Nanog Gene Reverses Aging in Adult Stem Cells


Professor Stelios Andreadis from SUNY Buffalo and his colleagues have, in a series of elegant experiments, shown that the gene Nanog can stimulate dormant cellular processes that seem to be vital for preventing weak bones, clogged arteries and other telltale signs of aging. The findings might help counteract premature aging disorders such as Hutchinson-Gilford progeria syndrome.

“Our research into Nanog is helping us to better understand the process of aging and ultimately how to reverse it,” said Andreadis.

In order to delay or even reverse the ravages of aging, the human body holds a reservoir of nonspecialized progenitor cells that can regenerate organs. These cells are collectively called “adult stem cells,” and they are in every tissue of the body. Adult stem cells can rapidly respond to tissue damage to regenerate and heal organs and tissues. Unfortunately, as people age, fewer adult stem cells pare able to properly perform their function. This leads to the clinical scenarios associated with aging. Reversing the effects of aging in adult stem cells – re-booting them if you will – can potentially overcome this problem.

Andreadis and his coworkers have previously shown that the capacity of adult stem cells to form muscle and generate force declines with age. Specifically, Andreadis and others examined smooth muscle cells found in arteries, intestines and other tissues. In this new study, grad student Panagiotis Mistriotis introduced a gene called Nanog into aged stem cells. He found that Nanog activated two key cellular pathways that include Rho-associated protein kinase (ROCK) and Transforming growth factor beta (TGF-β). Activation of these two signaling pathways awakens dormant proteins like actin to build the new cytoskeletal networks that adult stem cells need to form contracting muscle cells. Force generated by these cells ultimately helps restore the regenerative properties that adult stem cells lose due to aging.

“Not only does Nanog have the capacity to delay aging, it has the potential in some cases to reverse it,” said Andreadis, who noted that introduction of the Nanog gene worked in three different models of aging: cells isolated from aged donors, cells aged in culture, and cells isolated from patients with Hutchinson-Gilford progeria syndrome.

Additionally, Andreadis and his group found that Nanog activated the central regulator of muscle formation, a signaling protein called serum response factor (SRF), which suggests that the same results may be applicable for skeletal, cardiac and other muscle types.

Andreadis and others are now examining potential drugs that can replace or mimic the effects of the Nanog gene. This will allow them to study the consequences of aging inside the body can also be reversed. This could have implications in an array of illnesses, everything from atherosclerosis, high blood pressure, and osteoporosis to Alzheimer’s disease.

This fascinating paper was published here: Panagiotis Mistriotis et al., “NANOG Reverses the Myogenic Differentiation Potential of Senescent Stem Cells by Restoring ACTIN Filamentous Organization and SRF-Dependent Gene Expression,” Stem Cells, 2016; DOI: 10.1002/stem.2452.

Pluripotent Stem Cells Actively Regulate The Openness of their Heterochromatin


Packaging DNA into a small area like the nucleus of the cell does not occur unless that DNA is tightly wound into compact structures collectively known as chromatin. However, not all regions of the genome show the same degree of compaction. Highly-expressed regions of the genome tend to be less highly compacted and regions of the genes that are not expressed to any degree tend to be squirreled away into tight chromatin.

Pluripotent stem cells tend to have an open and decondensed chromatin organization. In fact, this open and decondensed chromatin configuration is a defining property of pluripotent cells in general. The connection between pluripotency and the is open chromatin organization and the mediators of this chromatin configuration remain shrouded in uncertainty.

A new study from the laboratory of Peter J Rugg-Gunn at the Babraham Institute, in collaboration with scientists from Canada, the United Kingdom, and Japan, has identified two proteins, Nanog and Sall1 that participate in the chromatin structure of pluripotent stem cells. Such an understanding can contribute to making better pluripotent stem cells.

Cells tend to possess regions of the genome that are tightly wrapped into tight heterochomatin. These genomic regions are usually structural in nature and are, typically, not expressed. These include centromeric DNA and pericentromeric DNA, which plays a role in spindle attachment during cell division. These regions are collectively known as “constitutive heterochromatin.” However, previous research has demonstrated that this constitutive heterchromatin is maintained in an open and uncompacted conformation.

