Advertisement

Protein & Cell

, Volume 4, Issue 11, pp 820–832 | Cite as

Toward pluripotency by reprogramming: mechanisms and application

  • Tao Wang
  • Stephen T. Warren
  • Peng JinEmail author
Review Protein & Cell

Abstract

The somatic epigenome can be reprogrammed to a pluripotent state by a combination of transcription factors. Altering cell fate involves transcription factors cooperation, epigenetic reconfiguration, such as DNA methylation and histone modification, posttranscriptional regulation by microRNAs, and so on. Nevertheless, such reprogramming is inefficient. Evidence suggests that during the early stage of reprogramming, the process is stochastic, but by the late stage, it is deterministic. In addition to conventional reprogramming methods, dozens of small molecules have been identified that can functionally replace reprogramming factors and significantly improve induced pluripotent stem cell (iPSC) reprogramming. Indeed, iPS cells have been created recently using chemical compounds only. iPSCs are thought to display subtle genetic and epigenetic variability; this variability is not random, but occurs at hotspots across the genome. Here we discuss the progress and current perspectives in the field. Research into the reprogramming process today will pave the way for great advances in regenerative medicine in the future.

Keywords

epigenetic reprogramming induced pluripotent stem cells embryonic stem cells disease modeling 

References

  1. Aasen, T., Raya, A., Barrero, M.J., Garreta, E., Consiglio, A., Gonzalez, F., Vassena, R., Bilic, J., Pekarik, V., Tiscornia, G., et al. (2008). Efficient and rapid generation of induced pluripotent stem cells from human keratinocytes. Nat Biotechnol 26, 1276–1284.Google Scholar
  2. Anokye-Danso, F., Trivedi, C.M., Juhr, D., Gupta, M., Cui, Z., Tian, Y., Zhang, Y., Yang, W., Gruber, P.J., Epstein, J.A., et al. (2011). Highly efficient miRNA-mediated reprogramming of mouse and human somatic cells to pluripotency. Cell Stem Cell 8, 376–388.Google Scholar
  3. Apostolou, E., Ferrari, F., Walsh, R.M., Bar-Nur, O., Stadtfeld, M., Cheloufi, S., Stuart, H.T., Polo, J.M., Ohsumi, T.K., Borowsky, M.L., et al. (2013). Genome-wide chromatin interactions of the Nanog locus in pluripotency, differentiation, and reprogramming. Cell Stem Cell 12, 699–712.Google Scholar
  4. Araki, R., Uda, M., Hoki, Y., Sunayama, M., Nakamura, M., Ando, S., Sugiura, M., Ideno, H., Shimada, A., Nifuji, A., et al. (2013). Negligible immunogenicity of terminally differentiated cells derived from induced pluripotent or embryonic stem cells. Nature 494, 100–104.Google Scholar
  5. Bartel, D.P. (2009). MicroRNAs: target recognition and regulatory functions. Cell 136, 215–233.Google Scholar
  6. Bhutani, N., Brady, J.J., Damian, M., Sacco, A., Corbel, S.Y., and Blau, H.M. (2010). Reprogramming towards pluripotency requires AIDdependent DNA demethylation. Nature 463, 1042–1047.Google Scholar
  7. Bock, C., Kiskinis, E., Verstappen, G., Gu, H., Boulting, G., Smith, Z.D., Ziller, M., Croft, G.F., Amoroso, M.W., Oakley, D.H., et al. (2011). Reference Maps of human ES and iPS cell variation enable high-throughput characterization of pluripotent cell lines. Cell 144, 439–452.Google Scholar
  8. Bostick, M., Kim, J.K., Esteve, P.O., Clark, A., Pradhan, S., and Jacobsen, S.E. (2007). UHRF1 plays a role in maintaining DNA methylation in mammalian cells. Science 317, 1760–1764.Google Scholar
  9. Brennand, K.J., Simone, A., Jou, J., Gelboin-Burkhart, C., Tran, N., Sangar, S., Li, Y., Mu, Y., Chen, G., Yu, D., et al. (2011). Modelling schizophrenia using human induced pluripotent stem cells. Nature 473, 221–225.Google Scholar
  10. Buganim, Y., Faddah, D.A., Cheng, A.W., Itskovich, E., Markoulaki, S., Ganz, K., Klemm, S.L., van Oudenaarden, A., and Jaenisch, R. (2012). Single-cell expression analyses during cellular reprogramming reveal an early stochastic and a late hierarchic phase. Cell 150, 1209–1222.Google Scholar
  11. Cao, N., Liang, H., Huang, J., Wang, J., Chen, Y., Chen, Z., and Yang, H.T. (2013). Highly efficient induction and long-term maintenance of multipotent cardiovascular progenitors from human pluripotent stem cells under defined conditions. Cell Res 23, 1119–1132.Google Scholar
  12. Carey, B.W., Markoulaki, S., Hanna, J.H., Faddah, D.A., Buganim, Y., Kim, J., Ganz, K., Steine, E.J., Cassady, J.P., Creyghton, M.P., et al. (2011). Reprogramming factor stoichiometry influences the epigenetic state and biological properties of induced pluripotent stem cells. Cell Stem Cell 9, 588–598.Google Scholar
  13. Cermak, T., Doyle, E.L., Christian, M., Wang, L., Zhang, Y., Schmidt, C., Baller, J.A., Somia, N.V., Bogdanove, A.J., and Voytas, D.F. (2011). Efficient design and assembly of custom TALEN and other TAL effector-based constructs for DNA targeting. Nucleic Acids Res 39, e82.Google Scholar
