无饲养层细胞的人类胚胎干细胞培养体系的比较。
Comparison of defined culture systems for feeder cell free propagation of human embryonic stem cells.
机构信息
The Eli and Edythe Broad Center for Regenerative Medicine and Stem Cell Research at USC, Keck School of Medicine, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA 90033, USA.
出版信息
In Vitro Cell Dev Biol Anim. 2010 Apr;46(3-4):247-58. doi: 10.1007/s11626-010-9297-z. Epub 2010 Feb 26.
There are many reports of defined culture systems for the propagation of human embryonic stem cells in the absence of feeder cell support, but no previous study has undertaken a multi-laboratory comparison of these diverse methodologies. In this study, five separate laboratories, each with experience in human embryonic stem cell culture, used a panel of ten embryonic stem cell lines (including WA09 as an index cell line common to all laboratories) to assess eight cell culture methods, with propagation in the presence of Knockout Serum Replacer, FGF-2, and mouse embryonic fibroblast feeder cell layers serving as a positive control. The cultures were assessed for up to ten passages for attachment, death, and differentiated morphology by phase contrast microscopy, for growth by serial cell counts, and for maintenance of stem cell surface marker expression by flow cytometry. Of the eight culture systems, only the control and those based on two commercial media, mTeSR1 and STEMPRO, supported maintenance of most cell lines for ten passages. Cultures grown in the remaining media failed before this point due to lack of attachment, cell death, or overt cell differentiation. Possible explanations for relative success of the commercial formulations in this study, and the lack of success with other formulations from academic groups compared to previously published results, include: the complex combination of growth factors present in the commercial preparations; improved development, manufacture, and quality control in the commercial products; differences in epigenetic adaptation to culture in vitro between different ES cell lines grown in different laboratories.
有许多关于在没有饲养细胞支持的情况下繁殖人类胚胎干细胞的特定培养体系的报道,但以前没有研究对这些不同方法进行多实验室比较。在这项研究中,五个具有人类胚胎干细胞培养经验的独立实验室使用了一组十个胚胎干细胞系(包括作为所有实验室共同的索引细胞系的 WA09)来评估八种细胞培养方法,以在 Knockout Serum Replacer、FGF-2 和小鼠胚胎成纤维细胞饲养细胞层存在的情况下进行繁殖作为阳性对照。通过相差显微镜评估培养物的附着、死亡和分化形态,通过连续细胞计数评估生长,通过流式细胞术评估干细胞表面标志物表达的维持。在这八种培养体系中,只有对照体系和基于两种商业培养基 mTeSR1 和 STEMPRO 的体系能够支持大多数细胞系维持 10 个传代。在其他培养基中生长的培养物在此之前由于附着不良、细胞死亡或明显的细胞分化而失败。本研究中商业配方相对成功的可能解释,以及与之前发表的结果相比,与学术团体开发的其他配方缺乏成功的原因包括:商业制剂中存在的复杂生长因子组合;商业产品在开发、制造和质量控制方面的改进;在不同实验室中使用不同的 ES 细胞系在体外培养中进行表观遗传适应的差异。
相似文献
In Vitro Cell Dev Biol Anim. 2010-2-26
PLoS One. 2013-12-10
Stem Cells Dev. 2010-6
Tissue Eng Part C Methods. 2011-6-20
引用本文的文献
Biochem Biophys Rep. 2025-7-21
Stem Cells Int. 2022-11-23
本文引用的文献
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2008-9-9
Cell Stem Cell. 2008-8-7
Hum Mol Genet. 2008-4-15
Curr Opin Chem Biol. 2007-8