Direct comparison of distinct naive pluripotent states in human embryonic stem cells

Nature Communications

Volumn 8, Issue , 2017, Pages

  Warrier, S ^a   Van Der Jeught, M ^a   Duggal, G ^a,b   Tilleman, L ^c   Sutherland, E ^a   Taelman, J ^a   Popovic, M ^a   Lierman, S ^a   Chuva De Sousa Lopes, S ^a,d   Van Soom, A ^c   Peelman, L ^c   Van Nieuwerburgh, F ^c   De Coninck, D I M ^c   Menten, B ^a   Mestdagh, P ^a   Van De Sompele, J ^a   Deforce, D ^c   De Sutter, P ^a   Heindryckx, B ^a  

^a GHENT UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL   (Belgium)

^b UNIVERSITY OF OXFORD   (United Kingdom)

^c GHENT UNIVERSITY   (Belgium)

^d LEIDEN UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

MAMMALIAN TARGET OF RAPAMYCIN COMPLEX 2; PHOSPHATIDYLINOSITOL 3 KINASE; PROTEIN KINASE B; TRANSCRIPTOME;

CELLS AND CELL COMPONENTS; COMPARATIVE STUDY; DIFFERENTIATION; GENETIC ANALYSIS;

AKT SIGNALING; ARTICLE; CELL DIFFERENTIATION; CELL LINEAGE; COMPARATIVE STUDY; EMBRYO; FEEDER CELL; HUMAN; HUMAN CELL; HUMAN EMBRYONIC STEM CELL; MOUSE; MOUSE EMBRYONIC FEEDER LAYER; MTOR SIGNALING; NONHUMAN; PLURIPOTENT STEM CELL; RNA ANALYSIS; RNA SEQUENCE; TRANSCRIPTOMICS; ANIMAL; CELL LINE; CHEMISTRY; CULTURE MEDIUM; CYTOLOGY; DRUG EFFECT; GENE EXPRESSION REGULATION; GENETICS; METABOLISM; PHARMACOLOGY; SECRETION (PROCESS); SEQUENCE ANALYSIS; SIGNAL TRANSDUCTION;

ANIMALS; CELL DIFFERENTIATION; CELL LINE; CULTURE MEDIA; FEEDER CELLS; GENE EXPRESSION REGULATION; HUMAN EMBRYONIC STEM CELLS; HUMANS; MECHANISTIC TARGET OF RAPAMYCIN COMPLEX 2; MICE; PHOSPHATIDYLINOSITOL 3-KINASES; PLURIPOTENT STEM CELLS; PROTO-ONCOGENE PROTEINS C-AKT; SEQUENCE ANALYSIS, RNA; SIGNAL TRANSDUCTION;

EID: 85020722426     PISSN: None     EISSN: 20411723     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1038/ncomms15055     Document Type: Article

References (49)

