BACKGROUND: New sources of insulin-secreting cells are strongly in demand for treatment of diabetes. Induced pluripotent stem cells (iPSCs) have the potential to generate insulin-producing cells (iβ). However, the gene expression profile and secretory function of iβ still need to be validated in comparison with native β cells. METHODS: Two clones of human iPSCs, reprogrammed from adult fibroblasts through integration-free Sendai virus, were differentiated into iβ and compared with donor pancreatic islets and EndoC-βH1, an immortalized human β cell line. RESULTS: Both clones of iPSCs differentiated into insulin+ cells with high efficiency (up to 20%). iβ were negative for pluripotency markers (Oct4, Sox2, Ssea4) and positive for Pdx1, Nkx6.1, Chromogranin A, PC1/3, insulin, glucagon and somatostatin. iβ basally secreted C-peptide, glucagon and ghrelin and released insulin in response either to increasing concentration of glucose or a depolarizing stimulus. The comparison revealed that iβ are remarkably similar to donor derived islets in terms of gene and protein expression profile and similar level of heterogeneity. The ability of iβ to respond to glucose instead was more related to that of EndoC-βH1. DISCUSSION: We demonstrated that insulin-producing cells generated from iPSCs recapitulate fundamental gene expression profiles and secretory function of native human β cells.
BACKGROUND: New sources of insulin-secreting cells are strongly in demand for treatment of diabetes. Induced pluripotent stem cells (iPSCs) have the potential to generate insulin-producing cells (iβ). However, the gene expression profile and secretory function of iβ still need to be validated in comparison with native β cells. METHODS: Two clones of human iPSCs, reprogrammed from adult fibroblasts through integration-free Sendai virus, were differentiated into iβ and compared with donor pancreatic islets and EndoC-βH1, an immortalized human β cell line. RESULTS: Both clones of iPSCs differentiated into insulin+ cells with high efficiency (up to 20%). iβ were negative for pluripotency markers (Oct4, Sox2, Ssea4) and positive for Pdx1, Nkx6.1, Chromogranin A, PC1/3, insulin, glucagon and somatostatin. iβ basally secreted C-peptide, glucagon and ghrelin and released insulin in response either to increasing concentration of glucose or a depolarizing stimulus. The comparison revealed that iβ are remarkably similar to donor derived islets in terms of gene and protein expression profile and similar level of heterogeneity. The ability of iβ to respond to glucose instead was more related to that of EndoC-βH1. DISCUSSION: We demonstrated that insulin-producing cells generated from iPSCs recapitulate fundamental gene expression profiles and secretory function of native human β cells.
Type 1 diabetes (T1D) is an autoimmune disorder in which the immune system attacks
and destroys insulin producing islet cells in the pancreas. Therefore, T1D is
characterized by deficient insulin production and persistently high blood glucose
levels that are not restored to a fully physiological extent by treatment with
exogenous insulin. As a consequence, prolonged glucose dysmetabolism can lead to a
number of secondary complications including eye, kidney, nerve, and heart disease[1,2]. β cell replacement is potentially able to restore normoglycemia and ward off
complications, as demonstrated by pancreas/islet transplantation, but scarcity of
donors and the need for lifelong immunosuppression limit its broad application to
T1D patients[3,4]. Pluripotent stem cells have shown the ability to differentiate in
vitro into insulin producing cells, following the stages of fetal
pancreatic organogenesis[5-8], and could then represent an infinite source of new β cells for
transplantation. Currently, pancreatic progenitors obtained from the differentiation
of embryonic stem cell lines are already being transplanted into patients with T1D
in a phase 1/2 clinical trial in the USA and Canada (NCT02239354 and
NCT03163511).Induced pluripotent stem cells (iPSCs) show the same plasticity of ESC, but can be
derived from patient’s somatic cells, without ethical issues[9-12]. iPSCs are able to differentiate into insulin producing cells, although
previous reports adopted different protocols and showed variable efficiency[6,7,12-14]. In addition, previous studies did not perform an accurate quality assessment
of β cell derivatives in comparison with human β cell, an issue of particular
relevance in light of the current push towards clinical application.We recently published that human iPSCs, reprogrammed from fetal fibroblasts with
retroviral vectors, can generate insulin-producing cells, engraft and secrete
insulin in vivo[15]. In the present study, we show that two clones of iPSCs, reprogrammed from
adult fibroblasts through integration-free Sendai virus delivery of Yamanaka’s
factors, are able to generate β cells with a phenotype and function that
recapitulate fundamental features of organ donor derived pancreatic islets and
EndoC-βH1, an immortalized human β cell line.
Materials and Methods
iPSC Reprogramming, Characterization, Validation of Pluripotency and
Multilineage Differentiation Potential
Two human iPSC clones (#5 and #9) were generated by reprogramming healthy subject
fibroblasts with the Sendai virus technology (CytoTune-iPS Sendai Reprogramming
Kit, ThermoFisher, Waltham, MA, USA)[16]. Clone #9 is characterized and banked at ISENET, Milan, Italy (www.isenet.it), clone #5 characterization is described below.
Written informed consent was obtained from the donor for anonymized information
to be published in this article.HiPSC clones were individually picked and expanded on a feeder layer in mTeSR1
medium (STEMCELL Technologies, Vancouver, Canada). Cells were maintained in
mTeSR1 on hESC-qualified Matrigel (BD Biosciences, Franklin Lakes, NJ, USA),
dissociated with 0.5 mM EDTA (Ambion, Waltham, MA, USA) for passages and
routinely tested for mycoplasma.iPSCs cultured on Matrigel ES (BD) were treated with 0.2 μg/ml colchicine for 16
hours and sent to Integrated System Engineering (ISENET, Milan, Italy) for
karyotype analysis using a Q-banding on 400 bands and by array cytogenetic
hybridization (aCGH) of 600,00 probes with a median probe spacing of 41 kb
(Agilent Technologies, Santa Clara, CA, USA).Cells were tested for pluripotency markers by immunofluorescence (OCT4, NANOG,
SSEA3, SSEA4 and SOX2) and by flow cytometry (SSEA4-FITC, TRA1-60-APC,
TRA1-81-APC, Millipore, Burlington, MA, USA). For immunofluorescence, iPSC
colonies were fixed in 4% paraformaldehyde, blocked with 5% goat serum in PBS
and permeabilized with 0.3% TritonX-100 for nuclear staining in presence of
primary antibody (Table
1) at 4°C overnight. Samples were exposed to secondary antibodies
(1:1000, Thermo Scientific, Table 2) 1 hour and half in the dark. Nuclei were counterstained
with DAPI diluted in PBS (1:10000, Sigma-Aldrich, Saint Louis, MO, USA) and
mounted on coverslips with Faramount aqueous mounting solution (DAKO, Agilent).
