4.4 Article

Comparison of efficiency of terminal differentiation of oligodendrocytes from induced pluripotent stem cells versus embryonic stem cells in vitro

Journal

JOURNAL OF BIOSCIENCE AND BIOENGINEERING
Volume 109, Issue 6, Pages 622-628

Publisher

SOC BIOSCIENCE BIOENGINEERING JAPAN
DOI: 10.1016/j.jbiosc.2009.11.013

Keywords

induced pluripotent stem cell; oligodendrocyte; embryonic stem cell; multiple sclerosis; regenerative medicine

Funding

  1. New Energy and Industrial Technology Development Organization (NEDO
  2. Kawasaki, Japan)

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Oligodendrocytes are the myelinating cells of the central nervous system (CNS), and defects in these cells can result in the loss of CNS functions. Although oligodendrocyte progenitor cells transplantation therapy is an effective cure for such symptoms, there is no readily available source of these cells. Recent studies have described the generation of induced pluripotent stem cells (iPS cells) from somatic cells, leading to anticipation of this technique as a novel therapeutic tool in regenerative medicine. In this study, we evaluated the ability of iPS cells derived from mouse embryonic fibroblasts to differentiate into oligodendrocytes and compared this with the differential ability of mouse embryonic stem cells (ES cells). Experiments using an in vitro oligodendrocyte differentiation protocol that was optimized to ES cells demonstrated that 2.3% of iPS cells differentiated into O4(+) oligodendrocytes compared with 24.0% of ES cells. However, the rate of induction of A2B5(+) oligodendrocyte precursor cell (OPC) was similar for both iPS-derived cells and ES-derived cells (14.1% and 12.6%, respectively). These findings suggest that some intracellular factors in iPS cells inhibit the terminal differentiation of oligodendrocytes from the OPC stage. (C) 2009, The Society for Biotechnology, Japan. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available