Clara Lopes Novo, in Rugg-Gunn’s laboratory and her colleagues discovered that transcription factor NANOG acts as an integral regulator of the conformation of constitutive heterochromatin in mouse embryonic stem cells. When Lopes Novo and others deleted the Nanog genes in mouse embryonic stem cells, the constitutive heterochromatin was remodeled in a manner that led to more intensive chromatin compaction. However, when Lopes Novo and her coworkers forced the expression of the Nanog gene in mouse embryonic stem cells, leading to spikes in the levels of NANOG proteim, the heterochromatin domains showed distinct decompaction.

When Lopes Novo and others determined where NANOG spent its time, they discovered that it was bound to heterochromatin. In particular, NANOG associated with satellite repeats within heterochromatin domains. Heterochromatin that was associated with NANOG had highly dispersed chromatin fibers, low levels of modified histone proteins that are usually associated with chromatin compaction (i.e. H3K9me3), and high levels of transcription.

The second heterochromatin-associated protein, SALL1, seems to work in cahoots with NANOG. In fact, when Lopes Novo and others deleted the Sall1 gene from mouse embryonic stem cells, the Sall1-/- cells recapitulate the Nanog -/- phenotype. However, further work showed that the loss of Sall1 can be rescued by forcing the recruitment of the NANOG to major portions of the heterochromatin (by over-expressing the NANOG protein).

These results demonstrate the connection between pluripotency and chromatin organization. This work seems to say, “embryonic stem cells actively maintain an open heterochromatin architecture.” They do this to stabilize their pluritotency.

Loss of heterochromatin regulation has potential consequences for the long-term genetic stability of stem cells, and the ability of stem cells, and the ability of stem cells to differentiate and mature into specialized cell types.

This work was published in the journal Genes and Development (http://www.genesdev.org/cgi/doi/10.1101/gad.275685.115)

Discovery of New Stem Cell Class Might Accelerate Research


An international team of scientists has discovered a new class of stem cell. This project consisted of a massive collaboration between over 50 scientists on four continents, that has been affectionately named, “Project Grandiose.” This new class of stem cells, known as a F-class cell, opens new and exciting avenues for generating designer cells that could be safer and more efficiently used in therapy.

Andras Nagy, Ph.D., from the University of Toronto’s Institute of Medical Sciences led this group in conducting a high-resolution characterization of the molecular events that are required for the reprogramming of stem cells. In particular, Nagy and his colleagues were interested in ways to control the path to pluripotency. In this analysis, they discovered an alternative reprogrammed cell, which they called F-class stem cells.

It has been known for many years that when mature, adult cells are reprogrammed into induced pluripotent stem cells (iPSCs) by means forcing expression of key transcription factors (Oct4, Klf4, Sox2, and c-Myc), some cells will stably not express the pluripotency gene Nanog, and fail to acquire full pluripotency, even though these cells look like embryonic stem cells (see Fussner, E. et al. EMBO J. 30, 1778–1789 (2011); Sridharan, R. et al. Cell 136, 364–377 (2009); and Chen, J. et al. Nature Genet. 45, 34–42 (2013)). These partially reprogrammed cells seem to indicate that there are other cell types that can be formed by reprogramming that are not fully pluripotent. Strangely, some labs have reported that treating partially pluripotent cells with vitamin C can reprogram to cells to full pluripotency (Esteban, M. A. et al. Cell Stem Cell 6, 71–79 (2009)).

Nagy and his colleagues used a whole battery of tests to take detailed snapshots of every stage of reprogramming, and in the process, revealed an alternative state of pluripotency. They discovered that high levels of expression of the four reprogramming factors generates cells that do not form typical ESC-like colonies in culture, but are still pluripotent. These are the F-type cells.  F-type cells derived their name from the fuzzy boundaries they form when they grow in culture.

When F-type cells were compared to embryonic-like stem cells, the F-type cells are easier to make, less expensive, and faster to grow. Thus F-class stem cells can be produced more economically in large quantities and this should accelerate drug-screening efforts, disease modeling, and eventually the development of treatments for different illnesses.

Bioinformatic Analysis Leads to Gene Combination that Makes Clinical Quality Mouse iPSCs


Adult cells can be de-differentiated so that they resemble embryonic stem cells by genetically engineering them to overexpress particular genes. Such reprogrammed cells are known as induced pluripotent stem cells or iPSCs, and these cells might have the potential to cure damaged nerves, regrow limbs and organs, and precisely model a patient’s particular disease. Unfortunately, the very process of reprogramming triggers replication stress, which causes iPSCs to acquire serious genetic and epigenetic abnormalities that lower the cells’ quality and limit their therapeutic usefulness.

