4.8 Article

Dynamic culture improves cell reprogramming efficiency

Journal

BIOMATERIALS
Volume 92, Issue -, Pages 36-45

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.biomaterials.2016.03.033

Keywords

Induced pluripotent stem cell (iPSC); Cell reprogramming; Cell proliferation

Funding

  1. National Institute of Health [EB012240, HL083900]
  2. Agency for Science, Technology and Research

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Cell reprogramming to pluripotency is an inefficient process and various approaches have been devised to improve the yield of induced pluripotent stem cells. However, the effect of biophysical factors on cell reprogramming is not well understood. Here we showed that, for the first time, dynamic culture with orbital shaking significantly improved the reprogramming efficiency in adherent cells. Manipulating the viscosity of the culture medium suggested that the improved efficiency is mainly attributed to convective mixing rather than hydrodynamic shear stress. Temporal studies demonstrated that the enhancement of reprogramming efficiency required the dynamic culture in the middle but not early phase. In the early phase, fibroblasts had a high proliferation rate, but as the culture became over-confluent in the middle phase, expression of p57 was upregulated to inhibit cell proliferation and consequently, cell reprogramming. Subjecting the over confluent culture to orbital shaking prevented the upregulation of p57, thus improving reprogramming efficiency. Seeding cells at low densities to avoid over-confluency resulted in a lower efficiency, and optimal reprogramming efficiency was attained at a high seeding density with dynamic culture. Our findings provide insight into the underlying mechanisms of how dynamic culture condition regulate cell reprogramming, and will have broad impact on cell engineering for regenerative medicine and disease modeling. (C) 2016 Elsevier Ltd. 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

4.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available