A decade of transcription factor-mediated reprogramming to pluripotency

Nature Reviews Molecular Cell Biology

Volumn 17, Issue 3, 2016, Pages 183-193

  Takahashi, Kazutoshi ^a,b   Yamanaka, Shinya ^a,b  

^a KYOTO UNIVERSITY   (Japan)

^b UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

KRUPPEL LIKE FACTOR 4; MYC PROTEIN; OCTAMER TRANSCRIPTION FACTOR 4; TRANSCRIPTION FACTOR NANOG; TRANSCRIPTION FACTOR PAX6; TRANSCRIPTION FACTOR SOX2; TRANSCRIPTION FACTOR;

CELL FATE; CELL PROLIFERATION; CELL SURVIVAL; CELL TRANSDIFFERENTIATION; DOWN REGULATION; DROSOPHILA MELANOGASTER; ECTOPIC EXPRESSION; EMBRYONIC STEM CELL; ENHANCER REGION; EPIGENETICS; GENE EXPRESSION; HUMAN; NONHUMAN; NUCLEAR REPROGRAMMING; PLURIPOTENT STEM CELL; PRIORITY JOURNAL; REGENERATIVE MEDICINE; REVIEW; SOMATIC CELL; STEM CELL SELF-RENEWAL; UPREGULATION; X CHROMOSOME; ANIMAL; BIOSYNTHESIS; CELL REPROGRAMMING TECHNIQUE; GENETICS; HISTORY; PROCEDURES;

ANIMALS; CELLULAR REPROGRAMMING; CELLULAR REPROGRAMMING TECHNIQUES; HISTORY, 21ST CENTURY; HUMANS; TRANSCRIPTION FACTORS;

EID: 84959566309     PISSN: 14710072     EISSN: 14710080     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1038/nrm.2016.8     Document Type: Review

References (174)

1. Weismann, A. The Germ-Plasm: A Theory of Heredity (Charles Scribner's Sons, 1893).
2. Waddington, C. H. The Strategy of the Genes. A Discussion of Some Aspects of Theoretical Biology (George Allen & Unwin, 1957).
3. Gurdon, J. B., Elsdale, T. R. & Fischberg, M. Sexually mature individuals of Xenopus laevis from the transplantation of single somatic nuclei. Nature 182, 64-65 (1958).
4. Gurdon, J. B. The developmental capacity of nuclei taken from intestinal epithelium cells of feeding tadpoles. J. Embryol. Exp. Morphol. 10, 622-640 (1962).
5. Evans, M. J. & Kaufman, M. H. Establishment in culture of pluripotential cells from mouse embryos. Nature 292, 154-156 (1981).
6. Martin, G. R. Isolation of a pluripotent cell line from early mouse embryos cultured in medium conditioned by teratocarcinoma stem cells. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 78, 7634-7638 (1981).
7. Wilmut, I., Schnieke, A. E., McWhir, J., Kind, A. J. & Campbell, K. H. Viable offspring derived from fetal and adult mammalian cells. Nature 385, 810-813 (1997).
8. Wakayama, T., Perry, A. C., Zuccotti, M., Johnson, K. R. & Yanagimachi, R. Full-term development of mice from enucleated oocytes injected with cumulus cell nuclei. Nature 394, 369-374 (1998).
9. Blau, H. M., Chiu, C. P. & Webster, C. Cytoplasmic activation of human nuclear genes in stable heterocaryons. Cell 32, 1171-1180 (1983).
10. Takagi, N., Yoshida, M. A., Sugawara, O. & Sasaki, M. Reversal of X-inactivation in female mouse somatic cells hybridized with murine teratocarcinoma stem cells in vitro. Cell 34, 1053-1062 (1983).
11. Tada, M., Takahama, Y., Abe, K., Nakatsuji, N. & Tada, T. Nuclear reprogramming of somatic cells by in vitro hybridization with ES cells. Curr. Biol. 11, 1553-1558 (2001).
12. Cowan, C. A., Atienza, J., Melton, D. A. & Eggan, K. Nuclear reprogramming of somatic cells after fusion with human embryonic stem cells. Science 309, 1369-1373 (2005).