  14. Chambers, S.M., Fasano, C.A., Papapetrou, E.P., Tomishima, M., Sadelain, M., and Studer, L. (2009). Highly efficient neural conversion of human ES and iPS cells by dual inhibition of SMAD signaling. Nat Biotechnol 27, 275–280.Google Scholar
  15. Chen, J., Liu, H., Liu, J., Qi, J., Wei, B., Yang, J., Liang, H., Chen, Y., Wu, Y., Guo, L., et al. (2013). H3K9 methylation is a barrier during somatic cell reprogramming into iPSCs. Nat Genet 45, 34–42.Google Scholar
  16. Cherry, A.B., and Daley, G.Q. (2013). Reprogrammed cells for disease modeling and regenerative medicine. Annu Rev Med 64, 277–290.Google Scholar
  17. Cheung, C., Bernardo, A.S., Trotter, M.W., Pedersen, R.A., and Sinha, S. (2012). Generation of human vascular smooth muscle subtypes provides insight into embryological origin-dependent disease susceptibility. Nat Biotechnol 30, 165–173.Google Scholar
  18. Chin, M.H., Mason, M.J., Xie, W., Volinia, S., Singer, M., Peterson, C., Ambartsumyan, G., Aimiuwu, O., Richter, L., Zhang, J., et al. (2009). Induced pluripotent stem cells and embryonic stem cells are distinguished by gene expression signatures. Cell Stem Cell 5, 111–123.Google Scholar
  19. Cong, L., Ran, F.A., Cox, D., Lin, S., Barretto, R., Habib, N., Hsu, P.D., Wu, X., Jiang, W., Marraffini, L.A., et al. (2013). Multiplex genome engineering using CRISPR/Cas systems. Science 339, 819–823.Google Scholar
  20. Costa, Y., Ding, J., Theunissen, T.W., Faiola, F., Hore, T.A., Shliaha, P.V., Fidalgo, M., Saunders, A., Lawrence, M., Dietmann, S., et al. (2013). NANOG-dependent function of TET1 and TET2 in establishment of pluripotency. Nature 495, 370–374.Google Scholar
  21. Cowan, C.A., Atienza, J., Melton, D.A., and Eggan, K. (2005). Nuclear reprogramming of somatic cells after fusion with human embryonic stem cells. Science 309, 1369–1373.Google Scholar
  22. Deng, J., Shoemaker, R., Xie, B., Gore, A., LeProust, E.M., Antosiewicz-Bourget, J., Egli, D., Maherali, N., Park, I.H., Yu, J., et al. (2009). Targeted bisulfite sequencing reveals changes in DNA methylation associated with nuclear reprogramming. Nat Biotechnol 27, 353–360.Google Scholar
  23. Dimos, J.T., Rodolfa, K.T., Niakan, K.K., Weisenthal, L.M., Mitsumoto, H., Chung, W., Croft, G.F., Saphier, G., Leibel, R., Goland, R., et al. (2008). Induced pluripotent stem cells generated from patients with ALS can be differentiated into motor neurons. Science 321, 1218–1221.Google Scholar
  24. Doege, C.A., Inoue, K., Yamashita, T., Rhee, D.B., Travis, S., Fujita, R., Guarnieri, P., Bhagat, G., Vanti, W.B., Shih, A., et al. (2012). Earlystage epigenetic modification during somatic cell reprogramming by Parp1 and Tet2. Nature 488, 652–655.Google Scholar
  25. Ebert, A.D., Yu, J., Rose, F.F., Jr., Mattis, V.B., Lorson, C.L., Thomson, J.A., and Svendsen, C.N. (2009). Induced pluripotent stem cells from a spinal muscular atrophy patient. Nature 457, 277–280.Google Scholar
  26. Engle, S.J., and Puppala, D. (2013). Integrating human pluripotent stem cells into drug development. Cell Stem Cell 12, 669–677.Google Scholar
  27. Espuny-Camacho, I., Michelsen, K.A., Gall, D., Linaro, D., Hasche, A., Bonnefont, J., Bali, C., Orduz, D., Bilheu, A., Herpoel, A., et al. (2013). Pyramidal neurons derived from human pluripotent stem cells integrate efficiently into mouse brain circuits in vivo. Neuron 77, 440–456.Google Scholar
  28. Feng, B., Jiang, J., Kraus, P., Ng, J.H., Heng, J.C., Chan, Y.S., Yaw, L.P., Zhang, W., Loh, Y.H., Han, J., et al. (2009). Reprogramming of fibroblasts into induced pluripotent stem cells with orphan nuclear receptor Esrrb. Nat Cell Biol 11, 197–203.Google Scholar
  29. Frum, T., Halbisen, M.A., Wang, C., Amiri, H., Robson, P., and Ralston, A. (2013). Oct4 cell-autonomously promotes primitive endoderm development in the mouse blastocyst. Dev Cell 25, 610–622.Google Scholar
  30. Fu, Y., Foden, J.A., Khayter, C., Maeder, M.L., Reyon, D., Joung, J.K., and Sander, J.D. (2013). High-frequency off-target mutagenesis induced by CRISPR-Cas nucleases in human cells. Nat Biotechnol 31, 822–826.Google Scholar
  31. Fusaki, N., Ban, H., Nishiyama, A., Saeki, K., and Hasegawa, M. (2009). 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.Google Scholar
  32. Gaj, T., Gersbach, C.A., and Barbas, C.F., 3rd (2013). ZFN, TALEN, and CRISPR/Cas-based methods for genome engineering. Trends Biotechnol 31, 397–405.Google Scholar
  33. Gao, Y., Chen, J., Li, K., Wu, T., Huang, B., Liu, W., Kou, X., Zhang, Y., Huang, H., Jiang, Y., et al. (2013). Replacement of Oct4 by Tet1 during iPSC induction reveals an important role of DNA methylation and hydroxymethylation in reprogramming. Cell Stem Cell 12, 453–469.Google Scholar