Images were taken with a confocal microscope (Leica SP5, Wetzlar, Germany).
Table 1.
List of Antibodies used in immunofluorescence (IF), Flow cytometry (FC)
and immunohistochemistry (IHC).
Marker
Host
Brand
Clone
Diluition
Application
SSEA3, surface
Rat
Millipore
MC-631
1:150
IF
SSEA4, surface
Mouse
Millipore
MC-813-70
1:150
IF, FC
TRA1-60, surface
Mouse
Millipore
TRA1-60
1:150
FC
TRA1-81, surface
Mouse
Millipore
TRA1-81
1:150
FC
OCT3/4, nuclear
Mouse
Santa Cruz
C-10
1:100
IF
NANOG, nuclear
Rabbit
Abcam
Polyclonal
1:100
IF
PAX6, nuclear
Rabbit
BIOLEGEND
Polyclonal
1:200
IF
αSMA-1, cytoplasm
Mouse
SIGMA
1A4
1:200
IF
aFP, cytoplasm
Mouse
R&D
189502
1:50
IF
SOX17, nuclear
Goat
R&D
Polyclonal
1:25
IF
FOXA2, nuclear
Mouse
Santa Cruz
A-12
1:50
IF
T (Brachyury), nuclear
Goat
R&D
Polyclonal
1:25
IF
Glucagon, cytoplasm
Mouse
Novocastra
Polyclonal
1:200
IHC
Insulin, cytoplasm
Mouse
Novocastra
2D11-H5
1:100
IHC
SOX2, nuclear
Mouse
R&D
245610
1:500
IHC
PDX1, nuclear
Rabbit
Abcam
EPR3358
1:5000
IHC
NKX6.1, nuclear
Mouse
R&D
631438
1:100
IF
Glucagon, cytoplasm
Mouse
Sigma
K79bB10
1:100
IF
Insulin, cytoplasm
Guinea pig
Dako
Polyclonal
1:200
IF
SSEA4, surface
Mouse
Abcam
MC813
1:100
IF
CHG-a, cytoplasm
Rabbit
Abcam
Polyclonal
1:100
IF
PC1/3, cytoplasm
Mouse
Abcam
Monoclonal
1:150
IF
Somatostatin, cytoplasm
Rat
Abcam
8.F.258
1:100
IF
Table 2.
Listo of secondary antibodies.
Species
Fluorophore
Host
Brand
Code
Diluition
Guinea pig
Alexa Fluor-488®
Goat
Thermo Scientific
A-11073
1:500
Mouse
Alexa Fluor-546®
Goat
Thermo Scientific
A-11003
1:500
Rabbit
Alexa Fluor-546®
Goat
Thermo Scientific
A-11035
1:500
Rat
Alexa Fluor-546®
Goat
Thermo Scientific
A-11081
1:500
List of Antibodies used in immunofluorescence (IF), Flow cytometry (FC)
and immunohistochemistry (IHC).Listo of secondary antibodies.For flow cytometry, colonies were dissociated into single cells with Accutase
(STEMCELL Technologies), then cells were directly stained with SSEA4, TRA1-60,
TRA1-81 (Table 1)
and results acquired using a FACS Canto flow cytometer and the FACS Diva
software. Results were re-analyzed with the FlowJo software version 9 (FlowJo
LLC, Ashland, Oregon, USA).To assess iPSC ability to differentiate in the three germinative lineages, iPSC
colonies were incubated with Dispase solution (Gibco, Waltham, MA, USA) for
10–15 min at 37°C to promote colony lifting. Cell aggregates (embryoid bodies
(EB)) were maintained in differentiation medium consisting of DMEMF-12, 20%
Knock-out serum replacement, 20 μM β-mercaptoethanol, 1% sodium pyruvate, 2 mM
L-glutamine, 2 mM nonessential amino acids (NEAA), 100 U/ml penicillin, and
0.1 mg/ml streptomycin (Gibco) for 5 days in presence of ROCK inhibitor
(STEMCELL Technologies). EB were plated on Matrigel coated 13 mm coverslips and
incubated for 2 days. The EB immunofluorescence analysis was conducted as
described above with specific primary antibodies (Table 1).
Differentiation of iPSC into Pancreatic Cells
Human iPSCs were differentiated into insulin-producing cells following a protocol
established for pluripotent stem cells[6], with slight modifications. Differentiation was initiated in adhesion
when the iPSC cultures reached 70−80% confluence. Cells were imaged during the
differentiation steps using an EVOS microscope (Life Technologies).The following culture media were used for differentiation:M1 medium: MCDB131 (Gibco) + 8 mM D-(+)-Glucose (Sigma) + 1.23 g/l
NaHCO3 (Sigma) + 2% BSA (Sigma) + 0.25 mM Vitamin C
(Sigma) + 1% Pen/Strep (Lonza, Basel, Switzerland) + 1% L-glutamine
(Lonza);M2 medium: MCDB131 + 20 mM D-Glucose + 1.754 g/l NaHCO3 +
2% BSA + 0.25 mM Vitamin C + Heparin 10mg/ml (Sigma) + 1% Pen/Strep
+ 1% L-glutamine.All media were filter-sterilized through a 0.22 mm bottle top filter (Corning,
New York State, USA). For sequential culture medium changes, small molecules and
growth factors were added to the base media immediately before daily exchange.