13. Davis, R. L., Weintraub, H. & Lassar, A. B. Expression of a single transfected cDNA converts fibroblasts to myoblasts. Cell 51, 987-1000 (1987).
14. Kulessa, H., Frampton, J. & Graf, T. GATA-1 reprograms avian myelomonocytic cell lines into eosinophils, thromboblasts, and erythroblasts. Genes Dev. 9, 1250-1262 (1995).
15. Xie, H., Ye, M., Feng, R. & Graf, T. Stepwise reprogramming of B cells into macrophages. Cell 117, 663-676 (2004).
16. Postlethwait, J. H. & Schneiderman, H. A. A clonal analysis of determination in Antennapedia, a homoeotic mutant of Drosophila melanogaster. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 64, 176-183 (1969).
17. Schneuwly, S., Klemenz, R. & Gehring, W. J. Redesigning the body plan of Drosophila by ectopic expression of the homoeotic gene Antennapedia. Nature 325, 816-818 (1987).
18. Frischer, L. E., Hagen, F. S. & Garber, R. L. An inversion that disrupts the Antennapedia gene causes abnormal structure and localization of RNAs. Cell 47, 1017-1023 (1986).
19. Schneuwly, S., Kuroiwa, A. & Gehring, W. J. Molecular analysis of the dominant homeotic Antennapedia phenotype. EMBO J. 6, 201-206 (1987).
20. Scott, M. P. et al. The molecular organization of the Antennapedia locus of Drosophila. Cell 35, 763-776 (1983).
21. Hazelrigg, T. & Kaufman, T. C. Revertants of dominant mutations associated with the Antennapedia gene complex of DROSOPHILA MELANOGASTER: cytology and genetics. Genetics 105, 581-600 (1983).
22. Halder, G., Callaerts, P. & Gehring, W. J. Induction of ectopic eyes by targeted expression of the eyeless gene in Drosophila. Science 267, 1788-1792 (1995).
23. Avior, Y., Sagi, I. & Benvenisty, N. Pluripotent stem cells in disease modelling and drug testing. Nat. Rev. Mol. Cell Biol. http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/nrm.2015.27 (2016).
24. Mitsui, K. et al. The homeoprotein Nanog is required for maintenance of pluripotency in mouse epiblast and ES cells. Cell 113, 631-642 (2003).
25. Chambers, I. et al. Functional expression cloning of Nanog, a pluripotency sustaining factor in embryonic stem cells. Cell 113, 643-655 (2003).
26. Smith, A. G. et al. Inhibition of pluripotential embryonic stem cell differentiation by purified polypeptides. Nature 336, 688-690 (1988).
27. Niwa, H., Burdon, T., Chambers, I. & Smith, A. Self-renewal of pluripotent embryonic stem cells is mediated via activation of STAT3. Genes Dev. 12, 2048-2060 (1998).
28. Matsuda, T. et al. STAT3 activation is sufficient to maintain an undifferentiated state of mouse embryonic stem cells. EMBO J. 18, 4261-4269 (1999).
29. Niwa, H., Ogawa, K., Shimosato, D. & Adachi, K. A parallel circuit of LIF signalling pathways maintains pluripotency of mouse ES cells. Nature 460, 118-122 (2009).
30. Cartwright, P. et al. LIF/STAT3 controls ES cell self-renewal and pluripotency by a Myc-dependent mechanism. Development 132, 885-896 (2005).
31. Sato, N., Meijer, L., Skaltsounis, L., Greengard, P. & Brivanlou, A. H. Maintenance of pluripotency in human and mouse embryonic stem cells through activation of Wnt signaling by a pharmacological GSK-3-specific inhibitor. Nat. Med. 10, 55-63 (2004).
32. Burdon, T., Stracey, C., Chambers, I., Nichols, J. & Smith, A. Suppression of SHP-2 and ERK signalling promotes self-renewal of mouse embryonic stem cells. Dev. Biol. 210, 30-43 (1999).
33. Burdon, T., Chambers, I., Stracey, C., Niwa, H. & Smith, A. Signaling mechanisms regulating self-renewal and differentiation of pluripotent embryonic stem cells. Cells Tissues Organs 165, 131-143 (1999).
