Generation of mouse-induced pluripotent stem cells by transient expression of a single nonviral polycistronic vector - PubMed (original) (raw)
Generation of mouse-induced pluripotent stem cells by transient expression of a single nonviral polycistronic vector
Federico Gonzalez et al. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2009.
Abstract
Induced pluripotent stem (iPS) cells have generated keen interest due to their potential use in regenerative medicine. They have been obtained from various cell types of both mice and humans by exogenous delivery of different combinations of Oct4, Sox2, Klf4, c-Myc, Nanog, and Lin28. The delivery of these transcription factors has mostly entailed the use of integrating viral vectors (retroviruses or lentiviruses), carrying the risk of both insertional mutagenesis and oncogenesis due to misexpression of these exogenous factors. Therefore, obtaining iPS cells that do not carry integrated transgene sequences is an important prerequisite for their eventual therapeutic use. Here we report the generation of iPS cell lines from mouse embryonic fibroblasts with no evidence of integration of the reprogramming vector in their genome, achieved by nucleofection of a polycistronic construct coexpressing Oct4, Sox2, Klf4, and c-Myc.
Conflict of interest statement
The authors declare no conflict of interest.
Figures
Fig. 1.
Generation of iPS cells by transfection of a single nonviral polycistronic construct. (A and B) Maps of the polycistronic constructs used in this study. (C) Expression of transgene mRNA relative to GAPDH in transfected (T) and nontransfected (NT) fibroblasts by real-time RT-PCR. (D) Western blot analysis of transgene factor expression in T and NT cells. (E and F) Timeline of iPS production with either 1 (E) or 2 (F) nucleofections.
Fig. 2.
Integration analysis of iPS cell lines. (A) Linear representation of pCAG-OSKM showing the location of the probes used for Southern blot (red bars, i–iv) and the approximate position and length of the amplicons generated by PCR (gray bars 1–22). (B) Southern blot analysis of clones 6, 11, 16, 36, 38, and 41, and mouse ES cells using probes against Oct4, Sox2, Klf4, and c-Myc. Black and gray arrowheads point respectively to specific and nonspecific endogenous bands present in the genomic DNA of control ES cells. Extra bands are highlighted by a red asterisk in clones 6, 16, and 36, indicating variable degrees of insertion of the transgene. (C) PCR analysis of clones 6, 11, 16, 36, 38, 41. Consistent with Southern blot, clones 6 and 36 are positive for almost the full set of primer pairs, whereas clone 16 is not positive for the backbone-specific primers 2–9. Clone 11 shows a weak signal for primer pairs 3, 9, 12, and 20, whereas clones 38 and 41 are negative for all primer pairs tested except faint bands for primer pairs 17 and 20.
Fig. 3.
Characterization of integrative and NiPS cell clones: comparison with MEFs and mouse ES cells. (A Upper) Real-time RT-PCR showing up-regulation of endogenous expression of the pluripotency markers Oct4, Sox2, Nanog, Utf1, and Zfp41 (Rex1). (Lower Left) Real-time RT-PCR showing down-regulation of expression of the fibroblast markers Col6a2, Grem2, and Thy1. (Lower Right) Real-time RT-PCR showing level of silencing of the transgene, if present. (B) Oct4 promoter methylation analysis. Percentages of methylation of the Oct4 promoter are indicated in red. (C) Immunofluorescence analysis showing expression of the ES cell markers NANOG, SOX2, OCT4, and SSEA1.
Fig. 4.
Differentiation potential of iPS cell lines. (A) In vitro differentiation toward ectoderm (i–iii) (TuJ1-positive neuronal cells, green), mesoderm (iv–vi) (α-actinin-positive cardiac myocytes, red), and endoderm (vii–ix) (α-fetoprotein-positive, green; FOXA2-positive, red). Blue nuclear staining is DAPI. Scale bars, 25 μm. (B) In vivo differentiation (teratomas) toward ectoderm (i–iii) (TuJ1-positive neuronal cells, green; glial fibrillary acidic protein-positive cells, red), mesoderm (iv–vi) (α-actinin-positive cardiac myocytes, green), and endoderm (vii–ix) (α-fetoprotein-positive, green; FOXA2-positive, red). Scale bars: iv, 25 μm; all others, 50 μm; (C) In vivo differentiation (blastocyst injection) of chimeric (Top and Middle) and control (Bottom) pups obtained by injecting NiPS cell clone 41 in a ICR host blastocysts. Black hair is from iPS cells.
