Reprogramming to Pluripotency Can Conceal Somatic Cell Chromosomal Instability
The discovery that somatic cells are reprogrammable to pluripotency by ectopic expression of a small subset of transcription factors has created great potential for the development of broadly applicable stem-cell-based therapies. One of the concerns regarding the safe use of induced pluripotent stem cells (iPSCs) in therapeutic applications is loss of genomic integrity, a hallmark of various human conditions and diseases, including cancer. Structural chromosome defects such as short telomeres and double-strand breaks are known to limit reprogramming of somatic cells into iPSCs, but whether defects that cause whole-chromosome instability (W-CIN) preclude reprogramming is unknown. Here we demonstrate, using aneuploidy-prone mouse embryonic fibroblasts (MEFs) in which chromosome missegregation is driven by BubR1 or RanBP2 insufficiency, that W-CIN is not a barrier to reprogramming. Unexpectedly, the two W-CIN defects had contrasting effects on iPSC genomic integrity, with BubR1 hypomorphic MEFs almost exclusively yielding aneuploid iPSC clones and RanBP2 hypomorphic MEFs karyotypically normal iPSC clones. Moreover, BubR1-insufficient iPSC clones were karyotypically unstable, whereas RanBP2-insufficient iPSC clones were rather stable. These findings suggest that aneuploid cells can be selected for or against during reprogramming depending on the W-CIN gene defect and present the novel concept that somatic cell W-CIN can be concealed in the pluripotent state. Thus, karyotypic analysis of somatic cells of origin in addition to iPSC lines is necessary for safe application of reprogramming technology.
Vyšlo v časopise:
Reprogramming to Pluripotency Can Conceal Somatic Cell Chromosomal Instability. PLoS Genet 8(8): e32767. doi:10.1371/journal.pgen.1002913
Kategorie:
Research Article
prolekare.web.journal.doi_sk:
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pgen.1002913
Souhrn
The discovery that somatic cells are reprogrammable to pluripotency by ectopic expression of a small subset of transcription factors has created great potential for the development of broadly applicable stem-cell-based therapies. One of the concerns regarding the safe use of induced pluripotent stem cells (iPSCs) in therapeutic applications is loss of genomic integrity, a hallmark of various human conditions and diseases, including cancer. Structural chromosome defects such as short telomeres and double-strand breaks are known to limit reprogramming of somatic cells into iPSCs, but whether defects that cause whole-chromosome instability (W-CIN) preclude reprogramming is unknown. Here we demonstrate, using aneuploidy-prone mouse embryonic fibroblasts (MEFs) in which chromosome missegregation is driven by BubR1 or RanBP2 insufficiency, that W-CIN is not a barrier to reprogramming. Unexpectedly, the two W-CIN defects had contrasting effects on iPSC genomic integrity, with BubR1 hypomorphic MEFs almost exclusively yielding aneuploid iPSC clones and RanBP2 hypomorphic MEFs karyotypically normal iPSC clones. Moreover, BubR1-insufficient iPSC clones were karyotypically unstable, whereas RanBP2-insufficient iPSC clones were rather stable. These findings suggest that aneuploid cells can be selected for or against during reprogramming depending on the W-CIN gene defect and present the novel concept that somatic cell W-CIN can be concealed in the pluripotent state. Thus, karyotypic analysis of somatic cells of origin in addition to iPSC lines is necessary for safe application of reprogramming technology.
Zdroje
1. TakahashiK, YamanakaS (2006) Induction of pluripotent stem cells from mouse embryonic and adult fibroblast cultures by defined factors. Cell 126: 663–676.
2. HannaJH, SahaK, JaenischR (2010) Pluripotency and cellular reprogramming: facts, hypotheses, unresolved issues. Cell 143: 508–525.
3. PanopoulosAD, RuizS, Izpisua BelmonteJC (2011) iPSCs: induced back to controversy. Cell Stem Cell 8: 347–348.
4. TorresEM, WilliamsBR, AmonA (2008) Aneuploidy: cells losing their balance. Genetics 179: 737–746.
5. HusseinSM, BatadaNN, VuoristoS, ChingRW, AutioR, et al. (2011) Copy number variation and selection during reprogramming to pluripotency. Nature 471: 58–62.
6. GoreA, LiZ, FungHL, YoungJE, AgarwalS, et al. (2011) Somatic coding mutations in human induced pluripotent stem cells. Nature 471: 63–67.
7. MarionRM, StratiK, LiH, MurgaM, BlancoR, et al. (2009) A p53-mediated DNA damage response limits reprogramming to ensure iPS cell genomic integrity. Nature 460: 1149–1153.
8. ParkIH, AroraN, HuoH, MaheraliN, AhfeldtT, et al. (2008) Disease-specific induced pluripotent stem cells. Cell 134: 877–886.
9. RickeRM, van ReeJH, van DeursenJM (2008) Whole chromosome instability and cancer: a complex relationship. Trends Genet 24: 457–466.
10. HollandAJ, ClevelandDW (2009) Boveri revisited: chromosomal instability, aneuploidy and tumorigenesis. Nat Rev Mol Cell Biol 10: 478–487.
