4.6 Review

Deconstructing and reconstructing the human brain with regionally specified brain organoids

期刊

SEMINARS IN CELL & DEVELOPMENTAL BIOLOGY
卷 111, 期 -, 页码 40-51

出版社

ACADEMIC PRESS LTD- ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.semcdb.2020.05.023

关键词

Brain organoid; Region-specific; Differentiation; Organoid fusion; Development; Disease modeling; Interneuron; Thalamus; Cell migration; Axonal connection; Human pluripotent stem cells; Embryonic stem cells; Induced pluripotent stem cells; ATAC-seq

资金

  1. NIH [GM111667-01, R01MH118344-01A1, R01MH118554-01A1, R01AA025080-01, R01CA203011-2]
  2. CSCRF [14-SCC-YALE-01, 16-RMB-YALE-04]
  3. Kavli Foundation
  4. Simons Foundation
  5. Nomis foundation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Brain organoids, three-dimensional neural cultures that mimic the spatiotemporal organization and function of the brain, are valuable tools for studying human brain development and diseases. Various region-specific human brain organoids have been developed to model distinct parts of the brain, offering unique opportunities for exploring regional interactions and advancing brain research. However, challenges exist in driving forward the technology and applications of brain organoids for future studies.
Brain organoids, three-dimensional neural cultures recapitulating the spatiotemporal organization and function of the brain in a dish, offer unique opportunities for investigating the human brain development and diseases. To model distinct parts of the brain, various region-specific human brain organoids have been developed. In this article, we review current approaches to produce human region-specific brain organoids, developed through the endeavor of many researchers. We highlight the applications of human region-specific brain organoids, especially in reconstructing regional interactions in the brain through organoid fusion. We also outline the existing challenges to drive forward further the brain organoid technology and its applications for future studies.

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