Similar articles
- Generation of mouse induced pluripotent stem cells without viral vectors.
Okita K, Nakagawa M, Hyenjong H, Ichisaka T, Yamanaka S. Okita K, et al. Science. 2008 Nov 7;322(5903):949-53. doi: 10.1126/science.1164270. Epub 2008 Oct 9. Science. 2008. PMID: 18845712 - Virus-free induction of pluripotency and subsequent excision of reprogramming factors.
Kaji K, Norrby K, Paca A, Mileikovsky M, Mohseni P, Woltjen K. Kaji K, et al. Nature. 2009 Apr 9;458(7239):771-5. doi: 10.1038/nature07864. Epub 2009 Mar 1. Nature. 2009. PMID: 19252477 Free PMC article. - A Versatile In Vivo System to Study Myc in Cell Reprogramming.
Senís E, Mosteiro L, Grimm D, Abad M. Senís E, et al. Methods Mol Biol. 2021;2318:267-279. doi: 10.1007/978-1-0716-1476-1_14. Methods Mol Biol. 2021. PMID: 34019296 - [Induced pluripotent stem cells].
Shevchenko AI, Medvedev SP, Mazurok NA, Zakiian SM. Shevchenko AI, et al. Genetika. 2009 Feb;45(2):160-8. Genetika. 2009. PMID: 19334609 Review. Russian. - Integration-free methods for generating induced pluripotent stem cells.
Zhou YY, Zeng F. Zhou YY, et al. Genomics Proteomics Bioinformatics. 2013 Oct;11(5):284-7. doi: 10.1016/j.gpb.2013.09.008. Epub 2013 Oct 11. Genomics Proteomics Bioinformatics. 2013. PMID: 24121200 Free PMC article. Review.
Cited by
- Systematic comparison of nonviral gene delivery strategies for efficient co-expression of two transgenes in human mesenchymal stem cells.
Kozisek T, Samuelson L, Hamann A, Pannier AK. Kozisek T, et al. J Biol Eng. 2023 Dec 7;17(1):76. doi: 10.1186/s13036-023-00394-0. J Biol Eng. 2023. PMID: 38062439 Free PMC article. - Nucleic acid direct delivery to fibroblasts: a review of nucleofection and applications.
Ren R, Guo J, Liu G, Kang H, Machens HG, Schilling AF, Slobodianski A, Zhang Z. Ren R, et al. J Biol Eng. 2022 Nov 4;16(1):30. doi: 10.1186/s13036-022-00309-5. J Biol Eng. 2022. PMID: 36329479 Free PMC article. Review. - Dental applications of induced pluripotent stem cells and their derivatives.
Gao P, Liu S, Wang X, Ikeya M. Gao P, et al. Jpn Dent Sci Rev. 2022 Nov;58:162-171. doi: 10.1016/j.jdsr.2022.03.002. Epub 2022 Apr 30. Jpn Dent Sci Rev. 2022. PMID: 35516907 Free PMC article. Review. - Human Induced Pluripotent Stem Cell as a Disease Modeling and Drug Development Platform-A Cardiac Perspective.
Bekhite MM, Schulze PC. Bekhite MM, et al. Cells. 2021 Dec 9;10(12):3483. doi: 10.3390/cells10123483. Cells. 2021. PMID: 34943991 Free PMC article. Review. - iPSC Preparation and Epigenetic Memory: Does the Tissue Origin Matter?
Scesa G, Adami R, Bottai D. Scesa G, et al. Cells. 2021 Jun 11;10(6):1470. doi: 10.3390/cells10061470. Cells. 2021. PMID: 34208270 Free PMC article. Review.
References
- Takahashi K, Yamanaka S. Induction of pluripotent stem cells from mouse embryonic and adult fibroblast cultures by defined factors. Cell. 2006;126:663–676. - PubMed
- Maherali N, et al. Directly reprogrammed fibroblasts show global epigenetic remodeling and widespread tissue contribution. Cell Stem Cell. 2007;1:55–70. - PubMed
- Okita K, Ichisaka T, Yamanaka S. Generation of germline-competent induced pluripotent stem cells. Nature. 2007;448:313–317. - PubMed
- Wernig M, et al. In vitro reprogramming of fibroblasts into a pluripotent ES-cell-like state. Nature. 2007;448:318–324. - PubMed
Publication types
MeSH terms
Substances
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources
Research Materials