Media switches were as follows:days 0–3: STEMdiff™ Definitive Endoderm Kit (STEMCELL) used following
manufacturer instructions;days 4–6: M1 medium + 50 ng/ml KGF (Peprotech, London, UK) + 1:50.000
ITS-X (Invitrogen, Carlsbad, CA, USA);days 7, 8: M1 medium + 50 ng/ml KGF + 0.25 mM Sant1 (Sigma) + 2 μM
Retinoic acid (RA) (Sigma) + 500 nM PdBU (Millipore) + 1:200 ITS-X +
200 nM LDN193189 (only Day 7) (Sigma);days 9–13: M1 medium + 50 ng/ml KGF + 0.25 mM Sant1 + 100 nM RA +
1:200 ITS-X;days 14–18: M2 medium + 0.25 mM Sant1 + 100 nM RA + 1 mM XXI
(Millipore) + 10 mM Alk5i II (Selleckchem, Munich, Germany) + 1 mM
L-3,30,5-Triiodothyronine (T3) (Sigma) + 20 ng/ml Betacellulin
(R&D, Minneapolis, MN, USA) + 1:200 ITS-X.
Human Islets and EndoC-βH1
Humanpancreatic islet (HI) preparations were isolated from heart-beating
cadaveric organ donors as previously described[17] in the Pancreatic Islet Processing Unit of the Diabetes Research
Institute (DRI) at the San Raffaele Scientific Institute in Milan, Italy. The
use of human specimens (islet preparations discarded from clinical use) was
approved by the Institutional Review Board under the ‘European Consortium for
Islet Transplantation (ECIT) human islet distribution program’ supported by the
Juvenile Diabetes Research Foundation (JDRF) (3-RSC-2016-160-I-X)[18]. Islet purity was assessed as the percentages of endocrine clusters
positive to dithizone staining (range: 80–90%).The genetically engineered humanpancreatic β cell line EndoC-βH1[19] was grown in DMEM low glucose (1 g/l) (Gibco), 2% BSA (Sigma), 50 μM
2-mercaptoethanol (Sigma), 10 mM nicotinamide (Sigma), 5.5 μg/ml transferrin
(Gibco), 6.7 ng/ml sodium selenite (Sigma), 1% Pen/Strep.
Molecular Analysis
Total RNA was extracted with the mirVana Isolation Kit (Ambion) and quantified by
spectrophotometry (Epoch, Gen5 software; BioTek, Winooski, VT). After DNAse
(Invitrogen) treatment, 2 µg of RNA were reverse transcribed with SuperScript
III RT (Invitrogen), according to the manufacturer’s instructions (Invitrogen).
Predesigned gene-specific primer and probe sets from TaqMan Gene Expression
Assays (Applied Biosystems, Foster City, CA, USA; listed in Supplementary Table
1) were used for gene expression study. A predesigned TaqMan low-density array
panel (Applied Biosystems) of 40 markers of β cells was also used for gene
expression analysis (assays are listed in Supplementary Table 2) of 6/7
preparations of clone #5 and 4/5 of clone #9. PCRs were performed in a 7900
Real-Time PCR System (Applied Biosystems). Gene expression levels were
normalized using GAPDH (2−ΔCt method) and are reported as fold change
over undifferentiated iPSC and compared with HI and EndoC-βH1 (ΔΔCt method, mean
± SEM). Low-density array clustering analysis was performed with the Morpheus
software (https://software.broadinstitute.org/morpheus). Values of mean
difference (MD) between groups were calculated as difference between the log of
arithmetic means of the two groups (βH1-Hi-iβ v. iPSC or βH1-Hi v. iβ):assuming that random variables X and Y into two
groups were independently and identically distributed. Positive or negative
signs were then attributed according to up- or down-expression of genes between
groups.
Immunocytochemistry
For immunocytochemistry iPSC clusters were fixed in PFA 4% (Sigma) and
cytospinned for thin-layer cell preparation. Islet clusters were embedded in
agarose and paraffin and 3 μm sections were cut with a microtome. Samples were
processed routinely for histology. The peroxidase-antiperoxidase
immunohistochemistry method (Labvision, Thermo Scientific) was used for
detection with the antibodies listed in Table 1. Immunostained slides were
acquired using an AperioScanscope (Leica), which allows the scanning and
digitalization of the slide by multiple vertical scans at 40× magnification, and
analyzed with the Aperio Image Scope software (Leica).
Cytofluorimetric Analysis
Human iPSC and EndoC-βH1 were stained with the Live/Dead stain (Molecular Probes)
to exclude dead cells from the analysis. Intracellular staining required cell
permeabilization (Cytofix/Phosflow™ perm buffer III, Becton Dickinson, BD,
Franklin Lakes, NJ, USA). Cells were then stained using the following monoclonal
antibodies (mAbs): 40/Oct3 Alexa Fluor647® anti-OCT3/4; 658A5 Alexa
Fluor488® anti-PDX-1; R11-560 PE anti-NKX6.1; T56-706 Alexa
Fluor647® anti-Insulin (BD). Analysis was carried out on a FACS
Canto flow cytometer using the FACS Diva software. Results were analyzed with
the FlowJo software version 9 (FlowJo LLC).
Immunofluorescence
For immunofluorescence human iPSC were differentiated in 4-Well Culture Slide
(Falcon, Corning). HI were embedded in agarose, fixed with 4% paraformaldehyde,
included in paraffin and 3 μm sections were cut with a microtome. Sections were
de-paraffinized using xylene, and rehydrated in a serial dilution of absolute
alcohol. Cells were permeabilized when necessary for intracellular staining
(PermWash 0.2% Triton X-100 in PBS) and stained using the antibodies listed in
Tables 1 and
2. Images were
acquired using Confocals PerkinElmer UltraVIEW ERS microscope (PerkinElmer Life
Sciences, Waltham, MA, USA) and deconvolved with Huygens Professional version
17.04 (Scientific Volume Imaging), using the Classic Maximum Likelihood
Estimation (CMLE) algorithm, with signal-to-noise ratio (SNR): 100
iterations.
Hormone Secretion
Hormone levels in iPSC culture supernatants were measured at each differentiation
stage using the Bio-Plex Pro™ humandiabetes kit (BioRad, Hercules, CA, USA).
Samples were assayed according to the manufacturer’s instructions, and the
plates were read on a Luminex xMAP instrument (BioRad). The acquisition and
analysis of the samples were performed with the Bio-Plex Manager 6.0 software
(BioRad).