34. Cheng, A. M. et al. Mammalian Grb2 regulates multiple steps in embryonic development and malignant transformation. Cell 95, 793-803 (1998).
35. Tokuzawa, Y. et al. Fbx15 is a novel target of Oct3/4 but is dispensable for embryonic stem cell self-renewal and mouse development. Mol. Cell. Biol. 23, 2699-2708 (2003).
36. Tomioka, M. et al. Identification of Sox-2 regulatory region which is under the control of Oct-3/4-Sox-2 complex. Nucleic Acids Res. 30, 3202-3213 (2002).
37. Okumura-Nakanishi, S., Saito, M., Niwa, H. & Ishikawa, F. Oct-3/4 and Sox2 regulate Oct-3/4 gene in embryonic stem cells. J. Biol. Chem. 280, 5307-5317 (2005).
38. Morita, S., Kojima, T. & Kitamura, T. Plat-E: an efficient and stable system for transient packaging of retroviruses. Gene Ther. 7, 1063-1066 (2000).
39. Takahashi, K. & Yamanaka, S. Induction of pluripotent stem cells from mouse embryonic and adult fibroblast cultures by defined factors. Cell 126, 663-676 (2006).
40. Takahashi, K. et al. Induction of pluripotent stem cells from adult human fibroblasts by defined factors. Cell 131, 861-872 (2007).
41. Yu, J. et al. Induced pluripotent stem cell lines derived from human somatic cells. Science 318, 1917-1920 (2007).
42. Yu, J. et al. Human induced pluripotent stem cells free of vector and transgene sequences. Science 324, 797-801 (2009).
43. Tanabe, K., Nakamura, M., Narita, M., Takahashi, K. & Yamanaka, S. Maturation, not initiation, is the major roadblock during reprogramming toward pluripotency from human fibroblasts. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 110, 12172-12179 (2013).
44. Nakagawa, M. et al. Generation of induced pluripotent stem cells without Myc from mouse and human fibroblasts. Nat. Biotechnol. 26, 101-106 (2008).
45. Jiang, J. et al. A core Klf circuitry regulates self-renewal of embryonic stem cells. Nat. Cell Biol. 10, 353-360 (2008).
46. Nakagawa, M., Takizawa, N., Narita, M., Ichisaka, T. & Yamanaka, S. Promotion of direct reprogramming by transformation-deficient Myc. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 107, 14152-14157 (2010).
47. Han, J. et al. Tbx3 improves the germ-line competency of induced pluripotent stem cells. Nature 463, 1096-1100 (2010).
48. Tsubooka, N. et al. Roles of Sall4 in the generation of pluripotent stem cells from blastocysts and fibroblasts. Genes Cells 14, 683-694 (2009).
49. Zhao, Y. et al. Two supporting factors greatly improve the efficiency of human iPSC generation. Cell Stem Cell 3, 475-479 (2008).
50. Feng, B. et al. Reprogramming of fibroblasts into induced pluripotent stem cells with orphan nuclear receptor Esrrb. Nat. Cell Biol. 11, 197-203 (2009).
51. Picanco-Castro, V. et al. Pluripotent reprogramming of fibroblasts by lentiviral-mediated insertion of SOX2, C-MYC and TCL-1A. Stem Cells Dev. 20, 169-180 (2010).
52. Heng, J. C. et al. The nuclear receptor Nr5a2 can replace Oct4 in the reprogramming of murine somatic cells to pluripotent cells. Cell Stem Cell 6, 167-174 (2010).
53. Judson, R. L., Babiarz, J. E., Venere, M. & Blelloch, R. Embryonic stem cell-specific microRNAs promote induced pluripotency. Nat. Biotechnol. 27, 459-461 (2009).
54. Worringer, K. A. et al. The let-7/LIN-41 pathway regulates reprogramming to human induced pluripotent stem cells by controlling expression of prodifferentiation genes. Cell Stem Cell 14, 40-52 (2013).
55. Festuccia, N. et al. Esrrb is a direct Nanog target gene that can substitute for Nanog function in pluripotent cells. Cell Stem Cell 11, 477-490 (2012).