  34. Giorgetti, A., Montserrat, N., Aasen, T., Gonzalez, F., Rodriguez-Piza, I., Vassena, R., Raya, A., Boue, S., Barrero, M.J., Corbella, B.A., et al. (2009). Generation of induced pluripotent stem cells from human cord blood using OCT4 and SOX2. Cell Stem Cell 5, 353–357.Google Scholar
  35. Goldberg, A.D., Allis, C.D., and Bernstein, E. (2007). Epigenetics: a landscape takes shape. Cell 128, 635–638.Google Scholar
  36. Golipour, A., David, L., Liu, Y., Jayakumaran, G., Hirsch, C.L., Trcka, D., and Wrana, J.L. (2012). A late transition in somatic cell reprogramming requires regulators distinct from the pluripotency network. Cell Stem Cell 11, 769–782.Google Scholar
  37. Gore, A., Li, Z., Fung, H.L., Young, J.E., Agarwal, S., Antosiewicz-Bourget, J., Canto, I., Giorgetti, A., Israel, M.A., Kiskinis, E., et al. (2011). Somatic coding mutations in human induced pluripotent stem cells. Nature 471, 63–67.Google Scholar
  38. Guha, P., Morgan, J.W., Mostoslavsky, G., Rodrigues, N.P., and Boyd, A.S. (2013). Lack of immune response to differentiated cells derived from syngeneic induced pluripotent stem cells. Cell Stem Cell 12, 407–412.Google Scholar
  39. Gurdon, J.B., Elsdale, T.R., and Fischberg, M. (1958). Sexually mature individuals of Xenopus laevis from the transplantation of single somatic nuclei. Nature 182, 64–65.Google Scholar
  40. Haase, A., Olmer, R., Schwanke, K., Wunderlich, S., Merkert, S., Hess, C., Zweigerdt, R., Gruh, I., Meyer, J., Wagner, S., et al. (2009). Generation of induced pluripotent stem cells from human cord blood. Cell Stem Cell 5, 434–441.Google Scholar
  41. Han, J., Yuan, P., Yang, H., Zhang, J., Soh, B.S., Li, P., Lim, S.L., Cao, S., Tay, J., Orlov, Y.L., et al. (2010). Tbx3 improves the germ-line competency of induced pluripotent stem cells. Nature 463, 1096–1100.Google Scholar
  42. Hanna, J., Saha, K., Pando, B., van Zon, J., Lengner, C.J., Creyghton, M.P., van Oudenaarden, A., and Jaenisch, R. (2009). Direct cell reprogramming is a stochastic process amenable to acceleration. Nature 462, 595–601.Google Scholar
  43. Hargus, G., Cooper, O., Deleidi, M., Levy, A., Lee, K., Marlow, E., Yow, A., Soldner, F., Hockemeyer, D., Hallett, P.J., et al. (2010). Differentiated Parkinson patient-derived induced pluripotent stem cells grow in the adult rodent brain and reduce motor asymmetry in Parkinsonian rats. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 107, 15921–15926.Google Scholar
  44. He, Y.F., Li, B.Z., Li, Z., Liu, P., Wang, Y., Tang, Q., Ding, J., Jia, Y., Chen, Z., Li, L., et al. (2011). Tet-mediated formation of 5-carboxylcytosine and its excision by TDG in mammalian DNA. Science 333, 1303–1307.Google Scholar
  45. Hochedlinger, K., and Jaenisch, R. (2002). Monoclonal mice generated by nuclear transfer from mature B and T donor cells. Nature 415, 1035–1038.Google Scholar
  46. Hou, P., Li, Y., Zhang, X., Liu, C., Guan, J., Li, H., Zhao, T., Ye, J., Yang, W., Liu, K., et al. (2013). Pluripotent stem cells induced from mouse somatic cells by small-molecule compounds. Science 341, 651–654.Google Scholar
  47. Hu, S., Wilson, K.D., Ghosh, Z., Han, L., Wang, Y., Lan, F., Ransohoff, K.J., Burridge, P., and Wu, J.C. (2013). MicroRNA-302 increases reprogramming efficiency via repression of NR2F2. Stem Cells 31, 259–268.Google Scholar
  48. Huangfu, D., Maehr, R., Guo, W., Eijkelenboom, A., Snitow, M., Chen, A.E., and Melton, D.A. (2008a). Induction of pluripotent stem cells by defined factors is greatly improved by small-molecule compounds. Nat Biotechnol 26, 795–797.Google Scholar
  49. Huangfu, D., Osafune, K., Maehr, R., Guo, W., Eijkelenboom, A., Chen, S., Muhlestein, W., and Melton, D.A. (2008b). Induction of pluripotent stem cells from primary human fibroblasts with only Oct4 and Sox2. Nat Biotechnol 26, 1269–1275.Google Scholar
  50. Hussein, S.M., Batada, N.N., Vuoristo, S., Ching, R.W., Autio, R., Narva, E., Ng, S., Sourour, M., Hamalainen, R., Olsson, C., et al. (2011). Copy number variation and selection during reprogramming to pluripotency. Nature 471, 58–62.Google Scholar
  51. Israel, M.A., Yuan, S.H., Bardy, C., Reyna, S.M., Mu, Y., Herrera, C., Hefferan, M.P., Van Gorp, S., Nazor, K.L., Boscolo, F.S., et al. (2012). Probing sporadic and familial Alzheimer’s disease using induced pluripotent stem cells. Nature 482, 216–220.Google Scholar
  52. Ito, S., Shen, L., Dai, Q., Wu, S.C., Collins, L.B., Swenberg, J.A., He, C., and Zhang, Y. (2011). Tet proteins can convert 5-methylcytosine to 5-formylcytosine and 5-carboxylcytosine. Science 333, 1300–1303.Google Scholar
  53. Iyer, L.M., Tahiliani, M., Rao, A., and Aravind, L. (2009). Prediction of novel families of enzymes involved in oxidative and other complex modifications of bases in nucleic acids. Cell Cycle 8, 1698–1710.Google Scholar