When iPSCs were first derived in 2006, the efficiency of their derivation was quite low, since only a fraction of a percentage of reprogrammed cells successfully grew to become cell lines. Thus some of the earliest work with iPSCs tried to increase the efficiency of reprogramming. These experiments provided a greater understanding of the reprogramming process and demonstrated that many different variables, including the ratio of reprogramming factors and the reprogramming environment, could also greatly affect the quality of the iPSCs that were derived.

A research group from the Whitehead Institute, which includes founding member Rudolf Jaenisch, in collaboration with scientists from Hebrew University, has shown that the reprogramming factors themselves greatly influence the reprogramming efficiency and the quality of the resulting cells. This work was published in the current issue of the journal Cell Stem Cell.

“Postdoctoral researcher Yosef Buganim and Research Scientist Styliani Markoulaki show that a different combination of reprogramming factors may be less efficient than the original, but can produce higher quality iPSCs,” says Jaenisch, who is also a professor of biology at MIT. “And quality is a really important issue. At this point, it doesn’t matter if we get one colony out of 10,000 or one out of 100,000 cells, as long as it is of high quality.”

In order to derive iPSCs from mature adult cells, scientists transfect adult cells to a cocktail of genes. The genes used are all active in embryonic stem cells. By pushing cells to overexpress these embryonic stem cell-specific genes, adult cells can become iPSCs, which can then be differentiated into almost any other cell type, such as nerve, liver, or muscle cells. The original gene combination included Oct4, Sox2, Klf4, and Myc or (OSKM). This combination efficiently reprograms cells, but a relatively high percentage of the resulting cells have serious genomic aberrations, including aneuploidy, and trisomy 8, which make them unsuitable for use in clinical research.

Buganim and Markoulaki used bioinformatic analysis of a network of 48 genes that are integral to the reprogramming process. With this analysis, Buganim and Markoulaki designed a new reprogramming gene cocktail: Sall4, Nanog, Esrrb, and Lin28 (SNEL). With this gene combination, approximately 80% of SNEL colonies made from mouse cells were of high quality and fulfilled the tetraploid complementation assay, which is the most stringent pluripotency test available. As a comparison, only 20-30% of high quality OSKM passed the same test. Buganim hypothesizes that SNEL reprograms cells better because, unlike OSKM, the cocktail does not rely on a potent oncogene like Myc, which might be the source of some of the genetic problems produced by the reprogramming process. Even importantly, the cocktail does not rely on the potent key master regulators Oct4 and Sox2 that seem to abnormally activate some regions in the adult cell genome.

buganim-slider-570

Buganim and Markoulaki also analyzed SNEL colonies down to the genetic and epigenetic level. On their DNA, SNEL cells have deposits of the histone protein H2AX in locations very similar to those in ESCs, and the position of H2AX seems to predict the quality of the cell. This characteristic might be a fast way to quickly screen for high quality colonies.

It must be stressed that this SNEL gene combination was designed for mouse cells; it is unable to reprogram human cells, which are generally more difficult to manipulate than mouse cells. However, the same bioinformatic analysis might provide the proper insights to find the right combination for human cells that produce clinical quality iPSCs.

“We know that SNEL is not the ideal combination of factors,” says Buganim, who is currently a Principal Investigator at Hebrew University in Jerusalem. “This work is only a proof of principle that says we must find this ideal combination. SNEL is an example that shows if you use bioinformatics tools you can get better quality. Now we should be able to find the optimal combination and try it in human cells to see if it works.”

Both Copies of the Nanog Gene Are Expressed in Embryonic Stem Cells


Commonly held ideas are sometimes held because there is a great of evidence to substantiate them. However, other times, an idea is commonly held because simply because it has been repeated over and over and over even though the evidence for it is poor. Thus, when new evidence come to light showing the commonly held believe to be untrue, it becomes incumbent on us to readjust what we think.