Dynamic Islet Perifusion
A high-capacity, automated perifusion system (BioRep® Perifusion
V2.0.0) was used to dynamically stimulate cell secretion. A low pulsatility
peristaltic pump was used to push HEPES-buffered solution (125 mM NaCl, 5.9 mM
KCl, 2.56 mM CaCl2, 1 mM MgCl2, 25 mM HEPES, 0.1% BSA, pH
7.4) through a sample container harboring 50 iPSC clusters or 20 HI immobilized
in Bio-Gel P-4 Gel (BioRad), or 700,000 EndoC-βH1 cells. Cells were stabilized
with a slow-flow perifusion rate (30 µl/min) with low glucose (2 mM) for 60
minutes. A combined stimulus (11 mM glucose with or without
3-isobutyl-1-methylxanthine - IBMX) was then added for 20 minutes at a flow rate
of 100 µl/min. Following a third step with 2 mM glucose for 20 minutes, cells
were exposed to 30 mM KCl for 20 minutes and then to 2 mM glucose for another 20
minutes. The perifusates were collected every minute by an automated fraction
collector designed for a multiwell plate format. Cells and perfusion solutions
were kept at 37°C in a built-in temperature controlled chamber, and collected
perifusates were stored at -20°C.
Quantification of Insulin Release
Insulin released in the perifusates was measured with an ELISA Kit (Mercodia,
Uppsala, SW) following the manufacturer’s instructions, using an ELISA Reader
(MicroPlate Reader, Model 680, BioRad).
Statistical Analysis
Nonparametric test (Kruskal Wallis with Dunn’s multiple comparison test) was used
to compare groups and a 2-tailed P value less than 0.05 or 0.01
was considered significant. Analysis of data was performed using the Prism
software (GraphPad Prism 5).
Results
IPSC Gene Expression Profile During In-vitro Differentiation
Compared to Mature β Cells
IPSC lines (clone #5 and clone #9) were obtained from fibroblasts of a healthy
adult donor, reprogrammed to iPSC by delivery of Yamanaka’s factors with Sendai
virus vectors.Clone #9 was previously characterized (HIPSCTR4#9, www.isenet.it). Regarding clone
#5, its genetic stability was confirmed by karyotype analysis via chromosome
Q-banding in the metaphase (Fig. 1S A) and by comparative genomic hybridization (CGH) array,
showing no significant genomic alterations with the exception of three CNVs, not
corresponding to known polymorphic variants and with no associated clinical
phenotype (Fig. 1S B).
Pluripotency requirements were assessed by flow cytometry staining (SSEA4,
TRA1-60, TRA1-80, Fig. 1S
C) and by immunofluorescence (OCT3/4, NANOG, TRA1-60, TRA1-80, SOX2,
Fig. 1S D),
confirming the staminal phenotype of the cells. Sendai virus vectors were
rapidly cleared after reprogramming Figure 2S. The differentiation capability
of iPSC towards cells of the three germinal layers was demonstrated by EB
formation in vitro. Plated aggregates stained positively for
endodermal (SOX17, alpha-FP, FOXA2), mesodermal (SMA1, T) and ectodermal (PAX6)
markers (Fig. 1S).
Fig 1.
Gene expression analysis of iPSC differentiation into insulin-producing
cells. (A) Gene expression analysis by Taqman of markers of definitive
endoderm (FOXA2 and SOX17), posterior
foregut (HNF1b and PDX1), pancreatic
endoderm (NKX2.2 and NKX6.1) and
endocrine cells (INS and GCG).
Normalized gene expression levels of clone #5 (black squares,
n=7) and clone #9 (red squares,
n=5) during the steps of differentiation are reported
as fold change referred to undifferentiated iPSC and compared with human
islets (HI, empty circles, n=5) and EndoC-βH1 cell line
(empty triangle) (mean ± SEM). (B) Heatmap showing the expression level
of 39 genes characteristic of β cell identity, function and development
in undifferentiated iPSC (clone #5 n=6 and clone #9
n=4), iβ (clone #5 n=6 and clone
#9 n=4), HI (n=6) and EndoC-βH1.
Samples are displayed in columns and genes in rows. Data are clustered
using hierarchical analysis based on Spearman correlation for genes and
k-means for samples. The bar below the heatmap is color coded according
to the level of expression (Log10 2⁁-ΔCt). Mean difference of
iPSC versus cluster composed by iβ-HI-EndoC-βH1 and iβ versus cluster of
HI-EndoC-βH1 of each gene is reported.
Fig 2.
Proteic expression analysis of iPSC-derived insulin-producing cells (iβ).
(A) Protein expression analysis by immunocytochemistry of SOX2, PDX1,
Insulin and Glucagon in cytospin preparations of iβ derived from iPSC
clone #5 and #9 and of paraffin embedded HI. Magnification 20x. (B)
Protein expression analysis by flow cytometry of markers of pluripotency
(OCT4), pancreatic endoderm (PDX1, NKX6.1) and endocrine cells (insulin)
in iβ and EndoC-βH1. SSC-A: side scatter. Gate delimitates positive
events. Percentages of positive cells of a representative experiment are
reported.
Gene expression analysis of iPSC differentiation into insulin-producing
cells. (A) Gene expression analysis by Taqman of markers of definitive
endoderm (FOXA2 and SOX17), posterior
foregut (HNF1b and PDX1), pancreatic
endoderm (NKX2.2 and NKX6.1) and
endocrine cells (INS and GCG).
Normalized gene expression levels of clone #5 (black squares,
n=7) and clone #9 (red squares,
n=5) during the steps of differentiation are reported
as fold change referred to undifferentiated iPSC and compared with human
islets (HI, empty circles, n=5) and EndoC-βH1 cell line
(empty triangle) (mean ± SEM). (B) Heatmap showing the expression level
of 39 genes characteristic of β cell identity, function and development
in undifferentiated iPSC (clone #5 n=6 and clone #9
n=4), iβ (clone #5 n=6 and clone
#9 n=4), HI (n=6) and EndoC-βH1.
