Cohesin's role in pluripotency and reprogramming

Cohesin is required for ES cell self-renewal and iPS-mediated reprogramming of somatic cells. This may indicate a special role for cohesin in the regulation of pluripotency genes, perhaps by mediating long-range chromosomal interactions between gene regulatory elements. However, cohesin is also essential for genome integrity, and its depletion from cycling cells induces DNA damage responses. Hence, the failure of cohesin-depleted cells to establish or maintain pluripotency gene expression could be explained by a loss of long-range interactions or by DNA damage responses that undermine pluripotency gene expression. In recent work we began to disentangle these possibilities by analyzing reprogramming in the absence of cell division. These experiments showed that cohesin was not specifically required for reprogramming, and that the expression of most pluripotency genes was maintained when ES cells were acutely depleted of cohesin. Here we take this analysis to its logical conclusion by demonstrating that deliberately inflicted DNA damage - and the DNA damage that results from proliferation in the absence of cohesin - can directly interfere with pluripotency and reprogramming. The role of cohesin in pluripotency and reprogramming may therefore be best explained by essential cohesin functions in the cell cycle.     

Focus on induced pluripotency and cellular reprogramming

Reflecting on the opportunities that ‘induced pluripotency’ offers for basic research and clinical translation, the 2015 Focus of The EMBO Journal highlights some of the most challenging biological questions studied using advanced iPSC‐based technologies.     

Using heterokaryons to understand pluripotency and reprogramming

Reprogramming differentiated cells towards pluripotency can be achieved by different experimental strategies including the forced expression of specific 'inducers' and nuclear transfer. While these offer unparalleled opportunities to generate stem cells and advance disease modelling, the relatively low levels of successful reprogramming achieved (1-2%) makes a direct analysis of the molecular events associated with productive reprogramming very challenging. The generation of transient heterokaryons between human differentiated cells (such as lymphocytes or fibroblasts) and mouse pluripotent stem cell lines results in a much higher frequency of successful conversion (15% SSEA4 expressing cells) and provides an alternative approach to study early events during reprogramming. Under these conditions, differentiated nuclei undergo a series of remodelling events before initiating human pluripotent gene expression and silencing differentiation-associated genes. When combined with genetic or RNAi-based approaches and high-throughput screens, heterokaryon studies can provide important new insights into the factors and mechanisms required to reprogramme unipotent cells towards pluripotency.     

RNA-binding proteins in pluripotency,differentiation, and reprogramming

Embryonic stem cell maintenance, differentiation, and somatic cell reprogramming require the interplay of multiple pluripotency factors, epigenetic remodelers, and extracellular signaling pathways. RNA-binding proteins （RBPs） are involved in a wide range of regulatory pathways, from RNA metabolism to epigenetic modifications. In recent years we have witnessed more and more studies on the discovery of new RBPs and the assessment of their functions in a variety of biological systems, including stem cells. We review the current studies on RBPs and focus on those that have functional implications in pluripotency, differentiation, and/or reprogramming in both the human and mouse systems.     

Inducing pluripotency in vitro: recent advances and highlights in induced pluripotent stem cells generation and pluripotency reprogramming

Induced pluripotent stem cells (iPSCs) are considered patient‐specific counterparts of embryonic stem cells as they originate from somatic cells after forced expression of pluripotency reprogramming factors Oct4, Sox2, Klf4 and c‐Myc. iPSCs offer unprecedented opportunity for personalized cell therapies in regenerative medicine. In recent years, iPSC technology has undergone substantial improvement to overcome slow and inefficient reprogramming protocols, and to ensure clinical‐grade iPSCs and their functional derivatives. Recent developments in iPSC technology include better reprogramming methods employing novel delivery systems such as non‐integrating viral and non‐viral vectors, and characterization of alternative reprogramming factors. Concurrently, small chemical molecules (inhibitors of specific signalling or epigenetic regulators) have become crucial to iPSC reprogramming; they have the ability to replace putative reprogramming factors and boost reprogramming processes. Moreover, common dietary supplements, such as vitamin C and antioxidants, when introduced into reprogramming media, have been found to improve genomic and epigenomic profiles of iPSCs. In this article, we review the most recent advances in the iPSC field and potent application of iPSCs, in terms of cell therapy and tissue engineering.     

Cell fate plug and play: direct reprogramming and induced pluripotency

Building on the discovery that MyoD expression reprograms fibroblasts into muscle, three papers (Vierbuchen et al., 2010; Ieda et al., 2010; Szabo et al., 2010) recently reported the reprogramming of fibroblasts into neurons, cardiomyocytes, and blood cell progenitors without first passing the cells through a pluripotent state. Here we discuss the advantages and challenges of harnessing this direct reprogramming method for regenerative medicine.