Differentiation-defective phenotypes revealed by large-scale analyses of human pluripotent stem cells

Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America

Volumn 110, Issue 51, 2013, Pages 20569-20574

  Koyanagi Aoi, Michiyo ^a   Ohnuki, Mari ^a   Takahashi, Kazutoshi ^a   Okita, Keisuke ^a   Noma, Hisashi ^b   Sawamura, Yuka ^a   Teramoto, Ito ^a   Narita, Megumi ^a   Sato, Yoshiko ^a   Ichisaka, Tomoko ^a   Amanoa, Naoki ^a   Watanabe, Akira ^a   Morizane, Asuka ^a   Yamada, Yasuhiro ^a,c   Sato, Tosiya ^d   Takahashi, Jun ^a,e   Yamanaka, Shinya ^a,f  

^a KYOTO UNIVERSITY   (Japan)

^b INSTITUTE OF STATISTICAL MATHEMATICS   (Japan)

^c KYOTO UNIVERSITY   (Japan)

^d KYOTO UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF PUBLIC HEALTH   (Japan)

^e KYOTO UNIVERSITY   (Japan)

^f GLADSTONE INSTITUTE OF CARDIOVASCULAR DISEASE   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

AMYLOID PRECURSOR PROTEIN; DNA METHYLTRANSFERASE 3B; MESSENGER RNA; MICRORNA; NERVE CELL ADHESION MOLECULE; OCTAMER TRANSCRIPTION FACTOR 4;

ANIMAL TISSUE; ARTICLE; DNA METHYLATION; EMBRYONIC STEM CELL; ENDODERM; ENDOGENOUS RETROVIRUS; GENE EXPRESSION; GENETIC VARIABILITY; HUMAN; HUMAN CELL; IN VITRO STUDY; LONG TERMINAL REPEAT; MESODERM; MOUSE; NERVE CELL DIFFERENTIATION; NONHUMAN; PHENOTYPE; PLURIPOTENT STEM CELL; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROTEIN MICROARRAY; PYROSEQUENCING; TERATOMA;

EID: 84890810447     PISSN: 00278424     EISSN: 10916490     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1319061110     Document Type: Article

References (33)