Samples are displayed in columns and genes in rows. Data are clustered
using hierarchical analysis based on Spearman correlation for genes and
k-means for samples. The bar below the heatmap is color coded according
to the level of expression (Log10 2⁁-ΔCt). Mean difference of
iPSC versus cluster composed by iβ-HI-EndoC-βH1 and iβ versus cluster of
HI-EndoC-βH1 of each gene is reported.iPSC were differentiated into pancreatic β cells using a modified version of the
Pagliuca et al. protocol[12]. The main modifications consist of: (a) culture of iPSC in adhesion
throughout the five steps of the differentiation process, (b) the use of a
commercial kit for definitive endoderm (DE) specification[20] and (c) a shorter duration of the differentiation protocol (up to 20
days). In the second step, CXCR4+ DE cells (>90% in flow
cytometry, data not shown) were induced to become posterior foregut (PF) by
adding KGF, while cells transitioned to pancreatic endoderm (PE) following
addition of retinoic acid and inhibition of the Sonic Hedgehog (Shh) signaling
pathway. Finally, using a combination of factors that affect signaling of
pathways like TGFβ, thyroid hormone, and γ-secretase, PE cells turned into
pancreatic endocrine cells (induced pluripotent stem cell-derived β cells or
iβ). Gene expression of the two iPSC clones was analyzed at each stage of
differentiation and compared with the median of 5 preparations of human islets
(purity >80%) and with the human β cell line EndoC-βH1[19] (Fig 1A). Genes
and transcription factors related to pancreatic development were selectively
upregulated at specific stages: SOX17 and
FOXA2, DE markers, were upregulated during the first stage
(iPSC versus DE p<0.001 for both genes), while
HNF1B and PDX1 reached their higher
expression level at the stage of posterior foregut (iPSC versus PF
p<0.001 for both genes). The expression of the
transcription factors NKX2.2 and NKX6.1
increased, as expected, during the last steps of differentiation (iPSC versus iβ
p<0.001 for both genes) and reached levels comparable to
HI and EndoC-βH1. iβ derived from iPSC expressed high levels of the
INS and GCGpancreatic hormones (iPSC
versus iβ p<0.001 for both genes). In particular, iβ
expressed insulin mRNA levels very close to donor pancreatic islets (iβ v. HI
p=ns), with iβ clone #5 and #9 expressing only 0.011 and
0.024 fold less insulin compared to HI (Fold change:
2⁁-(ΔCtiβ-ΔCtiPSC)/2⁁-(ΔCtHI-ΔCtiPSC)), respectively.
Similarly, compared to the pure β cell line EndoC-βH1, clone #5 and #9 derived
iβ cells expressed respectively only 0.045 and 0.095 fold less insulin (iβ
versus EndoC-βH1 p=ns). The gene expression signature corresponding to pancreas
development and to mature pancreatic β cells was also analyzed by low density
array qRT-PCR in undifferentiated iPSC and iβ, in comparison with 6 preparations
of HI (purity >80%) and EndoC-βH1. As shown in Fig. 1B, the cluster analysis identified
two main groups, one consisting of undifferentiated iPSC and the other of iβ +
HI + EndoC-βH1, confirming the similarity of the iβ gene expression profile to
that of pancreatic β cells. A comparison between iβ and HI+EndoC-βH1 revealed
that: (a) genes of pluripotency like NANOG, SOX2, POU5F1 and
NOTCH1 were markedly reduced in iβ, (b) transcription
factors and developmental genes like FGF10, PTF1a, ONECUT1, PDX1,
NKX2.2, NKX6.1, PAX6, FOXA2, ARX, NEUROD1, MNX1, ISL1, HHEX and
RFX6 were expressed by iβ at levels similar to those in
HI-EndoC-βH1 (median fold change difference between -1 and 1), (c) pancreatic
hormones were highly expressed in iβ with similar or slightly lower levels
compared to HI-EndoC-βH1 (INS 2.13, SST 1.48,
GCG 0.9, PPY 1.42, GHRL
0.13 mean difference of HI-EndoC-βH1 v. iβ); β cell specific autoantigens
GAD2, TSPAN7 and SLC30A8 were also
expressed in iβ. Finally, genes involved in insulin secretion and glucose
sensing pathways like SLC2A2, GCK, TMEM27, PCSK1, KCNJ8 and
INSM1 were expressed in iβ at levels comparable to
HI-EndoC-βH1 (median fold change difference between -1 and 1).
NEUROG3, PAX4, SOX17,
ONECUT3 and HNF1b resulted instead more
expressed in iβ than in mature β cells, suggesting the presence of still
developing endocrine cells. EndoC-βH1 express very low levels of non-β cell
specific genes as GCG, PPY,
GHRL and genes of pancreas development as
ARX, SOX17, HNF1b,
FGF10 and ONECUT1.
Terminally Differentiated Cells Express Pancreatic Protein Markers
Expression of pancreatic protein markers was analyzed at the final stage of
differentiation of the two iPSC clones and compared with HI and EndoC-βH1[19]. By immunocytochemistry, no residual SOX2 pluripotent cells were
observed, while iβ cells from both clones were positive for PDX1 and insulin
and, in some cells, also glucagon. As expected, HI were composed by insulin and
glucagon positive cells that were mostly PDX1 positive; no SOX2 positive cells
were observed (Fig. 2A).
We then determined quantitatively the composition of terminally differentiated
cells by flow cytometry: iβ resulted negative for OCT4, positive for PDX1 (clone
#5 n=8 differentiation experiments, mean ± SEM: 77.2 ± 2.9%;
clone #9 n=6, 68.1 ± 8.8%), NKX6.1 (clone #5
n=8, 42.9 ± 5.1%; clone #9 n=6, 39.2 ± 8.7%)
and insulin (clone #5 n=8, 11.0 ± 2.3%; clone #9
n=6 11.5 ± 3.8%). Co-expression analysis for PDX1 and
NKX6.1 revealed the coexistence of cells at different developmental stages:
indeed, virtually all NKX6.1 positive cells were also PDX1 positive (clone #5
n=3 differentiation experiments, mean ± SEM: 46.3 ± 4.5%;
clone #9 n=4: 35.6 ± 8.6% PDX1+/NKX6.1+),
while a proportion of cells was PDX1+/NKX6.1- (clone #5
n=3, 27.4 ± 6.3%; clone #9 n=4: 23.4 ±
7.1%). EndoC-βH1 cells were 98.9% PDX1/NKX6.1 double positive and 98% insulin
positive (Fig. 2B).
