4.6 Article

Isogenic Pairs of Wild Type and Mutant Induced Pluripotent Stem Cell (iPSC) Lines from Rett Syndrome Patients as In Vitro Disease Model

期刊

PLOS ONE
卷 6, 期 9, 页码 -

出版社

PUBLIC LIBRARY SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0025255

关键词

-

资金

  1. Friends of the Waisman Center [5T32GM07133]
  2. Stem Cell and Regenerative Medicine Center at University of Wisconsin at Madison
  3. National Institutes of Health [P30HD03352]
  4. [T32AG027566]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Rett syndrome (RTT) is an autism spectrum developmental disorder caused by mutations in the X-linked methyl-CpG binding protein 2 (MECP2) gene. Excellent RTT mouse models have been created to study the disease mechanisms, leading to many important findings with potential therapeutic implications. These include the identification of many MeCP2 target genes, better understanding of the neurobiological consequences of the loss-or mis-function of MeCP2, and drug testing in RTT mice and clinical trials in human RTT patients. However, because of potential differences in the underlying biology between humans and common research animals, there is a need to establish cell culture-based human models for studying disease mechanisms to validate and expand the knowledge acquired in animal models. Taking advantage of the nonrandom pattern of X chromosome inactivation in female induced pluripotent stem cells (iPSC), we have generated isogenic pairs of wild type and mutant iPSC lines from several female RTT patients with common and rare RTT mutations. R294X (arginine 294 to stop codon) is a common mutation carried by 5-6% of RTT patients. iPSCs carrying the R294X mutation has not been studied. We differentiated three R294X iPSC lines and their isogenic wild type control iPSC into neurons with high efficiency and consistency, and observed characteristic RTT pathology in R294X neurons. These isogenic iPSC lines provide unique resources to the RTT research community for studying disease pathology, screening for novel drugs, and testing toxicology.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据