1. Thomson, J. A. et al. Embryonic stem cell lines derived from human blastocysts. Science 282, 1145-1147 (1998).
2. 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).
3. Brons, I. G. et al. Derivation of pluripotent epiblast stem cells from mammalian embryos. Nature 448, 191-195 (2007).
4. Tesar, P. J. et al. New cell lines from mouse epiblast share defining features with human embryonic stem cells. Nature 448, 196-199 (2007).
5. Nichols, J. & Smith, A. Naive and primed pluripotent states. Cell Stem Cell 4, 487-492 (2009).
6. Nichols, J. & Smith, A. The origin and identity of embryonic stem cells. Development 138, 3-8 (2011).
7. Ying, Q.-L. et al. The ground state of embryonic stem cell self-renewal. Nature 453, 519-523 (2008).
8. Duggal, G. et al. Alternative routes to induce naïve pluripotency in human embryonic stem cells. Stem Cells 33, 2686-2698 (2015).
9. Honda, A. et al. Naive-like conversion overcomes the limited differentiation capacity of induced pluripotent stem cells. J. Biol. Chem. 288, 26157-26166 (2013).
10. Gafni, O. et al. Derivation of novel human ground state naive pluripotent stem cells. Nature 504, 282-286 (2013).
11. Ware, C. B. et al. Derivation of naive human embryonic stem cells. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 111, 4484-4489 (2014).
12. 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).
13. Takashima, Y. et al. Resetting transcription factor control circuitry toward ground-state pluripotency in human. Cell 158, 1254-1269 (2014).
14. Ernst, M. et al. Comparative computational analysis of pluripotency in human and mouse stem cells. Sci. Rep. 5, 7927 (2015).
15. 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 15, 410-415 (2014).
16. Pastor, W. A. et al. Naive human pluripotent cells feature a methylation landscape devoid of blastocyst or germline memory. Cell Stem Cell 18, 323-329 (2016).
17. Grabole, N. et al. Prdm14 promotes germline fate and naive pluripotency by repressing FGF signalling and DNA methylation. EMBO Rep. 14, 629-637 (2013).
18. Nakaki, F. & Saitou, M. PRDM14: a unique regulator for pluripotency and epigenetic reprogramming. Trends Biochem. Sci. 39, 289-298 (2014).
19. Yamaji, M. et al. PRDM14 ensures naive pluripotency through dual regulation of signaling and epigenetic pathways in mouse embryonic stem cells. Cell Stem Cell 12, 368-382 (2013).
20. Gillich, A. et al. Epiblast stem cell-based system reveals reprogramming synergy of germline factors. Cell Stem Cell 10, 425-439 (2012).
21. Martello, G. et al. Esrrb is a pivotal target of the Gsk3/Tcf3 axis regulating embryonic stem cell self-renewal. Cell Stem Cell 11, 491-504 (2012).
22. Guo, G. et al. Klf4 reverts developmentally programmed restriction of ground state pluripotency. Development 136, 1063-1069 (2009).
23. Paling, N. R., Wheadon, H., Bone, H. K. & Welham, M. J. Regulation of embryonic stem cell self-renewal by phosphoinositide 3-kinase-dependent signaling. J. Biol. Chem. 279, 48063-48070 (2004).
24. Pekarsky, Y. et al. Tcl1 enhances Akt kinase activity and mediates its nuclear translocation. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 97, 3028-3033 (2000).
25. Maiese, K. Stem cell guidance through the mechanistic target of rapamycin. World J. Stem Cell. 7, 999-1009 (2015).
26. Feldman, M. E. et al. Active-site inhibitors of mTOR target rapamycin-resistant outputs of mTORC1 and mTORC2. PLoS Biol. 7, e38 (2009).
27. Singh, A. M., Bechard, M., Smith, K. & Dalton, S. Reconciling the different roles of Gsk3b in 'naïve' and 'primed' pluripotent stem cells. Cell Cycle 11, 2991-2996 (2012).
28. Wang, X. Q. et al. CDK1-PDK1-PI3K/Akt signaling pathway regulates embryonic and induced pluripotency. Cell Death Differ. 24, 38-48 (2017).
29. Murakami, M. et al. mTOR is essential for growth and proliferation in early mouse embryos and embryonic stem cells. Mol. Cell. Biol. 24, 6710-6718 (2004).
30. Wray, J. et al. Inhibition of glycogen synthase kinase-3 alleviates Tcf3 repression of the pluripotency network and increases embryonic stem cell resistance to differentiation. Nat. Cell. Biol. 13, 838-845 (2011).
31. Dalton, S. Signaling networks in human pluripotent stem cells. Curr. Opin. Cell. Biol. 25, 241-246 (2013).
32. Liu, Y. et al. Directed differentiation of forebrain GABA interneurons from human pluripotent stem cells. Nat. Protoc. 8, 1670-1679 (2013).
33. Lian, X. et al. Directed cardiomyocyte differentiation from human pluripotent stem cells by modulating Wnt/b-catenin signaling under fully defined conditions. Nat. Protoc. 8, 162-175 (2013).
34. Irie, N. et al. SOX17 is a critical specifier of human primordial germ cell fate. Cell 160, 253-268 (2015).
35. Folmes, C. D. & Terzic, A. Metabolic determinants of embryonic development and stem cell fate. Reprod. Fertil. Dev. 27, 82-88 (2014).
36. Sperber, H. et al. The metabolome regulates the epigenetic landscape during naive-to-primed human embryonic stem cell transition. Nat. Cell Biol. 17, 1523-1535 (2015).
37. Wu, J. & Izpisua Belmonte, J. C. Metabolic exit from naive pluripotency. Nat. Cell Biol. 17, 1519-1521 (2015).
38. Tang, Y. et al. Differential effects of Akt isoforms on somatic cell reprogramming. J. Cell Sci. 127, 3998-4008 (2014).
39. Pearce, L. R. et al. Identification of protor as a novel rictor-binding component of mTOR complex-2. Biochem. J. 405, 513-522 (2007).
40. Unternaehrer, J. J. et al. The epithelial-mesenchymal transition factor SNAIL paradoxically enhances reprogramming. Stem Cell Rep. 3, 691-698 (2014).
41. Chen, H. et al. Reinforcement of STAT3 activity reprogrammes human embryonic stem cells to naive-like pluripotency. Nat. Commun. 6, 7095 (2015).
42. Leitch, H. G. et al. Naive pluripotency is associated with global DNA hypomethylation. Nat. Struct. Mol. Biol. 20, 311-316 (2013).
43. Martin, M. Cutadapt removes adapter sequences from high-throughput sequencing reads. EMBnet.journal 17, 10-12 (2011).
44. Love, M. I. et al. Moderated estimation of fold change and dispersion for RNA-seq data with DESeq2. Genome Biol. 15, 550 (2014).
45. Robinson, M. D. et al. edgeR: a Bioconductor package for differential expression analysis of digital gene expression data. Bioinformatics 26, 139-140 (2010).
46. Culhane, A. et al. MADE4:an R package for multivariate analysis of gene expression data. Bioinformatics 21, 2789-2790 (2005).
47. Luo, W. et al. GAGE: generally applicable gene set enrichment for pathway analysis. BMC Bioinformatics 10, 161 (2009).
48. Luo, W. & Brouwer, C. Pathview: an R/Bioconductor package for pathway-based data integration and visualization. Bioinformatics 29, 1830-1831 (2013).
49. Subramanian, A. et al. Gene set enrichment analysis: a knowledge-based approach for interpreting genome-wide expression profiles. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 102, 15545-15550 (2005).