Finally, the expression of key β cell markers in iPSC-derived insulin positive
cells was analyzed by immunofluorescence: insulin positive iβ cells were
negative for pluripotency marker such as SSEA4, co-expressed the β cell specific
transcription factor NKX6.1 and the neuroendocrine markers ChgA and PC1-3. Some
cells of the terminal differentiated cell population resulted poly-hormonal and
in particular few cells co-expressed either insulin and glucagon or insulin and
somatostatin, suggesting a partially immature phenotype. Anyway, the vast
majority of iβ were mono-hormonal cells. Control staining of HI showed that β
cells were positive for NKX6.1, ChgA, PC1-3, negative for SSEA4, and did not
co-stain with glucagon and somatostatin (Fig. 3 and Fig. 2S A-C).
Fig 3.
Proteic expression analysis of iPSC-derived insulin-producing cells (iβ).
Immunofluorescence of insulin (green) in iβ and HI in co-staining with
SSEA-4, NKX6.1, Chromogranin-A, PC1/3, Glucagon and Somatostatin (red).
Nuclei stained in blue (DAPI). Magnification x40.
Proteic expression analysis of iPSC-derived insulin-producing cells (iβ).
(A) Protein expression analysis by immunocytochemistry of SOX2, PDX1,
Insulin and Glucagon in cytospin preparations of iβ derived from iPSC
clone #5 and #9 and of paraffin embedded HI. Magnification 20x. (B)
Protein expression analysis by flow cytometry of markers of pluripotency
(OCT4), pancreatic endoderm (PDX1, NKX6.1) and endocrine cells (insulin)
in iβ and EndoC-βH1. SSC-A: side scatter. Gate delimitates positive
events. Percentages of positive cells of a representative experiment are
reported.Proteic expression analysis of iPSC-derived insulin-producing cells (iβ).
Immunofluorescence of insulin (green) in iβ and HI in co-staining with
SSEA-4, NKX6.1, Chromogranin-A, PC1/3, Glucagon and Somatostatin (red).
Nuclei stained in blue (DAPI). Magnification x40.
Terminally Differentiated Cells Secrete Insulin at Basal Level and in
Response to Stimuli
The release of insulin, glucagon and ghrelin was measured in the supernatants of
unstimulated cells during differentiation, then compared to HI and EndoC-βH1.
All three hormones were absent during the stages from pluripotency to pancreatic
progenitor cells. At the stage of iβ, cells started to release hormones in the
culture medium (c-peptide 2361.8±1156.9 pg/ml, glucagon 524.6±159.9 pg/ml and
ghrelin 506.1±169.5 pg/ml). HI secreted 1.4, 22.5 and 1.5 fold more c-peptide,
glucagon and ghrelin than iβ, respectively. EndoC-βH1 cells secreted 3.1 fold
more c-peptide than iβ but less ghrelin (0.4 fold) and no glucagon. This
indicates that iβ show a certain degree of cell heterogeneity which make them
closer to donor islets (low release of glucagon and ghrelin) but they also
contain cells with a clear β cell phenotype (significant release of c-peptide)
(Fig 4A).
Fig 4.
Secretory capacity of iPSC-derived insulin-producing cells (iβ). (A)
Unstimulated levels of C-peptide, glucagon and ghrelin in the
supernatant of iPSC at different stages (DE, PF, PE and iβ) of
differentiation into insulin producing cells (n=15), in
comparison with HI (n=4) and EndoC-βH1
(n=4), measured by Luminex. Mean±SEM.
**P<0.01 and ***P<0.001.
ns=not statistically significant. (B) Dynamic insulin secretion by
terminally differentiated iPSC (left, n=4), HI (middle,
n=6) and EndoC-βH1 (right, n=4),
upon sequential stimulation with 0.5 mM glucose (basal), 11 mM glucose
(stimulus) with (dashed line) or without (not dashed line) IBMX, 0.5 mM
glucose and 30 mM KCl, measured by Elisa. Insulin levels are expressed
as pm/ml.
iβ were then challenged with glucose and KCl in a dynamic perifusion assay to
compare their insulin secretion profile with that of HI and EndoC-βH1 (Fig. 4B). iβ and EndoC-βH1
poorly responded to a glucose stimulus, while HI promptly released insulin. The
addition to glucose of the phosphodiesterase inhibitor IBMX, promoted insulin
secretion by HI and induced a response also in iβ and EndoC-βH1. A depolarizing
stimulus with KCl resulted in an insulin secretory response in all tested β
cells. These data suggest that iβ have the capacity to secrete insulin, even if
they show the behavior of an immature β cell, partially recapitulating the
EndoC-βH1 phenotype. Basal level of insulin secretion was different among the
different sources of β cells (iβ 5,4±2 pm/ml, HI 221±32 pm/ml, EndoC-βH1
1076±175 pm/ml) and consistent with the much lower percentage of insulin
positive cells in the iβ group.Secretory capacity of iPSC-derived insulin-producing cells (iβ). (A)
Unstimulated levels of C-peptide, glucagon and ghrelin in the
supernatant of iPSC at different stages (DE, PF, PE and iβ) of
differentiation into insulin producing cells (n=15), in
comparison with HI (n=4) and EndoC-βH1
(n=4), measured by Luminex. Mean±SEM.
**P<0.01 and ***P<0.001.
ns=not statistically significant. (B) Dynamic insulin secretion by
terminally differentiated iPSC (left, n=4), HI (middle,
n=6) and EndoC-βH1 (right, n=4),
upon sequential stimulation with 0.5 mM glucose (basal), 11 mM glucose
(stimulus) with (dashed line) or without (not dashed line) IBMX, 0.5 mM
glucose and 30 mM KCl, measured by Elisa. Insulin levels are expressed
as pm/ml.
Discussion
This study describes the characterization of the expression profile and insulin
secretory capacity of iPSC derived insulin positive β cells in comparison to that of
native human islets and a human pure β cell line.We previously reported our studies on the differentiation into insulin producing
cells of iPSC reprogrammed with retroviral vectors[15]. In the present work, we used two clones of iPSC obtained from skin
fibroblasts of a healthy donor using the Sendai virus to deliver Yamanaka’s factors.
