The current state of Naïve human pluripotency

Stem Cells

Volumn 33, Issue 11, 2015, Pages 3181-3186

  Dodsworth, Benjamin T ^a   Flynn, Rowan ^a   Cowley, Sally A ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF OXFORD   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Differentiation; Embryonic stem cells; Ground state; Na ve; Pluripotency

Indexed keywords

FIBROBLAST GROWTH FACTOR 2; GLYCOGEN SYNTHASE KINASE 3BETA; LEUKEMIA INHIBITORY FACTOR; MITOGEN ACTIVATED PROTEIN KINASE KINASE;

ARTICLE; CELL RESPIRATION; ECTODERM; ENDOGENOUS RETROVIRUS; ENZYME INHIBITION; GENE EXPRESSION; GENE INSERTION; GENE LOCUS; HOMOLOGOUS RECOMBINATION; HUMAN; PLURIPOTENT STEM CELL; RNA METHYLATION; RNA SEQUENCE; TRANSGENE; UPREGULATION; ANIMAL; CELL DIFFERENTIATION; EMBRYO DEVELOPMENT; EMBRYONIC STEM CELL; PHYSIOLOGY; SIGNAL TRANSDUCTION; TRANSPLANTATION;

ANIMALS; CELL DIFFERENTIATION; EMBRYONIC DEVELOPMENT; EMBRYONIC STEM CELLS; HUMANS; PLURIPOTENT STEM CELLS; SIGNAL TRANSDUCTION;

EID: 84944535430     PISSN: 10665099     EISSN: 15494918     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/stem.2085     Document Type: Article

References (44)