  54. Jinek, M., East, A., Cheng, A., Lin, S., Ma, E., and Doudna, J. (2013). RNA-programmed genome editing in human cells. eLife 2, e00471.Google Scholar
  55. Judson, R.L., Babiarz, J.E., Venere, M., and Blelloch, R. (2009). Embryonic stem cell-specific microRNAs promote induced pluripotency. Nat Biotechnol 27, 459–461.Google Scholar
  56. Karwacki-Neisius, V., Goke, J., Osorno, R., Halbritter, F., Ng, J.H., Weisse, A.Y., Wong, F.C., Gagliardi, A., Mullin, N.P., Festuccia, N., et al. (2013). Reduced Oct4 expression directs a robust pluripotent state with distinct signaling activity and increased enhancer occupancy by Oct4 and Nanog. Cell Stem Cell 12, 531–545.Google Scholar
  57. Kato, Y., Kaneda, M., Hata, K., Kumaki, K., Hisano, M., Kohara, Y., Okano, M., Li, E., Nozaki, M., and Sasaki, H. (2007). Role of the Dnmt3 family in de novo methylation of imprinted and repetitive sequences during male germ cell development in the mouse. Hum Mol Genet 16, 2272–2280.Google Scholar
  58. Kattman, S.J., Witty, A.D., Gagliardi, M., Dubois, N.C., Niapour, M., Hotta, A., Ellis, J., and Keller, G. (2011). Stage-specific optimization of activin/nodal and BMP signaling promotes cardiac differentiation of mouse and human pluripotent stem cell lines. Cell Stem Cell 8, 228–240.Google Scholar
  59. Kim, J., Chu, J., Shen, X., Wang, J., and Orkin, S.H. (2008). An extended transcriptional network for pluripotency of embryonic stem cells. Cell 132, 1049–1061.Google Scholar
  60. Kim, K., Zhao, R., Doi, A., Ng, K., Unternaehrer, J., Cahan, P., Huo, H., Loh, Y.H., Aryee, M.J., Lensch, M.W., et al. (2011). Donor cell type can influence the epigenome and differentiation potential of human induced pluripotent stem cells. Nat Biotechnol 29, 1117–1119.Google Scholar
  61. Kondo, T., Asai, M., Tsukita, K., Kutoku, Y., Ohsawa, Y., Sunada, Y., Imamura, K., Egawa, N., Yahata, N., Okita, K., et al. (2013). Modeling Alzheimer’s disease with iPSCs reveals stress phenotypes associated with intracellular Abeta and differential drug responsiveness. Cell Stem Cell 12, 487–496.Google Scholar
  62. Kriks, S., Shim, J.W., Piao, J., Ganat, Y.M., Wakeman, D.R., Xie, Z., Carrillo-Reid, L., Auyeung, G., Antonacci, C., Buch, A., et al. (2011). Dopamine neurons derived from human ES cells efficiently engraft in animal models of Parkinson’s disease. Nature 480, 547–551.Google Scholar
  63. Kumar, R., DiMenna, L., Schrode, N., Liu, T.C., Franck, P., Munoz-Descalzo, S., Hadjantonakis, A.K., Zarrin, A.A., Chaudhuri, J., Elemento, O., et al. (2013). AID stabilizes stem-cell phenotype by removing epigenetic memory of pluripotency genes. Nature 500, 89–92.Google Scholar
  64. Laurent, L., Wong, E., Li, G., Huynh, T., Tsirigos, A., Ong, C.T., Low, H.M., Kin Sung, K.W., Rigoutsos, I., Loring, J., et al. (2010). Dynamic changes in the human methylome during differentiation. Genome Res 20, 320–331.Google Scholar
  65. Leonhardt, H., Page, A.W., Weier, H.U., and Bestor, T.H. (1992). A targeting sequence directs DNA methyltransferase to sites of DNA replication in mammalian nuclei. Cell 71, 865–873.Google Scholar
  66. Li, L.B., Chang, K.H., Wang, P.R., Hirata, R.K., Papayannopoulou, T., and Russell, D.W. (2012). Trisomy correction in Down syndrome induced pluripotent stem cells. Cell Stem Cell 11, 615–619.Google Scholar
  67. Li, M., Suzuki, K., Qu, J., Saini, P., Dubova, I., Yi, F., Lee, J., Sancho-Martinez, I., Liu, G.H., and Izpisua Belmonte, J.C. (2011). Efficient correction of hemoglobinopathy-causing mutations by homologous recombination in integration-free patient iPSCs. Cell Res 21, 1740–1744.Google Scholar
  68. Li, W., Zhou, H., Abujarour, R., Zhu, S., Young Joo, J., Lin, T., Hao, E., Scholer, H.R., Hayek, A., and Ding, S. (2009). Generation of human-induced pluripotent stem cells in the absence of exogenous Sox2. Stem Cells 27, 2992–3000.Google Scholar
  69. Lian, X., Hsiao, C., Wilson, G., Zhu, K., Hazeltine, L.B., Azarin, S.M., Raval, K.K., Zhang, J., Kamp, T.J., and Palecek, S.P. (2012). Robust cardiomyocyte differentiation from human pluripotent stem cells via temporal modulation of canonical Wnt signaling. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 109, E1848–1857.Google Scholar
  70. Liang, G., and Zhang, Y. (2013). Genetic and epigenetic variations in iPSCs: potential causes and implications for application. Cell Stem Cell 13, 149–159.Google Scholar
  71. Lin, C.Y., Loven, J., Rahl, P.B., Paranal, R.M., Burge, C.B., Bradner, J.E., Lee, T.I., and Young, R.A. (2012). Transcriptional amplification in tumor cells with elevated c-Myc. Cell 151, 56–67.Google Scholar
  72. Lin, S.L., Chang, D.C., Lin, C.H., Ying, S.Y., Leu, D., and Wu, D.T. (2011). Regulation of somatic cell reprogramming through inducible mir-302 expression. Nucleic Acids Res 39, 1054–1065.Google Scholar