When it comes to embryonic stem cells and the genes that keep them pluripotent, the transcription Nanog plays a very critical role in the self-renewal of embryonic stem cells and there is a great deal of evidence for this assertion. However, the expression of the gene that encodes Nanog was thought to follow the same mode of expression as some of the other pluripotency promoting genes. Namely, that only one of the copies of the Nanog gene were thought to be expressed in embryonic stem cells. This turns out to be probably false.

First a little background. In 2007, Ian Chambers and others published a paper in the journal Nature that examined the expression and function of Nanog in embryonic stem cells. Chambers and others found that Nanog expression levels in individual embryonic stem cells from a culture derived from a single cell varied wildly.  The figure from the Chambers et al paper is shown below.

Immunofluorescence of TNG cells for Oct4 and Nanog. Individual signals from 4,6-diamidino-2-phenylindole (DAPI), GFP, anti-Oct4 and anti-Nanog are shown on the left alongside a combined view of GFP with the stainings from anti-Oct4 and anti-Nanog.
Immunofluorescence of TNG cells for Oct4
and Nanog. Individual signals from 4,6-diamidino-2-phenylindole (DAPI),
GFP, anti-Oct4 and anti-Nanog are shown on the left alongside a combined
view of GFP with the stainings from anti-Oct4 and anti-Nanog.

The reason for this fluctuation in Nanog levels was uncertain, but Chambers and others showed that Nanog could be deleted from mouse embryonic stem cells without affecting their ability to contribute to various sundry embryonic tissues during mouse development, even though they do not make functional gametes (eggs and sperm).  In fact, mouse embryonic stem cells can self-renew under particular conditions without a functional copy of the Nanog gene even though they are prone to differentiation.  From this, Chambers and others concluded that Nanog stabilized rather than promoted pluripotency of embryonic stem cells by “resisting or reversing alternative gene expression states.”

Fast forward to 2012 and another Nature paper by Yusuke Miyanari and Maria-Elena Torres-Padilla from the IGBMC in Strasbourg, France, which showed that before mouse embryos implanted into the uterus, only one copy of the Nanog gene was expressed, but after implantation, both copies of the Nanog gene was expressed.  Miyanari and Torres-Padilla also made mouse embryonic stem cells that had copies of the Nanog gene labeled with different glowing proteins.  This ingenious experiment showed confirmed that Nanog levels were variable, but also showed that only one copy of the Nanog gene was expressed in growing embryonic stem cells in culture.