56. Dunn, S. J., Martello, G., Yordanov, B., Emmott, S. & Smith, A. G. Defining an essential transcription factor program for naive pluripotency. Science 344, 1156-1160 (2014).
57. Buganim, Y. et al. Single-cell expression analyses during cellular reprogramming reveal an early stochastic and a late hierarchic phase. Cell 150, 1209-1222 (2012).
58. Kawamura, T. et al. Linking the p53 tumour suppressor pathway to somatic cell reprogramming. Nature 460, 1140-1144 (2009).
59. Li, H. et al. The Ink4/Arf locus is a barrier for iPS cell reprogramming. Nature 460, 1136-1139 (2009).
60. Marion, R. M. et al. A p53-mediated DNA damage response limits reprogramming to ensure iPS cell genomic integrity. Nature 460, 1149-1153 (2009).
61. Utikal, J. et al. Immortalization eliminates a roadblock during cellular reprogramming into iPS cells. Nature 460, 1145-1148 (2009).
62. Hong, H. et al. Suppression of induced pluripotent stem cell generation by the p53-p21 pathway. Nature 460, 1132-1135 (2009).
63. Banito, A. et al. Senescence impairs successful reprogramming to pluripotent stem cells. Genes Dev. 23, 2134-2139 (2009).
64. Edel, M. J. et al. Rem2 GTPase maintains survival of human embryonic stem cells as well as enhancing reprogramming by regulating p53 and cyclin D1. Genes Dev. 24, 561-573 (2010).
65. Buganim, Y., Faddah, D. A. & Jaenisch, R. Mechanisms and models of somatic cell reprogramming. Nat. Rev. Genet. 14, 427-439 (2013).
66. Huangfu, D. et al. Induction of pluripotent stem cells by defined factors is greatly improved by small-molecule compounds. Nat. Biotechnol. 26, 795-797 (2008).
67. Liang, G., Taranova, O., Xia, K. & Zhang, Y. Butyrate promotes induced pluripotent stem cell generation. J. Biol. Chem. 285, 25516-25521 (2010).
68. Mali, P. et al. Butyrate greatly enhances derivation of human induced pluripotent stem cells by promoting epigenetic remodeling and the expression of pluripotency-associated genes. Stem Cells 28, 713-720 (2010).
69. Ang, Y. S. et al. Wdr5 mediates self-renewal and reprogramming via the embryonic stem cell core transcriptional network. Cell 145, 183-197 (2011).
70. Kuzmichev, A., Nishioka, K., Erdjument-Bromage, H., Tempst, P. & Reinberg, D. Histone methyltransferase activity associated with a human multiprotein complex containing the Enhancer of Zeste protein. Genes Dev. 16, 2893-2905 (2002).
71. Ding, X. et al. The polycomb protein Ezh2 impacts on induced pluripotent stem cell generation. Stem Cells Dev. 23, 931-940 (2014).
72. Wang, T. et al. The histone demethylases Jhdm1a/1b enhance somatic cell reprogramming in a vitamin-C-dependent manner. Cell Stem Cell 9, 575-587 (2011).
73. Onder, T. T. et al. Chromatin-modifying enzymes as modulators of reprogramming. Nature 483, 598-602 (2012).
74. Shinagawa, T. et al. Histone variants enriched in oocytes enhance reprogramming to induced pluripotent stem cells. Cell Stem Cell 14, 217-227 (2014).
75. Pawlak, M. & Jaenisch, R. De novo DNA methylation by Dnmt3a and Dnmt3b is dispensable for nuclear reprogramming of somatic cells to a pluripotent state. Genes Dev. 25, 1035-1040 (2011).
76. Hu, X. et al. Tet and TDG mediate DNA demethylation essential for mesenchymal-to-epithelial transition in somatic cell reprogramming. Cell Stem Cell 14, 512-522 (2014).
77. Yamanaka, S. Elite and stochastic models for induced pluripotent stem cell generation. Nature 460, 49-52 (2009).
78. Goodell, M. A., Nguyen, H. & Shroyer, N. Somatic stem cell heterogeneity: diversity in the blood, skin and intestinal stem cell compartments. Nat. Rev. Mol. Cell Biol. 16, 299-309 (2015).