  73. Lister, R., Pelizzola, M., Dowen, R.H., Hawkins, R.D., Hon, G., Tonti-Filippini, J., Nery, J.R., Lee, L., Ye, Z., Ngo, Q.M., et al. (2009). Human DNA methylomes at base resolution show widespread epigenomic differences. Nature 462, 315–322.Google Scholar
  74. Lister, R., Pelizzola, M., Kida, Y.S., Hawkins, R.D., Nery, J.R., Hon, G., Antosiewicz-Bourget, J., O’Malley, R., Castanon, R., Klugman, S., et al. (2011). Hotspots of aberrant epigenomic reprogramming in human induced pluripotent stem cells. Nature 471, 68–73.Google Scholar
  75. Liu, G.H., Qu, J., Suzuki, K., Nivet, E., Li, M., Montserrat, N., Yi, F., Xu, X., Ruiz, S., Zhang, W., et al. (2012). Progressive degeneration of human neural stem cells caused by pathogenic LRRK2. Nature 491, 603–607.Google Scholar
  76. Liu, G.H., Suzuki, K., Qu, J., Sancho-Martinez, I., Yi, F., Li, M., Kumar, S., Nivet, E., Kim, J., Soligalla, R.D., et al. (2011). Targeted gene correction of laminopathy-associated LMNA mutations in patientspecific iPSCs. Cell Stem Cell 8, 688–694.Google Scholar
  77. Liu, X., Sun, H., Qi, J., Wang, L., He, S., Liu, J., Feng, C., Chen, C., Li, W., Guo, Y., et al. (2013). Sequential introduction of reprogramming factors reveals a time-sensitive requirement for individual factors and a sequential EMT-MET mechanism for optimal reprogramming. Nat Cell Biol 15, 829–838.Google Scholar
  78. Loh, Y.H., Agarwal, S., Park, I.H., Urbach, A., Huo, H., Heffner, G.C., Kim, K., Miller, J.D., Ng, K., and Daley, G.Q. (2009). Generation of induced pluripotent stem cells from human blood. Blood 113, 5476–5479.Google Scholar
  79. Lu, D., Davis, M.P., Abreu-Goodger, C., Wang, W., Campos, L.S., Siede, J., Vigorito, E., Skarnes, W.C., Dunham, I., Enright, A.J., et al. (2012). MiR-25 regulates Wwp2 and Fbxw7 and promotes reprogramming of mouse fibroblast cells to iPSCs. PLoS One 7, e40938.Google Scholar
  80. Maekawa, M., Yamaguchi, K., Nakamura, T., Shibukawa, R., Kodanaka, I., Ichisaka, T., Kawamura, Y., Mochizuki, H., Goshima, N., and Yamanaka, S. (2011). Direct reprogramming of somatic cells is promoted by maternal transcription factor Glis1. Nature 474, 225–229.Google Scholar
  81. Maiti, A., and Drohat, A.C. (2011). Thymine DNA glycosylase can rapidly excise 5-formylcytosine and 5-carboxylcytosine: potential implications for active demethylation of CpG sites. J Biol Chem 286, 35334–35338.Google Scholar
  82. Mali, P., Yang, L., Esvelt, K.M., Aach, J., Guell, M., DiCarlo, J.E., Norville, J.E., and Church, G.M. (2013). RNA-guided human genome engineering via Cas9. Science 339, 823–826.Google Scholar
  83. Maroof, A.M., Keros, S., Tyson, J.A., Ying, S.W., Ganat, Y.M., Merkle, F.T., Liu, B., Goulburn, A., Stanley, E.G., Elefanty, A.G., et al. (2013). Directed differentiation and functional maturation of cortical interneurons from human embryonic stem cells. Cell Stem Cell 12, 559–572.Google Scholar
  84. Meng, X., Noyes, M.B., Zhu, L.J., Lawson, N.D., and Wolfe, S.A. (2008). Targeted gene inactivation in zebrafish using engineered zinc-finger nucleases. Nat Biotechnol 26, 695–701.Google Scholar
  85. Merkle, F.T., and Eggan, K. (2013). Modeling human disease with pluripotent stem cells: from genome association to function. Cell Stem Cell 12, 656–668.Google Scholar
  86. Mikkelsen, T.S., Hanna, J., Zhang, X., Ku, M., Wernig, M., Schorderet, P., Bernstein, B.E., Jaenisch, R., Lander, E.S., and Meissner, A. (2008). Dissecting direct reprogramming through integrative genomic analysis. Nature 454, 49–55.Google Scholar
  87. Miller, J.C., Tan, S., Qiao, G., Barlow, K.A., Wang, J., Xia, D.F., Meng, X., Paschon, D.E., Leung, E., Hinkley, S.J., et al. (2011). A TALE nuclease architecture for efficient genome editing. Nat Biotechnol 29, 143–148.Google Scholar
  88. Minami, I., Yamada, K., Otsuji, T.G., Yamamoto, T., Shen, Y., Otsuka, S., Kadota, S., Morone, N., Barve, M., Asai, Y., et al. (2012). A small molecule that promotes cardiac differentiation of human pluripotent stem cells under defined, cytokine- and xeno-free conditions. Cell Rep 2, 1448–1460.Google Scholar
  89. Mitne-Neto, M., Machado-Costa, M., Marchetto, M.C., Bengtson, M.H., Joazeiro, C.A., Tsuda, H., Bellen, H.J., Silva, H.C., Oliveira, A.S., Lazar, M., et al. (2011). Downregulation of VAPB expression in motor neurons derived from induced pluripotent stem cells of ALS8 patients. Hum Mol Genet 20, 3642–3652.Google Scholar
  90. Miura, K., Okada, Y., Aoi, T., Okada, A., Takahashi, K., Okita, K., Nakagawa, M., Koyanagi, M., Tanabe, K., Ohnuki, M., et al. (2009). Variation in the safety of induced pluripotent stem cell lines. Nat Biotechnol 27, 743–745.Google Scholar
  91. Miyoshi, N., Ishii, H., Nagano, H., Haraguchi, N., Dewi, D.L., Kano, Y., Nishikawa, S., Tanemura, M., Mimori, K., Tanaka, F., et al. (2011). Reprogramming of mouse and human cells to pluripotency using mature microRNAs. Cell Stem Cell 8, 633–638.Google Scholar