a, Schematic of the Nanog knock-in reporter NGR. A PEST motif in the carboxy terminus of the fluorescent proteins allows monitoring of dynamic Nanog expression. iHyg, internal ribosome entry site (IRES) hygromycin; iNeo, IRES neomycin; mChe, mCherry; NLS, nuclear localization signal; tGFP, TurboGFP. b, Representative image of NGR ES cells cultured with LIF or 2i/LIF. Scale bar, 10 µm. c, The incidence of allelic switching of Nanog expression in ES cells. Cells were classified into four groups: monoallelic (TurboGFP-positive, green), monoallelic (mCherry-positive, red), biallelic (TurboGFP- and mCherry-positive, yellow) and no expression (black). The proportion of cells undergoing a transition between these four groups during a single cell cycle is indicated. Overall, 47% of cells showed a colour change in this period. n, number of cells analysed. d, The asymmetric replication of Nanog in ES cells cultured with LIF changes to symmetric replication upon treatment with 2i. The cell nuclei were classified as single/double (SD), single/single (SS) and double/double (DD) according to DNA-FISH signals5. n, number of nuclei analysed. *, P < 4 × 10−7; **, P < 1.4 × 10−3 (Fisher’s exact test). e, Representative image of DNA-FISH for Nanog (arrowheads) and Oct4 in ES cells cultured with LIF or 2i/LIF. Scale bar, 2 µm. f, Nanog allelic expression is unaffected in the absence of DNA methyltransferase activity. Quantification of RNA-FISH for Nanog in wild-type (WT) ES cells and ES cells lacking all three DNA methyltransferases (TKO) cultured with LIF or 2i/LIF. g, ChIP for H3K4me3, MED12 or NIPBL along the Nanog locus (black line, top) in ES cells cultured with LIF or 2i/LIF. The position of the ChIP amplicons is depicted by the thick boxes below the line, the TSS by an arrow, the first exon by the black box on the line, and the distal enhancer by the blue box on the line. The Oct4 promoter region (Oct4 Pro) and distal enhancer (Oct4 DE) were positive controls (right)20. The mean ± s.d. of three independent biological replicates is shown.
a, Schematic of the Nanog knock-in reporter NGR. A PEST motif in the carboxy terminus of the fluorescent proteins allows monitoring of dynamic Nanog expression. iHyg, internal ribosome entry site (IRES) hygromycin; iNeo, IRES neomycin; mChe, mCherry; NLS, nuclear localization signal; tGFP, TurboGFP. b, Representative image of NGR ES cells cultured with LIF or 2i/LIF. Scale bar, 10 µm. c, The incidence of allelic switching of Nanog expression in ES cells. Cells were classified into four groups: monoallelic (TurboGFP-positive, green), monoallelic (mCherry-positive, red), biallelic (TurboGFP- and mCherry-positive, yellow) and no expression (black). The proportion of cells undergoing a transition between these four groups during a single cell cycle is indicated. Overall, 47% of cells showed a colour change in this period. n, number of cells analysed. d, The asymmetric replication of Nanog in ES cells cultured with LIF changes to symmetric replication upon treatment with 2i. The cell nuclei were classified as single/double (SD), single/single (SS) and double/double (DD) according to DNA-FISH signals5. n, number of nuclei analysed. *, P < 4 × 10−7; **, P < 1.4 × 10−3 (Fisher’s exact test). e, Representative image of DNA-FISH for Nanog (arrowheads) and Oct4 in ES cells cultured with LIF or 2i/LIF. Scale bar, 2 µm. f, Nanog allelic expression is unaffected in the absence of DNA methyltransferase activity. Quantification of RNA-FISH for Nanog in wild-type (WT) ES cells and ES cells lacking all three DNA methyltransferases (TKO) cultured with LIF or 2i/LIF. g, ChIP for H3K4me3, MED12 or NIPBL along the Nanog locus (black line, top) in ES cells cultured with LIF or 2i/LIF. The position of the ChIP amplicons is depicted by the thick boxes below the line, the TSS by an arrow, the first exon by the black box on the line, and the distal enhancer by the blue box on the line. The Oct4 promoter region (Oct4 Pro) and distal enhancer (Oct4 DE) were positive controls (right)20. The mean ± s.d. of three independent biological replicates is shown.

Now if we fast forward one more year and a paper from the journal Cell Stem Cell and a letter to the same edition of this journal, we have an article by Dina Faddah and others from the laboratory of Rudolf Jaenisch at the Whitehead Institute (MIT, Cambridge, MA), and a supporting letter from Adam Filipczyk and others from Germany and Switzerland.  In this article, the authors also double-labeled mouse embryonic stem cells and examined multiple cells and showed that BOTH copies of Nanog were expressed, and that the range of variability of Nanog expression was approximately the same as other pluripotency genes.

Filipczyk and others used a similar approach to examine the expression of Nanog in mouse embryonic stem cells and they came to the same conclusions as those of Faddah and others.

What is the reason for the differences in findings?  Faddah and others did an important experiment to answer this question.  Some of the cells that with labeled copies of the Nanog gene disrupted the production of a functional Nanog protein.  The constructs used in the papers by Faddah and others and by Filipczyk and others did not disrupt Nanog protein production.  When Faddah and others tested these other constructs that disrupted Nanog protein production to determine is the amount of glowing protein tracked with the amount of Nanog protein produced, it was clear that the amount of Nanog protein made by the cells did not reflect the amount of glowing protein produced.  According to Dina Faddah, “The way the reported was inserted into the DNA seems to disrupt the regulation of the alleles so that when the reported said Nanog isn’t being expressed, it actually is.”

Jaenisch sees this as an instructional tale for all stem cell scientists.  He noted: “Clearly, the conclusions for this particular gene need to be reconsidered.  And it raises the question for other genes.  For some genes, there might be similar issues.  For other genes, they might be more resistant to this type of disturbances caused by a reporter.”

Bottom line – read the materials and methods part of the paper carefully because the way these experiments are done can determine if the results are trustworthy.

Stem Cell-Promoting Gene Also Promotes the Growth of Head and Neck Cancer


Nanog is a very funny name for a gene, but the Nanog gene is an essential part of the cellular machinery that keeps embryonic stem cells from differentiating and maintains them in a pluripotent state. Unfortunately, Nanog also has other roles if it is mis-expressed and that includes in the genesis of cancers of the head and neck.