79. Hanna, J. et al. Direct reprogramming of terminally differentiated mature B lymphocytes to pluripotency. Cell 133, 250-264 (2008).
80. Aoi, T. et al. Generation of pluripotent stem cells from adult mouse liver and stomach cells. Science 321, 699-702 (2008).
81. Stadtfeld, M., Brennand, K. & Hochedlinger, K. Reprogramming of pancreatic β cells into induced pluripotent stem cells. Curr. Biol. 18, 890-894 (2008).
82. Samavarchi-Tehrani, P. et al. Functional genomics reveals a BMP-driven mesenchymal-to-epithelial transition in the initiation of somatic cell reprogramming. Cell Stem Cell 7, 64-77 (2010).
83. Li, R. et al. A mesenchymal-to-epithelial transition initiates and is required for the nuclear reprogramming of mouse fibroblasts. Cell Stem Cell 7, 51-63 (2010).
84. Panopoulos, A. D. et al. The metabolome of induced pluripotent stem cells reveals metabolic changes occurring in somatic cell reprogramming. Cell Res. 22, 168-177 (2011).
85. Zhang, J., Nuebel, E., Daley, G. Q., Koehler, C. M. & Teitell, M. A. Metabolic regulation in pluripotent stem cells during reprogramming and self-renewal. Cell Stem Cell 11, 589-595 (2012).
86. Mikkelsen, T. S. et al. Dissecting direct reprogramming through integrative genomic analysis. Nature 454, 794 (2008).
87. Deng, J. et al. Targeted bisulfite sequencing reveals changes in DNA methylation associated with nuclear reprogramming. Nat. Biotechnol. 27, 353-360 (2009).
88. Polo, J. M. et al. A molecular roadmap of reprogramming somatic cells into iPS cells. Cell 151, 1617-1632 (2012).
89. Soufi, A., Donahue, G. & Zaret, K. S. Facilitators and impediments of the pluripotency reprogramming factors' initial engagement with the genome. Cell 151, 994-1004 (2012).
90. Sridharan, R. et al. Role of the murine reprogramming factors in the induction of pluripotency. Cell 136, 364-377 (2009).
91. Feng, B., Ng, J. H., Heng, J. C. & Ng, H. H. Molecules that promote or enhance reprogramming of somatic cells to induced pluripotent stem cells. Cell Stem Cell 4, 301-312 (2009).
92. Stadtfeld, M., Maherali, N., Breault, D. T. & Hochedlinger, K. Defining molecular cornerstones during fibroblast to iPS cell reprogramming in mouse. Cell Stem Cell 2, 230-240 (2008).
93. Brambrink, T. et al. Sequential expression of pluripotency markers during direct reprogramming of mouse somatic cells. Cell Stem Cell 2, 151-159 (2008).
94. O'Malley, J. et al. High-resolution analysis with novel cell-surface markers identifies routes to iPS cells. Nature 499, 88-91 (2013).
95. Chan, E. M. et al. Live cell imaging distinguishes bona fide human iPS cells from partially reprogrammed cells. Nat. Biotechnol. 27, 1033-1037 (2009).
96. Takahashi, K. et al. Induction of pluripotency in human somatic cells via a transient state resembling primitive streak-like mesendoderm. Nat. Commun. 5, 3678 (2014).
97. Cacchiarelli, D. et al. Integrative analyses of human reprogramming reveal dynamic nature of induced pluripotency. Cell 162, 412-424 (2015).
98. Ohnuki, M. et al. Dynamic regulation of human endogenous retroviruses mediates factor-induced reprogramming and differentiation potential. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 111, 12426-12431 (2014).
99. Xie, W. et al. Epigenomic analysis of multilineage differentiation of human embryonic stem cells. Cell 153, 1134-1148 (2013).
100. Grow, E. J. et al. Intrinsic retroviral reactivation in human preimplantation embryos and pluripotent cells. Nature 522, 221-225 (2015).
101. Papapetrou, E. P. et al. Stoichiometric and temporal requirements of Oct4, Sox2, Klf4, and c-Myc expression for efficient human iPSC induction and differentiation. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 106, 12759-12764 (2009).
