4.7 Article

Scalable topographies to support proliferation and Oct4 expression by human induced pluripotent stem cells

期刊

SCIENTIFIC REPORTS
卷 6, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

NATURE PORTFOLIO
DOI: 10.1038/srep18948

关键词

-

资金

  1. Wellcome Trust
  2. MRC Human Induced Pluripotent Stem Cell Initiative
  3. Dutch province of Limburg
  4. NanoNext initiative
  5. European Union's Seventh Framework Programme [289720]
  6. European Union [289720]
  7. BBSRC [BB/M007219/1] Funding Source: UKRI
  8. MRC [MR/L022699/1, MC_PC_12026, MR/K026666/1] Funding Source: UKRI
  9. Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council [BB/M007219/1] Funding Source: researchfish
  10. Medical Research Council [MR/K026666/1, MR/L022699/1, MC_PC_12026] Funding Source: researchfish

向作者/读者索取更多资源

It is well established that topographical features modulate cell behaviour, including cell morphology, proliferation and differentiation. To define the effects of topography on human induced pluripotent stem cells (iPSC), we plated cells on a topographical library containing over 1000 different features in medium lacking animal products (xeno-free). Using high content imaging, we determined the effect of each topography on cell proliferation and expression of the pluripotency marker Oct4 24 h after seeding. Features that maintained Oct4 expression also supported proliferation and cell-cell adhesion at 24 h, and by 4 days colonies of Oct4-positive, Sox2-positive cells had formed. Computational analysis revealed that small feature size was the most important determinant of pluripotency, followed by high wave number and high feature density. Using this information we correctly predicted whether any given topography within our library would support the pluripotent state at 24 h. This approach not only facilitates the design of substrates for optimal human iPSC expansion, but also, potentially, identification of topographies with other desirable characteristics, such as promoting differentiation.

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

4.7
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