11. MusacchioA, SalmonED (2007) The spindle-assembly checkpoint in space and time. Nat Rev Mol Cell Biol 8: 379–393.
12. KolodnerRD, PutnamCD, MyungK (2002) Maintenance of genome stability in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Science 297: 552–557.
13. NasmythK (2002) Segregating sister genomes: the molecular biology of chromosome separation. Science 297: 559–565.
14. MichorF, IwasaY, VogelsteinB, LengauerC, NowakMA (2005) Can chromosomal instability initiate tumorigenesis? Semin Cancer Biol 15: 43–49.
15. SchvartzmanJM, SotilloR, BenezraR (2010) Mitotic chromosomal instability and cancer: mouse modelling of the human disease. Nature reviews Cancer 10: 102–115.
16. BakerDJ, DawlatyMM, GalardyP, van DeursenJM (2007) Mitotic regulation of the anaphase-promoting complex. Cellular and molecular life sciences : CMLS 64: 589–600.
17. RickeRM, van ReeJH, van DeursenJM (2008) Whole chromosome instability and cancer: a complex relationship. Trends in genetics : TIG 24: 457–466.
18. HollandAJ, ClevelandDW (2009) Boveri revisited: chromosomal instability, aneuploidy and tumorigenesis. Nature reviews Molecular cell biology 10: 478–487.
19. KulukianA, HanJS, ClevelandDW (2009) Unattached kinetochores catalyze production of an anaphase inhibitor that requires a Mad2 template to prime Cdc20 for BubR1 binding. Dev Cell 16: 105–117.
20. MalureanuLA, JeganathanKB, HamadaM, WasilewskiL, DavenportJ, et al. (2009) BubR1 N terminus acts as a soluble inhibitor of cyclin B degradation by APC/C(Cdc20) in interphase. Dev Cell 16: 118–131.
21. LampsonMA, KapoorTM (2005) The human mitotic checkpoint protein BubR1 regulates chromosome-spindle attachments. Nat Cell Biol 7: 93–98.
22. BakerDJ, JeganathanKB, CameronJD, ThompsonM, JunejaS, et al. (2004) BubR1 insufficiency causes early onset of aging-associated phenotypes and infertility in mice. Nat Genet 36: 744–749.
23. PichlerA, GastA, SeelerJS, DejeanA, MelchiorF (2002) The nucleoporin RanBP2 has SUMO1 E3 ligase activity. Cell 108: 109–120.
24. DawlatyMM, MalureanuL, JeganathanKB, KaoE, SustmannC, et al. (2008) Resolution of sister centromeres requires RanBP2-mediated SUMOylation of topoisomerase IIalpha. Cell 133: 103–115.
25. BakerDJ, JeganathanKB, CameronJD, ThompsonM, JunejaS, et al. (2004) BubR1 insufficiency causes early onset of aging-associated phenotypes and infertility in mice. Nature genetics 36: 744–749.
26. RickeRM, JeganathanKB, van DeursenJM (2011) Bub1 overexpression induces aneuploidy and tumor formation through Aurora B kinase hyperactivation. J Cell Biol 193: 1049–1064.
27. BakerDJ, Perez-TerzicC, JinF, PitelK, NiederlanderNJ, et al. (2008) Opposing roles for p16Ink4a and p19Arf in senescence and ageing caused by BubR1 insufficiency. Nature cell biology 10: 825–836.
28. LiH, ColladoM, VillasanteA, StratiK, OrtegaS, et al. (2009) The Ink4/Arf locus is a barrier for iPS cell reprogramming. Nature 460: 1136–1139.
29. van ReeJ, ZhouW, LiM, van DeursenJM (2011) Transgenesis in mouse embryonic stem cells. Methods Mol Biol 693: 143–162.
30. HottaA, EllisJ (2008) Retroviral vector silencing during iPS cell induction: an epigenetic beacon that signals distinct pluripotent states. Journal of cellular biochemistry 105: 940–948.
31. WernigM, MeissnerA, ForemanR, BrambrinkT, KuM, et al. (2007) In vitro reprogramming of fibroblasts into a pluripotent ES-cell-like state. Nature 448: 318–324.
32. TsaiSY, BouwmanBA, AngYS, KimSJ, LeeDF, et al. (2011) Single transcription factor reprogramming of hair follicle dermal papilla cells to induced pluripotent stem cells. Stem cells 29: 964–971.
33. ClarkeDJ, JohnsonRT, DownesCS (1993) Topoisomerase II inhibition prevents anaphase chromatid segregation in mammalian cells independently of the generation of DNA strand breaks. J Cell Sci 105(Pt 2):563–569.
34. Van HoofD, PassierR, Ward-Van OostwaardD, PinkseMW, HeckAJ, et al. (2006) A quest for human and mouse embryonic stem cell-specific proteins. Molecular & cellular proteomics : MCP 5: 1261–1273.
35. LiM, FangX, BakerDJ, GuoL, GaoX, et al. (2010) The ATM-p53 pathway suppresses aneuploidy-induced tumorigenesis. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 107: 14188–14193.
