6.  Keratinocyte stem cells are more resistant to UVA radiation than their direct progeny.

Authors:  Elodie Metral; Nicolas Bechetoille; Frédéric Demarne; Odile Damour; Walid Rachidi
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2018-09-12       Impact factor: 3.240

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.