102. Yamaguchi, S., Hirano, K., Nagata, S. & Tada, T. Sox2 expression effects on direct reprogramming efficiency as determined by alternative somatic cell fate. Stem Cell Res. 6, 177-186 (2010).
103. Carey, B. W. et al. Reprogramming factor stoichiometry influences the epigenetic state and biological properties of induced pluripotent stem cells. Cell Stem Cell 9, 588-598 (2011).
104. Wernig, M. et al. A drug-inducible transgenic system for direct reprogramming of multiple somatic cell types. Nat. Biotechnol. 26, 916-924 (2008).
105. Kim, S. I. et al. KLF4 N-terminal variance modulates induced reprogramming to pluripotency. Stem Cell Rep. 4, 727-743 (2015).
106. Shu, J. et al. Induction of pluripotency in mouse somatic cells with lineage specifiers. Cell 153, 963-975 (2013).
107. Okita, K., Ichisaka, T. & Yamanaka, S. Generation of germ-line competent induced pluripotent stem cells. Nature 448, 313-317 (2007).
108. Stadtfeld, M., Nagaya, M., Utikal, J., Weir, G. & Hochedlinger, K. Induced pluripotent stem cells generated without viral integration. Science 322, 945-949 (2008).
109. Okita, K., Nakagawa, M., Hyenjong, H., Ichisaka, T. & Yamanaka, S. Generation of mouse induced pluripotent stem cells without viral vectors. Science 322, 949-953 (2008).
110. Okita, K. et al. A more efficient method to generate integration-free human iPS cells. Nat. Methods 8, 409-412 (2011).
111. Jia, F. et al. A nonviral minicircle vector for deriving human iPS cells. Nat. Methods 7, 197-199 (2010).
112. Kaji, K. et al. Virus-free induction of pluripotency and subsequent excision of reprogramming factors. Nature 458, 771-775 (2009).
113. Woltjen, K. et al. piggyBac transposition reprograms fibroblasts to induced pluripotent stem cells. Nature 458, 766-770 (2009).
114. Yusa, K., Rad, R., Takeda, J. & Bradley, A. Generation of transgene-free induced pluripotent mouse stem cells by the piggyBac transposon. Nat. Methods 6, 363-369 (2009).
115. Fusaki, N., Ban, H., Nishiyama, A., Saeki, K. & Hasegawa, M. Efficient induction of transgene-free human pluripotent stem cells using a vector based on Sendai virus, an RNA virus that does not integrate into the host genome. Proc. Jpn Acad. Ser. B Phys. Biol. Sci. 85, 348-362 (2009).
116. Nishimura, K. et al. Development of defective and persistent Sendai virus vector: a unique gene delivery/expression system ideal for cell reprogramming. J. Biol. Chem. 286, 4760-4771 (2010).
117. Warren, L. et al. Highly efficient reprogramming to pluripotency and directed differentiation of human cells with synthetic modified mRNA. Cell Stem Cell 7, 618-630 (2010).
118. Kim, D. et al. Generation of human induced pluripotent stem cells by direct delivery of reprogramming proteins. Cell Stem Cell 4, 472-476 (2009).
119. Hou, P. et al. Pluripotent stem cells induced from mouse somatic cells by small-molecule compounds. Science 341, 651-654 (2013).
120. Chen, G. et al. Chemically defined conditions for human iPSC derivation and culture. Nat. Methods 8, 424-429 (2011).
121. Wang, Q. et al. A novel xeno-free and feeder-cell-free system for human pluripotent stem cell culture. Protein Cell 3, 51-59 (2012).
122. Bergstrom, R., Strom, S., Holm, F., Feki, A. & Hovatta, O. Xeno-free culture of human pluripotent stem cells. Methods Mol. Biol. 767, 125-136 (2011).
123. Ross, P. J. et al. Human induced pluripotent stem cells produced under xeno-free conditions. Stem Cells Dev. 19,1221-1229 (2009).
124. Miyazaki, T. et al. Laminin E8 fragments support efficient adhesion and expansion of dissociated human pluripotent stem cells. Nat. Commun. 3, 1236 (2012).