1. Thomson JA, et al. (1998) Embryonic stem cell lines derived from human blastocysts. Science 282(5391):1145-1147.
2. Takahashi K, et al. (2007) Induction of pluripotent stem cells from adult human fibroblasts by defined factors. Cell 131(5):861-872.
3. Yu J, et al. (2007) Induced pluripotent stem cell lines derived from human somatic cells. Science 318(5858):1917-1920.
4. Bock C, et al. (2011) Reference maps of human ES and iPS cell variation enable highthroughput characterization of pluripotent cell lines. Cell 144(3):439-452.
5. Newman AM, Cooper JB (2010) Lab-Specific gene expression signatures in pluripotent stem cells. Cell Stem Cell 7(2):258-262.
6. Guenther MG, et al. (2010) Chromatin structure and gene expression programs of human embryonic and induced pluripotent stem cells. Cell Stem Cell 7(2):249-257.
7. Chin MH, et al. (2009) Induced pluripotent stem cells and embryonic stem cells are distinguished by gene expression signatures. Cell Stem Cell 5(1):111-123.
8. Marchetto MC, et al. (2009) Transcriptional signature and memory retention of human-Induced pluripotent stem cells. PLoS ONE 4(9):e7076.
9. Ghosh Z, et al. (2010) Persistent donor cell gene expression among human induced pluripotent stem cells contributes to differences with human embryonic stem cells. PLoS ONE 5(2):e8975.
10. Ohi Y, et al. (2011) Incomplete DNA methylation underlies a transcriptional memory of somatic cells in human iPS cells. Nat Cell Biol 13(5):541-549.
11. Deng J, et al. (2009) Targeted bisulfite sequencing reveals changes in DNA methylation associated with nuclear reprogramming. Nat Biotechnol 27(4):353-360.
12. Doi A, et al. (2009) Differential methylation of tissue-And cancer-Specific CpG island shores distinguishes human induced pluripotent stem cells, embryonic stem cells and fibroblasts. Nat Genet 41(12):1350-1353.
13. Lister R, et al. (2011) Hotspots of aberrant epigenomic reprogramming in human induced pluripotent stem cells. Nature 471(7336):68-73.
14. Hu BY, et al. (2010) Neural differentiation of human induced pluripotent stem cells follows developmental principles but with variable potency. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 107(9):4335-4340.
15. Yamanaka S (2012) Induced pluripotent stem cells: Past, present, and future. Cell Stem Cell 10(6):678-684.
16. Kajiwara M, et al. (2012) Donor-Dependent variations in hepatic differentiation from human-Induced pluripotent stem cells. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 109(31):12538-12543.
17. Suemori H, et al. (2006) Efficient establishment of human embryonic stem cell lines and long-Term maintenance with stable karyotype by enzymatic bulk passage. Biochem Biophys Res Commun 345(3):926-932.
18. Morizane A, Doi D, Kikuchi T, Nishimura K, Takahashi J (2011) Small-Molecule inhibitors of bone morphogenic protein and activin/nodal signals promote highly efficient neural induction from human pluripotent stem cells. J Neurosci Res 89(2): 117-126.
19. Kriks S, et al. (2011) Dopamine neurons derived from human ES cells efficiently engraft in animal models of Parkinson's disease. Nature 480(7378):547-551.
20. Kowalski PE, Freeman JD, Mager DL (1999) Intergenic splicing between a HERV-H endogenous retrovirus and two adjacent human genes. Genomics 57(3):371-379.
21. Bahrami AR, Matin MM, Andrews PW (2005) The CDK inhibitor p27 enhances neural differentiation in pluripotent NTERA2 human EC cells, but does not permit differentiation of 2102Ep nullipotent human EC cells. Mech Dev 122(9):1034-1042.
22. Rowe HM, Trono D (2011) Dynamic control of endogenous retroviruses during development. Virology 411(2):273-287.
23. Hutnick LK, Huang X, Loo TC, Ma Z, Fan G (2010) Repression of retrotransposal elements in mouse embryonic stem cells is primarily mediated by a DNA methylationindependent mechanism. J Biol Chem 285(27):21082-21091.
24. Stoye JP (2012) Studies of endogenous retroviruses reveal a continuing evolutionary saga. Nat Rev Microbiol 10(6):395-406.
25. Macfarlan TS, et al. (2012) Embryonic stem cell potency fluctuates with endogenous retrovirus activity. Nature 487(7405):57-63.
26. Santoni FA, Guerra J, Luban J (2012) HERV-H RNA is abundant in human embryonic stem cells and a precise marker for pluripotency. Retrovirology 9:111.
27. Loewer S, et al. (2010) Large intergenic non-Coding RNA-RoR modulates reprogramming of human induced pluripotent stem cells. Nat Genet 42(12):1113-1117.
28. Wang Y, et al. (2013) Endogenous miRNA sponge lincRNA-RoR regulates Oct4, Nanog, and Sox2 in human embryonic stem cell self-Renewal. Dev Cell 25(1):69-80.
29. Kim H, et al. (2011) miR-371-3 expression predicts neural differentiation propensity in human pluripotent stem cells. Cell Stem Cell 8(6):695-706.
30. Miura K, et al. (2009) Variation in the safety of induced pluripotent stem cell lines. Nat Biotechnol 27(8):743-745.
31. Ruiz S, et al. (2012) Identification of a specific reprogramming- Associated epigenetic signature in human induced pluripotent stem cells. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 109(40): 16196-16201.
32. Kawase E, et al. (1994) Strain difference in establishment of mouse embryonic stem (ES) cell lines. Int J Dev Biol 38(2):385-390.
33. Tomoda K, et al. (2012) Derivation conditions impact X-Inactivation status in female human induced pluripotent stem cells. Cell Stem Cell 11(1):91-99.