| Literature DB >> 31660065 |
Seuk Young Song1, Jin Yoo1, Seokhyeong Go2, Jihye Hong2, Hee Su Sohn1, Ju-Ro Lee1, Mikyung Kang2, Gun-Jae Jeong1, Seungmi Ryu2, Seung Hyun L Kim2, Nathaniel S Hwang1,2, Kookheon Char1, Byung-Soo Kim1,2,3.
Abstract
Rationale: Cardiovascular diseases often cause substantial heart damage and even heart failure due to the limited regenerative capacity of adult cardiomyocytes. The direct cardiac reprogramming of fibroblasts could be a promising therapeutic option for these patients. Although exogenous transcriptional factors can induce direct cardiac reprogramming, the reprogramming efficiency is too low to be used clinically. Herein, we introduce a cardiac-mimetic cell-culture system that resembles the microenvironment in the heart and provides interactions with cardiomyocytes and electrical cues to the cultured fibroblasts for direct cardiac reprogramming.Entities:
Keywords: cardiovascular disease; coculture; direct reprogramming; electric stimulation; membrane
Year: 2019 PMID: 31660065 PMCID: PMC6815967 DOI: 10.7150/thno.35574
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Theranostics ISSN: 1838-7640 Impact factor: 11.556
Figure 1Cardiac-mimetic culture system used to stimulate direct cardiac reprogramming in this study. (A) Cues received by cardiomyocytes in vivo in the cardiac microenvironment. (B) A schematic diagram of the cardiac-mimetic culture system that mimics the cardiac microenvironment and provides interactions with cardiomyocytes and electrical cue to cultured fibroblasts for direct cardiac reprogramming.
Figure 2Characterization of nano-thin and nano-porous PLGA membranes incubated for various periods in the culture medium in the culture system. (A) AFM images and (B) pore size distribution of the membrane. (C) Photograph of the transferable membrane in the culture system. PET frame works as a support for easy handling of the membrane. Changes in (D) pore size and (E) thickness of the membrane during incubation in the culture medium in the culture system.
Figure 3Suitability of the membrane for cellular coculture. (A) Microscopic images of HNDFs on the membrane and TSPS. (B) Viability of HNDFs cultured on membrane and TSPS at various culture time points as evaluated by Live/Dead assay. (C) Schematic illustration of coculture of HNDFs (red) and cardiomyocytes (green) using the nano-thin and nano-porous membrane and a z-stacked confocal image showing direct contacts (yellow) between HNDFs and cardiomyocytes through the membrane. (D) Homogeneity of HNDFs collected after 1, 2, and 3 weeks of coculture with murine cardiomyocytes, as evaluated by flow cytometry using FITC-conjugated anti-HLA antibodies. n=3 per group.
Figure 4Direct cardiac reprogramming of HNDF by delivery of cardiac transcription factors, GMTHN. (A) GMTHN transfection efficiency (GFP-positive cell portion) of HNDFs as analyzed via flow cytometry after 2 days. (B) RT-PCR analysis of cardiac transcription factors. (C) mRNA expressions of cardiac markers in HNDFs after GMTHN transfection. The control indicates no transfection. * p < 0.05, n = 3 per group.
Figure 6Enhanced direct cardiac reprogramming in protein level by coculture and ES. (A) Immunocytochemical staining for cTnT. (B) Flow cytometry analysis of cTnT-positive cells. *p < 0.05 versus group A, #p < 0.05 versus group B, †p < 0.05 versus group D. n=5 in group A, n=3 in group B, D, F.
Figure 7Cardiac reprogramming-related intracellular signaling induced by interactions with cardiomyocytes and electrical cue in the cardiac-mimetic culture system. (A) A schematic diagram of intracellular signaling involved in cardiac reprogramming and induced by interactions with cardiomyocytes and electrical cue. (B) Western blot analysis of GMTHN-transfected HNDFs cultured with or without coculture and/or ES for 7 days. *p < 0.05 versus monoculture without ES, #p < 0.05 versus coculture without ES. n = 3 per group.