125. Nakagawa, M. et al. A novel efficient feeder-free culture system for the derivation of human induced pluripotent stem cells. Sci. Rep. 4, 3594 (2014).
126. Rajala, K. et al. A defined and xeno-free culture method enabling the establishment of clinical-grade human embryonic, induced pluripotent and adipose stem cells. PLoS ONE 5, e10246 (2010).
127. Hanna, J. et al. Treatment of sickle cell anemia mouse model with iPS cells generated from autologous skin. Science 318, 1920-1923 (2007).
128. Wernig, M. et al. Neurons derived from reprogrammed fibroblasts functionally integrate into the fetal brain and improve symptoms of rats with Parkinson's disease. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 105, 5856-5861 (2008).
129. Tsuji, O. et al. Therapeutic potential of appropriately evaluated safe-induced pluripotent stem cells for spinal cord injury. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 107, 12704-12709 (2010).
130. Kobayashi, Y. et al. Pre-evaluated safe human iPSC-derived neural stem cells promote functional recovery after spinal cord injury in common marmoset without tumorigenicity. PLoS ONE 7, e52787 (2012).
131. Hockemeyer, D. et al. Efficient targeting of expressed and silent genes in human ESCs and iPSCs using zinc-finger nucleases. Nat. Biotechnol. 27, 851-857 (2009).
132. Nichols, J. & Smith, A. Naive and primed pluripotent states. Cell Stem Cell 4, 487-492 (2009).
133. Weinberger, L., Ayyash, M., Novershtern, N. & Hanna, J. H. Naive and primed pluripotency. Nat. Rev. Mol. Cell Biol. http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/nrm.2015.28 (2016).
134. Ying, Q. L. et al. The ground state of embryonic stem cell self-renewal. Nature 453, 519-523 (2008).
135. Takashima, Y. et al. Resetting transcription factor control circuitry toward ground-state pluripotency in human. Cell 158, 1254-1269 (2014).
136. Theunissen, T. W. et al. Systematic identification of culture conditions for induction and maintenance of naive human pluripotency. Cell Stem Cell 15, 471-487 (2014).
137. Hanna, J. et al. Human embryonic stem cells with biological and epigenetic characteristics similar to those of mouse ESCs. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 107, 9222-9227 (2010).
138. Gafni, O. et al. Derivation of novel human ground state naive pluripotent stem cells. Nature 504, 282-286 (2013).
139. Ware, C. B. et al. Derivation of naive human embryonic stem cells. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 111, 4484-4489 (2014).
140. Chan, Y. S. et al. Induction of a human pluripotent state with distinct regulatory circuitry that resembles preimplantation epiblast. Cell Stem Cell 13, 663-675 (2013).
141. Chen, H. et al. Reinforcement of STAT3 activity reprogrammes human embryonic stem cells to naive-like pluripotency. Nat. Commun. 6, 7095 (2015).
142. Narsinh, K. H. et al. Single cell transcriptional profiling reveals heterogeneity of human induced pluripotent stem cells. J. Clin. Invest. 121, 1217-1221 (2011).
143. Hough, S. R. et al. Single-cell gene expression profiles define self-renewing, pluripotent, and lineage primed states of human pluripotent stem cells. Stem Cell Rep. 2, 881-895 (2014).
144. Kang, L., Wang, J., Zhang, Y., Kou, Z. & Gao, S. iPS cells can support full-term development of tetraploid blastocyst-complemented embryos. Cell Stem Cell 5, 135-138 (2009).
145. Boland, M. J. et al. Adult mice generated from induced pluripotent stem cells. Nature 461, 91-94 (2009).
146. Zhao, X. Y. et al. iPS cells produce viable mice through tetraploid complementation. Nature 461, 86-90 (2009).
147. Yamanaka, S. Induced pluripotent stem cells: past, present, and future. Cell Stem Cell 10, 678-684 (2012).
148. Osafune, K. et al. Marked differences in differentiation propensity among human embryonic stem cell lines. Nat. Biotechnol. 26, 313-315 (2008).
149. Tachibana, M. et al. Human embryonic stem cells derived by somatic cell nuclear transfer. Cell 153, 1228-1238 (2013).