  92. Nazor, K.L., Altun, G., Lynch, C., Tran, H., Harness, J.V., Slavin, I., Garitaonandia, I., Muller, F.J., Wang, Y.C., Boscolo, F.S., et al. (2012). Recurrent variations in DNA methylation in human pluripotent stem cells and their differentiated derivatives. Cell Stem Cell 10, 620–634.Google Scholar
  93. Okano, M., Bell, D.W., Haber, D.A., and Li, E. (1999). DNA methyltransferases Dnmt3a and Dnmt3b are essential for de novo methylation and mammalian development. Cell 99, 247–257.Google Scholar
  94. Onder, T.T., and Daley, G.Q. (2012). New lessons learned from disease modeling with induced pluripotent stem cells. Curr Opin Genet Dev 22, 500–508.Google Scholar
  95. Papapetrou, E.P., Tomishima, M.J., Chambers, S.M., Mica, Y., Reed, E., Menon, J., Tabar, V., Mo, Q., Studer, L., and Sadelain, M. (2009). Stoichiometric and temporal requirements of Oct4, Sox2, Klf4, and c-Myc expression for efficient human iPSC induction and differentiation. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 106, 12759–12764.Google Scholar
  96. Pardo, M., Lang, B., Yu, L., Prosser, H., Bradley, A., Babu, M.M., and Choudhary, J. (2010). An expanded Oct4 interaction network: implications for stem cell biology, development, and disease. Cell Stem Cell 6, 382–395.Google Scholar
  97. Park, I.H., Arora, N., Huo, H., Maherali, N., Ahfeldt, T., Shimamura, A., Lensch, M.W., Cowan, C., Hochedlinger, K., and Daley, G.Q. (2008). Disease-specific induced pluripotent stem cells. Cell 134, 877–886.Google Scholar
  98. Pawlak, M., and Jaenisch, R. (2011). 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.Google Scholar
  99. Perez, E.E., Wang, J., Miller, J.C., Jouvenot, Y., Kim, K.A., Liu, O., Wang, N., Lee, G., Bartsevich, V.V., Lee, Y.L., et al. (2008). Establishment of HIV-1 resistance in CD4+ T cells by genome editing using zinc-finger nucleases. Nat Biotechnol 26, 808–816.Google Scholar
  100. Pijnappel, W.W., Esch, D., Baltissen, M.P., Wu, G., Mischerikow, N., Bergsma, A.J., van der Wal, E., Han, D.W., Bruch, H., Moritz, S., et al. (2013). A central role for TFIID in the pluripotent transcription circuitry. Nature 495, 516–519.Google Scholar
  101. Polo, J.M., Anderssen, E., Walsh, R.M., Schwarz, B.A., Nefzger, C.M., Lim, S.M., Borkent, M., Apostolou, E., Alaei, S., Cloutier, J., et al. (2012). A molecular roadmap of reprogramming somatic cells into iPS cells. Cell 151, 1617–1632.Google Scholar
  102. Popp, C., Dean, W., Feng, S., Cokus, S.J., Andrews, S., Pellegrini, M., Jacobsen, S.E., and Reik, W. (2010). Genome-wide erasure of DNA methylation in mouse primordial germ cells is affected by AID deficiency. Nature 463, 1101–1105.Google Scholar
  103. Rai, K., Huggins, I.J., James, S.R., Karpf, A.R., Jones, D.A., and Cairns, B.R. (2008). DNA demethylation in zebrafish involves the coupling of a deaminase, a glycosylase, and gadd45. Cell 135, 1201–1212.Google Scholar
  104. Revazova, E.S., Turovets, N.A., Kochetkova, O.D., Kindarova, L.B., Kuzmichev, L.N., Janus, J.D., and Pryzhkova, M.V. (2007). Patientspecific stem cell lines derived from human parthenogenetic blastocysts. Cloning Stem Cells 9, 432–449.Google Scholar
  105. Ruiz, S., Diep, D., Gore, A., Panopoulos, A.D., Montserrat, N., Plongthongkum, N., Kumar, S., Fung, H.L., Giorgetti, A., Bilic, J., et al. (2012). Identification of a specific reprogramming-associated epigenetic signature in human induced pluripotent stem cells. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 109, 16196–16201.Google Scholar
  106. Samavarchi-Tehrani, P., Golipour, A., David, L., Sung, H.K., Beyer, T.A., Datti, A., Woltjen, K., Nagy, A., and Wrana, J.L. (2010). Functional genomics reveals a BMP-driven mesenchymal-to-epithelial transition in the initiation of somatic cell reprogramming. Cell Stem Cell 7, 64–77.Google Scholar
  107. Schiesser, S., Hackner, B., Pfaffeneder, T., Muller, M., Hagemeier, C., Truss, M., and Carell, T. (2012). Mechanism and stem-cell activity of 5-carboxycytosine decarboxylation determined by isotope tracing. Angew Chem Int Ed Engl 51, 6516–6520.Google Scholar
  108. Seki, T., Yuasa, S., Oda, M., Egashira, T., Yae, K., Kusumoto, D., Nakata, H., Tohyama, S., Hashimoto, H., Kodaira, M., et al. (2010). Generation of induced pluripotent stem cells from human terminally differentiated circulating T cells. Cell Stem Cell 7, 11–14.Google Scholar
  109. Sharif, J., Muto, M., Takebayashi, S., Suetake, I., Iwamatsu, A., Endo, T.A., Shinga, J., Mizutani-Koseki, Y., Toyoda, T., Okamura, K., et al. (2007). The SRA protein Np95 mediates epigenetic inheritance by recruiting Dnmt1 to methylated DNA. Nature 450, 908–912.Google Scholar
  110. Shi, Y., Desponts, C., Do, J.T., Hahm, H.S., Scholer, H.R., and Ding, S. (2008a). Induction of pluripotent stem cells from mouse embryonic fibroblasts by Oct4 and Klf4 with small-molecule compounds. Cell Stem Cell 3, 568–574.Google Scholar
