4.3 Article

Epigenetic Erasing and Pancreatic Differentiation of Dermal Fibroblasts into Insulin-Producing Cells are Boosted by the Use of Low-Stiffness Substrate

期刊

STEM CELL REVIEWS AND REPORTS
卷 14, 期 3, 页码 398-411

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s12015-017-9799-0

关键词

Cell plasticity; Epigenetic conversion; Hippo signaling pathway; Matrix elasticity; 5-Azacytidine; Insulin-producing cells

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Several studies have demonstrated the possibility to revert differentiation process, reactivating hypermethylated genes and facilitating cell transition to a different lineage. Beside the epigenetic mechanisms driving cell conversion processes, growing evidences highlight the importance of mechanical forces in supporting cell plasticity and boosting differentiation. Here, we describe epigenetic erasing and conversion of dermal fibroblasts into insulin-producing cells (EpiCC), and demonstrate that the use of a low-stiffness substrate positively influences these processes. Our results show a higher expression of pluripotency genes and a significant bigger decrease of DNA methylation levels in 5-azacytidine (5-aza-CR) treated cells plated on soft matrix, compared to those cultured on plastic dishes. Furthermore, the use of low-stiffness also induces a significant increased up-regulation of ten-eleven translocation 2 (Tet2) and histone acetyltransferase 1 (Hat1) genes, and more decreased histone deacetylase enzyme1 (Hdac1) transcription levels. The soft substrate also encourages morphological changes, actin cytoskeleton re-organization, and the activation of the Hippo signaling pathway, leading to yes-associated protein (YAP) phosphorylation and its cytoplasmic translocation. Altogether, this results in increased epigenetic conversion efficiency and in EpiCC acquisition of a mono-hormonal phenotype. Our findings indicate that mechano-transduction related responsed influence cell plasticity induced by 5-aza-CR and improve fibroblast differentiation toward the pancreatic lineage.

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

4.3
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