36. ThompsonSL, ComptonDA (2010) Proliferation of aneuploid human cells is limited by a p53-dependent mechanism. J Cell Biol 188: 369–381.
37. SchvartzmanJM, SotilloR, BenezraR (2010) Mitotic chromosomal instability and cancer: mouse modelling of the human disease. Nat Rev Cancer 10: 102–115.
38. TorresEM, SokolskyT, TuckerCM, ChanLY, BoselliM, et al. (2007) Effects of aneuploidy on cellular physiology and cell division in haploid yeast. Science 317: 916–924.
39. WilliamsBR, PrabhuVR, HunterKE, GlazierCM, WhittakerCA, et al. (2008) Aneuploidy affects proliferation and spontaneous immortalization in mammalian cells. Science 322: 703–709.
40. AzumaY, ArnaoutovA, AnanT, DassoM (2005) PIASy mediates SUMO-2 conjugation of Topoisomerase-II on mitotic chromosomes. Embo J 24: 2172–2182.
41. AzumaY, ArnaoutovA, DassoM (2003) SUMO-2/3 regulates topoisomerase II in mitosis. J Cell Biol 163: 477–487.
42. Diaz-MartinezLA, Gimenez-AbianJF, AzumaY, GuacciV, Gimenez-MartinG, et al. (2006) PIASgamma is required for faithful chromosome segregation in human cells. PLoS ONE 1: e53 doi:10.1371/journal.pgen.0010053.
43. BakerDJ, JinF, van DeursenJM (2008) The yin and yang of the Cdkn2a locus in senescence and aging. Cell cycle 7: 2795–2802.
44. MatsumotoT, BakerDJ, d'UscioLV, MozammelG, KatusicZS, et al. (2007) Aging-associated vascular phenotype in mutant mice with low levels of BubR1. Stroke 38: 1050–1056.
45. HartmanTK, WengenackTM, PodusloJF, van DeursenJM (2007) Mutant mice with small amounts of BubR1 display accelerated age-related gliosis. Neurobiol Aging 28: 921–927.
46. van ReeJH, JeganathanKB, MalureanuL, van DeursenJM (2010) Overexpression of the E2 ubiquitin-conjugating enzyme UbcH10 causes chromosome missegregation and tumor formation. J Cell Biol 188: 83–100.
47. WooRA, PoonRY (2004) Gene mutations and aneuploidy: the instability that causes cancer. Cell Cycle 3: 1101–1103.
48. LongoL, BygraveA, GrosveldFG, PandolfiPP (1997) The chromosome make-up of mouse embryonic stem cells is predictive of somatic and germ cell chimaerism. Transgenic research 6: 321–328.
49. TaapkenSM, NislerBS, NewtonMA, Sampsell-BarronTL, LeonhardKA, et al. (2011) Karotypic abnormalities in human induced pluripotent stem cells and embryonic stem cells. Nature biotechnology 29: 313–314.
50. DonehowerLA, HarveyM, SlagleBL, McArthurMJ, MontgomeryCAJr, et al. (1992) Mice deficient for p53 are developmentally normal but susceptible to spontaneous tumours. Nature 356: 215–221.
51. van DeursenJ, HeerschapA, OerlemansF, RuitenbeekW, JapP, et al. (1993) Skeletal muscles of mice deficient in muscle creatine kinase lack burst activity. Cell 74: 621–631.
52. LaboskyPA, BarlowDP, HoganBL (1994) Mouse embryonic germ (EG) cell lines: transmission through the germline and differences in the methylation imprint of insulin-like growth factor 2 receptor (Igf2r) gene compared with embryonic stem (ES) cell lines. Development 120: 3197–3204.
53. TakahashiK, OkitaK, NakagawaM, YamanakaS (2007) Induction of pluripotent stem cells from fibroblast cultures. Nat Protoc 2: 3081–3089.
54. OkadaM, OkaM, YonedaY (2010) Effective culture conditions for the induction of pluripotent stem cells. Biochimica et biophysica acta 1800: 956–963.
55. MalureanuL, JeganathanKB, JinF, BakerDJ, van ReeJH, et al. (2010) Cdc20 hypomorphic mice fail to counteract de novo synthesis of cyclin B1 in mitosis. The Journal of cell biology 191: 313–329.
Štítky
Genetika Reprodukčná medicínaČlánok vyšiel v časopise
PLOS Genetics
2012 Číslo 8
- Je „freeze-all“ pro všechny? Odborníci na fertilitu diskutovali na virtuálním summitu
- Gynekologové a odborníci na reprodukční medicínu se sejdou na prvním virtuálním summitu
Najčítanejšie v tomto čísle
- Dissecting the Gene Network of Dietary Restriction to Identify Evolutionarily Conserved Pathways and New Functional Genes
- It's All in the Timing: Too Much E2F Is a Bad Thing
- Variation of Contributes to Dog Breed Skull Diversity
- The PARN Deadenylase Targets a Discrete Set of mRNAs for Decay and Regulates Cell Motility in Mouse Myoblasts