  111. Shi, Y., Do, J.T., Desponts, C., Hahm, H.S., Scholer, H.R., and Ding, S. (2008b). A combined chemical and genetic approach for the generation of induced pluripotent stem cells. Cell Stem Cell 2, 525–528.Google Scholar
  112. Shi, Y., Kirwan, P., Smith, J., Robinson, H.P., and Livesey, F.J. (2012). Human cerebral cortex development from pluripotent stem cells to functional excitatory synapses. Nat Neurosci 15, 477–486.Google Scholar
  113. Shu, J., Wu, C., Wu, Y., Li, Z., Shao, S., Zhao, W., Tang, X., Yang, H., Shen, L., Zuo, X., et al. (2013). Induction of pluripotency in mouse somatic cells with lineage specifiers. Cell 153, 963–975.Google Scholar
  114. Smith, Z.D., and Meissner, A. (2013). DNA methylation: roles in mammalian development. Nat Rev Genet 14, 204–220.Google Scholar
  115. Soldner, F., Hockemeyer, D., Beard, C., Gao, Q., Bell, G.W., Cook, E.G., Hargus, G., Blak, A., Cooper, O., Mitalipova, M., et al. (2009). Parkinson’s disease patient-derived induced pluripotent stem cells free of viral reprogramming factors. Cell 136, 964–977.Google Scholar
  116. Soufi, A., Donahue, G., and Zaret, K.S. (2012). Facilitators and impediments of the pluripotency reprogramming factors’ initial engagement with the genome. Cell 151, 994–1004.Google Scholar
  117. Sridharan, R., Tchieu, J., Mason, M.J., Yachechko, R., Kuoy, E., Horvath, S., Zhou, Q., and Plath, K. (2009). Role of the murine reprogramming factors in the induction of pluripotency. Cell 136, 364–377.Google Scholar
  118. Stadtfeld, M., Apostolou, E., Akutsu, H., Fukuda, A., Follett, P., Natesan, S., Kono, T., Shioda, T., and Hochedlinger, K. (2010a). Aberrant silencing of imprinted genes on chromosome 12qF1 in mouse induced pluripotent stem cells. Nature 465, 175–181.Google Scholar
  119. Stadtfeld, M., Maherali, N., Borkent, M., and Hochedlinger, K. (2010b). A reprogrammable mouse strain from gene-targeted embryonic stem cells. Nat Methods 7, 53–55.Google Scholar
  120. Staerk, J., Dawlaty, M.M., Gao, Q., Maetzel, D., Hanna, J., Sommer, C.A., Mostoslavsky, G., and Jaenisch, R. (2010). Reprogramming of human peripheral blood cells to induced pluripotent stem cells. Cell Stem Cell 7, 20–24.Google Scholar
  121. Sun, N., Panetta, N.J., Gupta, D.M., Wilson, K.D., Lee, A., Jia, F., Hu, S., Cherry, A.M., Robbins, R.C., Longaker, M.T., et al. (2009). Feederfree derivation of induced pluripotent stem cells from adult human adipose stem cells. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 106, 15720–15725.Google Scholar
  122. Suzuki, K., Mitsui, K., Aizawa, E., Hasegawa, K., Kawase, E., Yamagishi, T., Shimizu, Y., Suemori, H., Nakatsuji, N., and Mitani, K. (2008). Highly efficient transient gene expression and gene targeting in primate embryonic stem cells with helper-dependent adenoviral vectors. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 105, 13781–13786.Google Scholar
  123. Tachibana, M., Amato, P., Sparman, M., Gutierrez, N.M., Tippner-Hedges, R., Ma, H., Kang, E., Fulati, A., Lee, H.S., Sritanaudomchai, H., et al. (2013). Human embryonic stem cells derived by somatic cell nuclear transfer. Cell 153, 1228–1238.Google Scholar
  124. Tada, M., Tada, T., Lefebvre, L., Barton, S.C., and Surani, M.A. (1997). Embryonic germ cells induce epigenetic reprogramming of somatic nucleus in hybrid cells. EMBO J 16, 6510–6520.Google Scholar
  125. Tada, M., Takahama, Y., Abe, K., Nakatsuji, N., and Tada, T. (2001). Nuclear reprogramming of somatic cells by in vitro hybridization with ES cells. Curr Biol 11, 1553–1558.Google Scholar
  126. Tahiliani, M., Koh, K.P., Shen, Y., Pastor, W.A., Bandukwala, H., Brudno, Y., Agarwal, S., Iyer, L.M., Liu, D.R., Aravind, L., et al. (2009). Conversion of 5-methylcytosine to 5-hydroxymethylcytosine in mammalian DNA by MLL partner TET1. Science 324, 930–935.Google Scholar
  127. Takahashi, K., Tanabe, K., Ohnuki, M., Narita, M., Ichisaka, T., Tomoda, K., and Yamanaka, S. (2007). Induction of pluripotent stem cells from adult human fibroblasts by defined factors. Cell 131, 861–872.Google Scholar
  128. Takahashi, K., and Yamanaka, S. (2006). Induction of pluripotent stem cells from mouse embryonic and adult fibroblast cultures by defined factors. Cell 126, 663–676.Google Scholar
  129. Thomson, M., Liu, S.J., Zou, L.N., Smith, Z., Meissner, A., and Ramanathan, S. (2011). Pluripotency factors in embryonic stem cells regulate differentiation into germ layers. Cell 145, 875–889.Google Scholar
  130. Tiemann, U., Sgodda, M., Warlich, E., Ballmaier, M., Scholer, H.R., Schambach, A., and Cantz, T. (2011). Optimal reprogramming factor stoichiometry increases colony numbers and affects molecular characteristics of murine induced pluripotent stem cells. Cytometry A 79, 426–435.Google Scholar