1. Evans MJ, Kaufman MH,. Establishment in culture of pluripotential cells from mouse embryos. Nature 1981; 292: 154-156.
2. Brook FA, Gardner RL,. The origin and efficient derivation of embryonic stem cells in the mouse. Proc Natl Acad Sci 1997; 94: 5709-5712.
3. Ying Q-L, Wray J, Nichols J, et al., The ground state of embryonic stem cell self-renewal. Nature 2008; 453: U519-U515.
4. Bradley A, Evans M, Kaufman MH, et al., Formation of germ-line chimaeras from embryo-derived teratocarcinoma cell lines. Nature 1984; 309: 255-256.
5. Tesar PJ, Chenoweth JG, Brook FA, et al., New cell lines from mouse epiblast share defining features with human embryonic stem cells. Nature 2007; 448: U196-U110.
6. Brons IGM, Smithers LE, Trotter MWB, et al., Derivation of pluripotent epiblast stem cells from mammalian embryos. Nature 2007; 448: 191-195.
7. Ozawa M, Kawakami E, Sakamoto R, et al., Development of FGF2-dependent pluripotent stem cells showing naive state characteristics from murine preimplantation inner cell mass. Stem Cell Res 2014; 13: 75-87.
8. Nichols J, Smith A,. Naive and primed pluripotent states. Cell Stem Cell 2009; 4: 487-492.
9. Zhou H, Li W, Zhu S, et al., Conversion of mouse epiblast stem cells to an earlier pluripotency state by small molecules. J Biol Chem 2010; 285: 29676-29680.
10. Fang R, Liu K, Zhao Y, et al., Generation of naive induced pluripotent stem cells from rhesus monkey fibroblasts. Cell Stem Cell 2014; 15: 488-496.
11. Mascetti VL, Pedersen RA,. Naivete of the human pluripotent stem cell. Nat Biotechnol 2014; 32: 68-70.
12. Buecker C, Srinivasan R, Wu Z, et al., Reorganization of enhancer patterns in transition from naive to primed pluripotency. Cell Stem Cell 2014; 14: 838-853.
13. Hanna J, Cheng AW, Saha K, et al., Human embryonic stem cells with biological and epigenetic characteristics similar to those of mouse ESCs. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 2010; 107: 9222-9227.
14. Takashima Y, Guo G, Loos R, et al., Resetting transcription factor control circuitry toward ground-state pluripotency in human. Cell 2014; 158: 1254-1269.
15. Gafni O, Weinberger L, Mansour AA, et al., Derivation of novel human ground state naive pluripotent stem cells. Nature 2013; 504: 282-286.
16. Duggal G, Warrier S, Ghimire S, et al., Alternative Routes to Induce Naive Pluripotency in Human Embryonic Stem Cells. Stem Cells. 2015.
17. Chan Y-S, Goeke J, Ng J-H, et al., Induction of a human pluripotent state with distinct regulatory circuitry that resembles preimplantation epiblast. Cell Stem Cell 2013; 13: 663-675.
18. Valamehr B, Robinson M, Abujarour R, et al., Platform for induction and maintenance of transgene-free hiPSCs resembling ground state pluripotent stem cells. Stem Cell Rep 2014; 2: 366-381.
19. Theunissen TW, Powell BE, Wa H, et al., Systematic identification of culture conditions for induction and maintenance of naive human pluripotency. Cell Stem Cell 2014; 15: 471-487.
20. Ware CB, Nelson AM, Mecham B, et al., Derivation of naive human embryonic stem cells. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 2014; 111: 4484-4489.
21. Brinster R, Troike D,. Requirements for blastocyst development in vitro. J Anim Sci 1978; 49: 26-34.
22. Martin KL, Leese HJ,. Role of glucose in mouse preimplantation embryo development. Mol Reprod Dev 1995; 40: 436-443.
23. Zhou W, Choi M, Margineantu D, et al., HIF1α induced switch from bivalent to exclusively glycolytic metabolism during ESC-to-EpiSC/hESC transition. EMBO J 2012; 31: 2103-2116.
24. Teslaa T, Teitell MA,. Pluripotent stem cell energy metabolism: An update. EMBO J 2015; 34: 138-153.
25. Van Bortle K, Corces VG,. Lost in transition: Dynamic enhancer organization across naive and primed stem cell states. Cell Stem Cell 2014; 14: 693-694.
26. Factor DC, Corradin O, Zentner GE, et al., Epigenomic comparison reveals activation of "seed" enhancers during transition from naive to primed pluripotency. Cell Stem Cell 2014; 14: 854-863.
27. Wang J, Xie G, Singh M, et al., Primate-specific endogenous retrovirus-driven transcription defines naive-like stem cells. Nature 2014; 516: 405-409.
28. Grow E, Flynn R, Chavez S, et al., Intrinsic retroviral reactivation in human preimplantation embryos and pluripotent cells. Nature 2015; 522: 221-225.
29. Batista Pedro J, Molinie B, Wang J, et al., m6A RNA modification controls cell fate transition in mammalian embryonic stem cells. Cell Stem Cell 2014; 15: 707-719.
30. Geula S, Moshitch-Moshkovitz S, Dominissini D, et al., Stem cells. m6A mRNA methylation facilitates resolution of naive pluripotency toward differentiation. Science 2015; 347: 1002-1006.
31. Wang Y, Li Y, Toth JI, et al., N6-methyladenosine modification destabilizes developmental regulators in embryonic stem cells. Nat Cell Biol 2014; 16: 191-198.
32. Ye S, Liu D, Ying Q-L,. Signaling pathways in induced naïve pluripotency. Curr Opin Genet Dev 2014; 28: 10-15.
33. Zwaka TP, Thomson JA,. Homologous recombination in human embryonic stem cells. Nat Biotechnol 2003; 21: 319-321.
34. Buecker C, Chen H-H, Polo JM, et al., A murine ESC-like state facilitates transgenesis and homologous recombination in human pluripotent stem cells. Cell Stem Cell 2010; 6: 535-546.
35. Fu Y, Foden JA, Khayter C, et al., High-frequency off-target mutagenesis induced by CRISPR-Cas nucleases in human cells. Nat Biotechnol 2013; 31: 822-826.
36. Wu X, Scott DA, Kriz AJ, et al., Genome-wide binding of the CRISPR endonuclease Cas9 in mammalian cells. Nat Biotechnol 2014; 32: 670-676.
37. Dunn SJ, Martello G, Yordanov B, et al., Defining an essential transcription factor program for naive pluripotency. Science 2014; 344: 1156-1160.
38. Hackett JA, Surani MA,. Regulatory principles of pluripotency: From the ground state up. Cell Stem Cell 2014; 15: 416-430.
39. Niwa H,. The pluripotency transcription factor network at work in reprogramming. Curr Opin Genet Dev 2014; 28: 25-31.
40. Yang S-H, Kalkan T, Morissroe C, et al., Otx2 and Oct4 drive early enhancer activation during embryonic stem cell transition from naive pluripotency. Cell Rep 2014; 7: 1968-1981.
41. Pera MF,. In search of naivety. Cell Stem Cell 2014; 15: 543-545.
42. Huang K, Maruyama T, Fan G,. The naive state of human pluripotent stem cells: A synthesis of stem cell and preimplantation embryo transcriptome analyses. Cell Stem Cell 2014; 15: 410-415.
43. Hough SR, Thornton M, Mason E, et al., Single-cell gene expression profiles define self-renewing, pluripotent, and lineage primed states of human pluripotent stem cells. Stem Cell Rep 2014; 2: 881-895.
44. Wu J, Okamura D, Li M, et al., An alternative pluripotent state confers interspecies chimaeric competency. Nature 2015; 521: 316-321.