Compared to iPSC generated using retroviral vectors, the generation of iPSC using
Sendai represents a safer and more efficient strategy, since this RNA vector carries
no risk of integrating into the host genome and is characterized by a high-infection
efficiency, resulting in high rates of reprogramming[16]. The pluripotency and genomic stability of the two clones used in this study
were extensively characterized in terms of viability, mycoplasma infection,
microsatellite-based identity matching to the parent cell line, and karyotype
analysis. Currently, one of the two clones is already stored in a biobank (http://www.isenet.it/) and is available for future studies.Different protocol exist for the differentiation of pluripotent cells into pancreatic
cells. While all share a common core set of steps, it is increasingly evident[5-7] that there is a need to introduce adjustments and modifications depending on
the starting pluripotent cell line[21,22]. In this study, we applied the protocol described by Pagliuca et al. with ad
hoc modifications. In particular, for the induction of the differentiation to
definitive endoderm, a critical step for efficient pancreatic differentiation
usually achieved by supplying a high concentration of Activin A[23], we instead adopted a commercially available differentiation system
(STEMdiff™ Definitive Endoderm Kit)[20]. This resulted in a homogeneous and confluent monolayer of individualized DE
cells at the end of the induction, which were strongly positive for stage-specific
markers. These cells were then either grown in adhesion or induced to form clusters
in suspension for functional tests.To perform a robust ascertainment of successful pancreatic terminal differentiation,
we analyzed also the intermediate steps of the pancreas specification, ruling out an
aspecific up-regulation of the insulin gene in response to stress[24], and investigated at both the mRNA and protein level multiple pancreatic β
cell markers, demonstrating not only the presence of β cell phenotype but also
characterizing its function and maturity.In our iPSC-derived cells, throughout differentiation we observed the sequential
up-regulation of HNF1b and PDX1, followed by NKX2.2 and NKX6.1, and finally insulin
and glucagon. Conversely, at the end of the differentiation, iPSC-derived cells iβ
were negative for pluripotency markers (OCT4, NANOG, SSEA4 and SOX2) and positive
for PDX1, NKX6.1, insulin and glucagon by qRT-PCR, immunocytochemistry and flow
cytometry. Moreover, an immunofluorescence analysis allowed us to determine that iβ
cells were mostly mono-hormonal with only a few cells double positive for
glucagon/insulin or somatostatin/insulin. The data for hormones’ basal secretion
confirmed that among our terminally differentiated cells a large majority is
constituted by insulin secreting β cells with only a minor fraction of cells
secreting glucagon and ghrelin, suggesting that the minor heterogeneity is possibly
due to cell immaturity. We have no evidence of the presence of exocrine cells after
differentiation; we speculate that it is likely that few exocrine cells are present
in final cell product, considering the widely shared differentiation path between
endocrine and exocrine cell.To verify the functional capacity of iβ, we decided to use a dynamic perifusion
assay. In fact, the classical static incubation test with glucose, reported by most
of the publications describing β cell generation[25-28], does not assess the physiological release of insulin by β cells upon
stimulation and does not provide information on the timing of the secretory response
and its recovery. Overall, our iβ secreted insulin in response to a dynamic glucose
challenge and we did not observe significant differences in the differentiation
potential of the two clones analyzed, as expected since their derivation from a
single donor[29,30].The terminal cell product of our differentiation has all the features of a β cell,
including insulin secretion, both basal and under glycemic stimulus. Viacyte group
utilizes a different strategy, which include the production of pancreatic
progenitors in vitro from embryonic stem cells and then the
spontaneous maturation into insulin-secreting cells in vivo weeks
after transplantation[8,31]. Other experiences however, like that of Pagliuca et al[6,12], which will soon become a clinical trial with Semma Therapeutics, are more
oriented to the use of cells terminally differentiated to insulin-secreting β cells.
The advantages of this last approach are the possibility to qualify the β cell
before the transplant and the immediate function of the graft after transplantion,
without delay of maturation.Furthermore, the field of cell regeneration from stem cells requires the
identification of a reference target cell to perform a quality assessment of
differentiation products. Therefore, to corroborate our results on β cell
differentiation and to bring iβ a step closer to a clinical application, we
performed a comparison between iβ and two sources of control β cells: pancreatic
islets from organ donors and the immortalized β cell line EndoC-βH1.In the field of β cell replacement, pancreatic islets from organ donors constitute
the most intuitive reference tissue. Donor derived pancreatic islets are infused in
T1D patients when obtained with a purity of at least 80% of endocrine tissue,
corresponding to around 35% of β cells at best[32]. While it has been proposed that islet heterogeneous composition might have
beneficial effects, with non β cell components favoring post-transplant islets
survival and function, we decided to compare our final cell product also with
EndoC-βH1 cells, a human β cell line, resembling primary pancreatic β cells[19,33]. To generate the cell line, human fetal pancreatic buds were transduced with
a lentiviral vector that expressed SV40LT under the control of the insulin promoter
and grafted into SCIDmice to allow the formation of mature insulinomas; the
resulting β cells were then transduced with human telomerase reverse transcriptase,
grafted into other SCIDmice, and finally expanded in vitro.Our analysis of β cell identity markers highlighted a remarkable similarity between
iβ and both control β cells, with iβ, HI and EndoC-βH1 expressing similar levels of
key β cell transcription factors, genes involved in secretion machinery, and of
autoantigens: an observation with relevant implications for β cell replacement in