  131. Waddington, C.H. (1957). The strategy of the genes; a discussion of some aspects of theoretical biology (London, Allen & Unwin).Google Scholar
  132. Wang, T., Wu, H., Li, Y., Szulwach, K.E., Lin, L., Li, X., Chen, I.P., Goldlust, I.S., Chamberlain, S.J., Dodd, A., et al. (2013). Subtelomeric hotspots of aberrant 5-hydroxymethylcytosine-mediated epigenetic modifications during reprogramming to pluripotency. Nat Cell Biol 15, 700–711.Google Scholar
  133. Wang, Y., Baskerville, S., Shenoy, A., Babiarz, J.E., Baehner, L., and Blelloch, R. (2008). Embryonic stem cell-specific microRNAs regulate the G1-S transition and promote rapid proliferation. Nat Genet 40, 1478–1483.Google Scholar
  134. Wang, Y., Medvid, R., Melton, C., Jaenisch, R., and Blelloch, R. (2007). DGCR8 is essential for microRNA biogenesis and silencing of embryonic stem cell self-renewal. Nat Genet 39, 380–385.Google Scholar
  135. Wang, Z., Oron, E., Nelson, B., Razis, S., and Ivanova, N. (2012). Distinct lineage specification roles for NANOG, OCT4, and SOX2 in human embryonic stem cells. Cell Stem Cell 10, 440–454.Google Scholar
  136. Warren, L., Manos, P.D., Ahfeldt, T., Loh, Y.H., Li, H., Lau, F., Ebina, W., Mandal, P.K., Smith, Z.D., Meissner, A., et al. (2010). Highly efficient reprogramming to pluripotency and directed differentiation of human cells with synthetic modified mRNA. Cell Stem Cell 7, 618–630.Google Scholar
  137. Wei, Z., Gao, F., Kim, S., Yang, H., Lyu, J., An, W., Wang, K., and Lu, W. (2013). Klf4 organizes long-range chromosomal interactions with the oct4 locus in reprogramming and pluripotency. Cell Stem Cell 13, 36–47.Google Scholar
  138. Wernig, M., Lengner, C.J., Hanna, J., Lodato, M.A., Steine, E., Foreman, R., Staerk, J., Markoulaki, S., and Jaenisch, R. (2008). A drug-inducible transgenic system for direct reprogramming of multiple somatic cell types. Nat Biotechnol 26, 916–924.Google Scholar
  139. Wilmut, I., Schnieke, A.E., McWhir, J., Kind, A.J., and Campbell, K.H. (1997). Viable offspring derived from fetal and adult mammalian cells. Nature 385, 810–813.Google Scholar
  140. Yagi, T., Ito, D., Okada, Y., Akamatsu, W., Nihei, Y., Yoshizaki, T., Yamanaka, S., Okano, H., and Suzuki, N. (2011). Modeling familial Alzheimer’s disease with induced pluripotent stem cells. Hum Mol Genet 20, 4530–4539.Google Scholar
  141. Yang, C.S., Li, Z., and Rana, T.M. (2011). microRNAs modulate iPS cell generation. RNA 17, 1451–1460.Google Scholar
  142. Yoshioka, N., Gros, E., Li, H.R., Kumar, S., Deacon, D.C., Maron, C., Muotri, A.R., Chi, N.C., Fu, X.D., Yu, B.D., et al. (2013). Efficient generation of human iPSCs by a synthetic self-replicative RNA. Cell Stem Cell 13, 246–254.Google Scholar
  143. Yu, D.X., Marchetto, M.C., and Gage, F.H. (2013). Therapeutic translation of iPSCs for treating neurological disease. Cell Stem Cell 12, 678–688.Google Scholar
  144. Yu, J., Hu, K., Smuga-Otto, K., Tian, S., Stewart, R., Slukvin, II, and Thomson, J.A. (2009). Human induced pluripotent stem cells free of vector and transgene sequences. Science 324, 797–801.Google Scholar
  145. Yu, J., Vodyanik, M.A., Smuga-Otto, K., Antosiewicz-Bourget, J., Frane, J.L., Tian, S., Nie, J., Jonsdottir, G.A., Ruotti, V., Stewart, R., et al. (2007). Induced pluripotent stem cell lines derived from human somatic cells. Science 318, 1917–1920.Google Scholar
  146. Yuan, X., Wan, H., Zhao, X., Zhu, S., Zhou, Q., and Ding, S. (2011). Brief report: combined chemical treatment enables Oct4-induced reprogramming from mouse embryonic fibroblasts. Stem Cells 29, 549–553.Google Scholar
  147. Yusa, K., Rashid, S.T., Strick-Marchand, H., Varela, I., Liu, P.Q., Paschon, D.E., Miranda, E., Ordonez, A., Hannan, N.R., Rouhani, F.J., et al. (2011). Targeted gene correction of alpha1-antitrypsin deficiency in induced pluripotent stem cells. Nature 478, 391–394.Google Scholar
  148. Zhang, H., Jiao, W., Sun, L., Fan, J., Chen, M., Wang, H., Xu, X., Shen, A., Li, T., Niu, B., et al. (2013). Intrachromosomal looping is required for activation of endogenous pluripotency genes during reprogramming. Cell Stem Cell 13, 30–35.Google Scholar
  149. Zhao, T., Zhang, Z.N., Rong, Z., and Xu, Y. (2011). Immunogenicity of induced pluripotent stem cells. Nature 474, 212–215.Google Scholar
  150. Zhao, Y., Yin, X., Qin, H., Zhu, F., Liu, H., Yang, W., Zhang, Q., Xiang, C., Hou, P., Song, Z., et al. (2008). Two supporting factors greatly improve the efficiency of human iPSC generation. Cell Stem Cell 3, 475–479.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Higher Education Press and Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Human GeneticsEmory UniversityAtlantaUSA
  2. 2.Genetics and Molecular Biology Graduate ProgramEmory UniversityAtlantaUSA

Personalised recommendations