150. Chung, Y. G. et al. Human somatic cell nuclear transfer using adult cells. Cell Stem Cell 14, 777-780 (2014).
151. Yamada, M. et al. Human oocytes reprogram adult somatic nuclei of a type 1 diabetic to diploid pluripotent stem cells. Nature 510, 533-536 (2014).
152. Ma, H. et al. Abnormalities in human pluripotent cells due to reprogramming mechanisms. Nature 511, 177-183 (2014).
153. Johannesson, B. et al. Comparable frequencies of coding mutations and loss of imprinting in human pluripotent cells derived by nuclear transfer and defined factors. Cell Stem Cell 15, 634-642 (2014).
154. Choi, J. et al. A comparison of genetically matched cell lines reveals the equivalence of human iPSCs and ESCs. Nat. Biotechnol. 33, 1173-1181 (2015).
155. Miura, K. et al. Variation in the safety of induced pluripotent stem cell lines. Nat. Biotechnol. 27, 743-745 (2009).
156. Koyanagi-Aoi, M. et al. Differentiation-defective phenotypes revealed by large-scale analyses of human pluripotent stem cells. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 110, 20569-20574 (2013).
157. Schwartz, S. D. et al. Embryonic stem cell trials for macular degeneration: a preliminary report. Lancet 379, 713-720 (2012).
158. Trounson, A. & DeWitt, N. D. Pluripotent stem cells progressing to the clinic. Nat. Rev. Mol. Cell Biol. http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/nrm.2016.10 (2016).
159. Wernig, M. et al. In vitro reprogramming of fibroblasts into a pluripotent ES cell-like state. Nature 448, 318-324 (2007).
160. Maherali, N. et al. Directly reprogrammed fibroblasts show global epigenetic remodelling and widespread tissue contribution. Cell Stem Cell 1, 55-70 (2007).
161. Park, I. H. et al. Reprogramming of human somatic cells to pluripotency with defined factors. Nature 451, 141-146 (2008).
162. Hanna, J. et al. Direct cell reprogramming is a stochastic process amenable to acceleration. Nature 462, 595-601 (2009).
163. Yang, J. et al. Stat3 activation is limiting for reprogramming to ground state pluripotency. Cell Stem Cell 7, 319-328 (2010).
164. Silva, J. et al. Promotion of reprogramming to ground state pluripotency by signal inhibition. PLoS Biol. 6, e253 (2008).
165. Thomson, J. A. et al. Embryonic stem cell lines derived from human blastocysts. Science 282, 1145-1147 (1998).
166. Takahashi, K., Mitsui, K. & Yamanaka, S. Role of ERas in promoting tumour-like properties in mouse embryonic stem cells. Nature 423, 541-545 (2003).
167. Wernig, M., Meissner, A., Cassady, J. P. & Jaenisch, R. c-Myc is dispensable for direct reprogramming of mouse fibroblasts. Cell Stem Cell 2, 10-12 (2008).
168. Dimos, J. T. et al. Induced pluripotent stem cells generated from patients with ALS can be differentiated into motor neurons. Science 321, 1218-1221 (2008).
169. Park, I. H. et al. Disease-specific induced pluripotent stem cells. Cell 134, 877-886 (2008).
170. Zhou, H. et al. Generation of induced pluripotent stem cells using recombinant proteins. Cell Stem Cell 4, 381-384 (2009).
171. Zhou, Q., Brown, J., Kanarek, A., Rajagopal, J. & Melton, D. A. In vivo reprogramming of adult pancreatic exocrine cells to β-cells. Nature 455, 627-632 (2008).
172. Vierbuchen, T. et al. Direct conversion of fibroblasts to functional neurons by defined factors. Nature 463, 1035-1041 (2010).
173. Montserrat, N. et al. Reprogramming of human fibroblasts to pluripotency with lineage specifiers. Cell Stem Cell 13, 341-350 (2013).
174. Smith, Z. D., Sindhu, C. & Meissner, A. Molecular features of cellular reprogramming and development. Nat. Rev. Mol. Cell Biol. http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/nrm.2016.6 (2016).