T1D patients. However, albeit not unexpectedly, both immunofluorescence and flow
cytometric analyses set iβ closer to HI than to EndoC-βH1, because of the
heterogeneous expression of some endocrine markers.At the functional level, iβ cells responded to increasing concentration of glucose
and to depolarizing stimuli in a similar fashion to HI and EndoC-βH1, although with
expectedly lower basal levels of released insulin (approximately 50 fold less than
HI and 200 fold than EndoC-βH1, respectively) considering the comparatively smaller
number of fully differentiated cells. The kinetic of response of iβ cells to a
secretory stimulus, while showing a double-peak response without an initial delay
like in HI, was more related to that of EndoC-βH1, because of the similar need for
IBMX potentiation to achieve a response to glucose[19].In summary, our data report that the iβ cellular product obtained at the end of iPSC
differentiation is very similar to donorhuman islets in terms of gene and protein
expression as well as cell composition, with both islets and iβ being cellular
aggregates composed of cells with different functions. At the level of insulin
secretion instead, iβ contained a variable proportion of cells sharing secretory
features typical of EndoC-βH1 and showing an only partially mature secretory
function, suggesting that the efficiency of differentiation and maturation of stem
cell-derived β cells is in need of further improvement.Our study, while confirming that iPSC-derived β cells have the potential to
constitute an unlimited, adjustable, and efficient source of new β cells for the
cell therapy of T1D, indicates that the comparison with more than one reference
tissue is necessary for proper assessment of the quality of the differentiation
product. This assessment is crucial both for devising optimal cell therapy
strategies in T1D and for in vitro β cell studies aimed at
understanding experimental islet biology, disease pathogenesis, and drug
discovery.Click here for additional data file.Supplemental Material, CT-2091_Supplementary_Figure_1S for Differentiation of
Sendai Virus-Reprogrammed iPSC into β Cells, Compared with HumanPancreatic
Islets and Immortalized β Cell Line by Silvia Pellegrini, Fabio Manenti, Raniero
Chimienti, Rita Nano, Linda Ottoboni, Francesca Ruffini, Gianvito Martino,
Philippe Ravassard, Lorenzo Piemonti, and Valeria Sordi in Cell
TransplantationClick here for additional data file.Supplemental Material, CT-2091_Supplementary_Figure_2S for Differentiation of
Sendai Virus-Reprogrammed iPSC into β Cells, Compared with HumanPancreatic
Islets and Immortalized β Cell Line by Silvia Pellegrini, Fabio Manenti, Raniero
Chimienti, Rita Nano, Linda Ottoboni, Francesca Ruffini, Gianvito Martino,
Philippe Ravassard, Lorenzo Piemonti, and Valeria Sordi in Cell
TransplantationClick here for additional data file.Supplemental Material, CT-2091_Supplementary_Figure_3Sa for Differentiation of
Sendai Virus-Reprogrammed iPSC into β Cells, Compared with HumanPancreatic
Islets and Immortalized β Cell Line by Silvia Pellegrini, Fabio Manenti, Raniero
Chimienti, Rita Nano, Linda Ottoboni, Francesca Ruffini, Gianvito Martino,
Philippe Ravassard, Lorenzo Piemonti, and Valeria Sordi in Cell
TransplantationClick here for additional data file.Supplemental Material, CT-2091_Supplementary_Figure_3Sb for Differentiation of
Sendai Virus-Reprogrammed iPSC into β Cells, Compared with HumanPancreatic
Islets and Immortalized β Cell Line by Silvia Pellegrini, Fabio Manenti, Raniero
Chimienti, Rita Nano, Linda Ottoboni, Francesca Ruffini, Gianvito Martino,
Philippe Ravassard, Lorenzo Piemonti, and Valeria Sordi in Cell
TransplantationClick here for additional data file.Supplemental Material, CT-2091_Supplementary_Figure_3Sc for Differentiation of
Sendai Virus-Reprogrammed iPSC into β Cells, Compared with HumanPancreatic
Islets and Immortalized β Cell Line by Silvia Pellegrini, Fabio Manenti, Raniero
Chimienti, Rita Nano, Linda Ottoboni, Francesca Ruffini, Gianvito Martino,
Philippe Ravassard, Lorenzo Piemonti, and Valeria Sordi in Cell
Transplantation
Authors: Kevin A D'Amour; Alan D Agulnick; Susan Eliazer; Olivia G Kelly; Evert Kroon; Emmanuel E Baetge Journal: Nat Biotechnol Date: 2005-10-28 Impact factor: 54.908
Authors: Anna Pisania; Gordon C Weir; John J O'Neil; Abdulkadir Omer; Vaja Tchipashvili; Ji Lei; Clark K Colton; Susan Bonner-Weir Journal: Lab Invest Date: 2010-08-09 Impact factor: 5.662
Authors: Bernhard J Hering; William R Clarke; Nancy D Bridges; Thomas L Eggerman; Rodolfo Alejandro; Melena D Bellin; Kathryn Chaloner; Christine W Czarniecki; Julia S Goldstein; Lawrence G Hunsicker; Dixon B Kaufman; Olle Korsgren; Christian P Larsen; Xunrong Luo; James F Markmann; Ali Naji; Jose Oberholzer; Andrew M Posselt; Michael R Rickels; Camillo Ricordi; Mark A Robien; Peter A Senior; A M James Shapiro; Peter G Stock; Nicole A Turgeon Journal: Diabetes Care Date: 2016-04-18 Impact factor: 19.112
Authors: Kathryn F Cogger; Ankit Sinha; Farida Sarangi; Emily C McGaugh; Diane Saunders; Craig Dorrell; Salvador Mejia-Guerrero; Yasaman Aghazadeh; Jillian L Rourke; Robert A Screaton; Markus Grompe; Philip R Streeter; Alvin C Powers; Marcela Brissova; Thomas Kislinger; M Cristina Nostro Journal: Nat Commun Date: 2017-08-24 Impact factor: 14.919
Authors: Helena Kilpinen; Angela Goncalves; Andreas Leha; Vackar Afzal; Kaur Alasoo; Sofie Ashford; Sendu Bala; Dalila Bensaddek; Francesco Paolo Casale; Oliver J Culley; Petr Danecek; Adam Faulconbridge; Peter W Harrison; Annie Kathuria; Davis McCarthy; Shane A McCarthy; Ruta Meleckyte; Yasin Memari; Nathalie Moens; Filipa Soares; Alice Mann; Ian Streeter; Chukwuma A Agu; Alex Alderton; Rachel Nelson; Sarah Harper; Minal Patel; Alistair White; Sharad R Patel; Laura Clarke; Reena Halai; Christopher M Kirton; Anja Kolb-Kokocinski; Philip Beales; Ewan Birney; Davide Danovi; Angus I Lamond; Willem H Ouwehand; Ludovic Vallier; Fiona M Watt; Richard Durbin; Oliver Stegle; Daniel J Gaffney Journal: Nature Date: 2017-05-10 Impact factor: 49.962
Authors: Abiramy Jeyagaran; Chuan-En Lu; Aline Zbinden; Andreas L Birkenfeld; Sara Y Brucker; Shannon L Layland Journal: Adv Drug Deliv Rev Date: 2022-08-21 Impact factor: 17.873
Authors: Maximilian Zeidler; Kai K Kummer; Clemens L Schöpf; Theodora Kalpachidou; Georg Kern; M Zameel Cader; Michaela Kress Journal: Adv Sci (Weinh) Date: 2021-09-05 Impact factor: 16.806