Cited by 145Pluripotent Stem Cells ResearchDevelopmental Biology and Gene RegulationNeurogenesis and neuroplasticity mechanisms

Defining the nature of human pluripotent stem cell progeny

Open access
Patterson, Michaela, Chan, David N., Ha, Iris, Case, Dana, Cui, Yongyan, Handel, Ben Van, Mikkola, Hanna KA, Lowry, William E·2012·Cell Research

Abstract

While it is clear that human pluripotent stem cells (hPSCs) can differentiate to generate a panoply of various cell types, it is unknown how closely in vitro development mirrors that which occurs in vivo. To determine whether human embryonic stem cells (hESCs) and human-induced pluripotent stem cells (hiPSCs) make equivalent progeny, and whether either makes cells that are analogous to tissue-derived cells, we performed comprehensive transcriptome profiling of purified PSC derivatives and their tissue-derived counterparts. Expression profiling demonstrated that hESCs and hiPSCs make nearly identical progeny for the neural, hepatic, and mesenchymal lineages, and an absence of re-expression from exogenous reprogramming factors in hiPSC progeny. However, when compared to a tissue-derived counterpart, the progeny of both hESCs and hiPSCs maintained expression of a subset of genes normally associated with early mammalian development, regardless of the type of cell generated. While pluripotent genes (OCT4, SOX2, REX1, and NANOG) appeared to be silenced immediately upon differentiation from hPSCs, genes normally unique to early embryos (LIN28A, LIN28B, DPPA4, and others) were not fully silenced in hPSC derivatives. These data and evidence from expression patterns in early human fetal tissue (3-16 weeks of development) suggest that the differentiated progeny of hPSCs are reflective of very early human development (< 6 weeks). These findings provide support for the idea that hPSCs can serve as useful in vitro models of early human development, but also raise important issues for disease modeling and the clinical application of hPSC derivatives.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1038/cr.2011.133

Cites

52 of 52 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • iPSC neurons exhibit a fetal neuronal identity that might not be optimally suited to model all disease-relevant phenotypes.

    “They are also known to exhibit a fetal neuronal identity that might not be optimally suited to model all disease-relevant phenotypes (Arbab et al., 2014; Luo et al., 2016; Patterson et al., 2012).”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 3

  1. Pankratz MT, Li XJ, Lavaute TM, Lyons EA, Chen X, Zhang www.cell-research.com | Cell Research Michaela Patterson et al. 193 npg dylation. Cell 2009; 138:696-708.
  2. Ghosh Z, Huang M, Hu S, Wilson KD, Dey D, Wu JC. Dis- secting the oncogenic potential of human embryonic and induced pluripotent stem cell derivatives. Cancer Res 2011; 71:5030-5039.
  3. Ambros V, Horvitz HR. Heterochronic mutants of the nema- tode Caenorhabditis elegans. Science 1984; 226:409-416.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Patterson, M., Chan, D. N., Ha, I., Case, D., Cui, Y., Handel, B. V., Mikkola, H. K., & Lowry, W. E.
Affiliations
University of California, Los Angeles (US)
Corresponding author
Lowry, William E
Venue
Cell Research
Published
2011-08-16
Volume
22
Issue
1
Pages
178-193
ISSN
  • 1001-0602 (ISSN-L)
  • 1748-7838
OpenAlex
W2077007919
Cited by
145
References
52
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 9 · 2021: 11 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 11 · 2017: 11 · 2016: 10 · 2015: 12 · 2014: 13 · 2013: 22 · 2012: 12
FWCI
6.58
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Cell Research (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
National Institute of General Medical Sciences (T32GM007104, GM007104-33)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Pluripotent Stem Cells Research
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Developmental Biology and Gene Regulation
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Developmental Neuroscience › Neurogenesis and neuroplasticity mechanisms
Keywords
human pluripotent stem cells, human embryonic stem cells, human induced pluripotent stem cells, in vitro differentiation, gene expression profiling, early human development, neural lineage, mesenchymal lineage, pluripotency genes, LIN28A, DPPA4, disease modeling
MeSH terms
Cell Differentiation, Embryo, Mammalian, Fibroblasts, Germ Layers, Humans, Transfection, Cluster Analysis, RNA-Binding Proteins, Gene Expression Regulation, Developmental, Cell Lineage, Gene Silencing, Gene Expression Profiling, Hepatocytes, Pluripotent Stem Cells, Embryonic Development, Octamer Transcription Factor-3, SOXB1 Transcription Factors, Neural Stem Cells, Cellular Reprogramming

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review