Nanog function during development
Nanog function during development

This study emerged from work done by researchers at the Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center – Arthur G. James Cancer Hospital, and Richard J. Solove Research Institute or OSUCCC-James. Since Nanog has been studied in some depth, understanding Nanog activity might provide vital clues in the design of targeted drugs and reagents for treating particular cancers.

“This study defines a signaling axis that is essential for head and neck cancer progression, and our findings show that this axis may be disrupted at three key steps,” said Quintin Pan, associate professor of otolaryngology at OSUCCC-James and principal investigator in this research effort. “Targeted drugs that are designed to inhibit any or all of these three steps might greatly improve the treatment of head and neck cancer.”

What kind of signaling axis is Dr. Pan referring to? An enzyme called protein kinase C-epsilon or PKC-epsilon can place phosphate groups on the Nanog protein. Phosphate groups are negatively charged and are also quite bulky. Attaching such chemical groups to a protein can effectively change its structure and function. In the case of Nanog, phosphorylation of stabilizes it and activates it.

Phosphorylated Nanog proteins can bind together to form a dimer, which attracts a third protein to it; p300. This third protein, p300, in combination with the paired Nanog proteins acts as a potent activator of gene expression of particular genes, in particular a gene called Bmi1. When expressed at high levels, Bmi1 stimulates the proliferation of cells in an uncontrolled fashion.

Bmi1 - Nanog interaction

“Our work shows that the PKCepsilon/Nanog/Bmi1 signaling axis is essential to promote head and neck cancer,” Pan said. “And it provides initial evidence that the development of inhibitors that block critical points in this axis might yield a potent collection of targeted anti-cancer therapeutics that could be valuable for the treatment of head and neck cancer.”

Stress-Resistant Stem Cells From Fat


During liposuction patients lose a fat cells, fat-based mesenchymal stem cells, and now, according to new results from UCLA scientists, stress-enduring stem cells.

This new stem cell population has been called a Multi-lineage Stress-Enduring Adipose Tissue or Muse-AT stem cells. UCLA scientists found Muse-AT stem cells by accident when a particular machine in the laboratory malfunctioned, killing all the cells found in cells from human liposuction, with the exception on the Muse-AT stem cells.

Gregorio Chazenbalk from the UCLA Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology and his research team discovered, after further tests on Muse-AT stem cells, that they not only survive stress, but might be activated by it.

The removal of Muse-AT stem cells from the human body by means of liposuction revealed cells that express several embryonic stem cell-specific proteins (SSEA3, TR-1-60, Oct3/4, Nanog and Sox2). Furthermore, Muse-AT stem cells were able to differentiate into muscle, bone, fat, heart muscle, liver, and neuronal cells. Finally, when Chazenbalk and his group examined the properties of Muse-AT stem cells, they discovered that these stem cells could repair and regenerate tissues when transplanted back into the body after having been exposed to cellular stress.

Muse-ATs express pluripotent stem cell markers. Immunofluorescence microscopy demonstrates that Muse-AT aggregates, along with individual Muse-AT cells, express characteristic pluripotent stem cell markers, including SSEA3, Oct3/4, Nanog, Sox2, and TRA1-60. Comparatively, ASCs (right panel) derived from the same lipoaspirate under standard conditions (see above, [16] were negative for these pluripotent stem cell markers. Nuclei were stained with DAPI (blue). Original magnification, 600 X. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0064752.g002
Muse-ATs express pluripotent stem cell markers.
Immunofluorescence microscopy demonstrates that Muse-AT aggregates, along with individual Muse-AT cells, express characteristic pluripotent stem cell markers, including SSEA3, Oct3/4, Nanog, Sox2, and TRA1-60. Comparatively, ASCs (right panel) derived from the same lipoaspirate under standard conditions (see above, [16] were negative for these pluripotent stem cell markers. Nuclei were stained with DAPI (blue). Original magnification, 600 X.
doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0064752.g002
“This population of cells lies dormant in the fat tissue until it is subjected to very harsh conditions. These cells can survive in conditions in which usually cancer cells can survive. Upon further investigation and clinical trials, these cells could prove a revolutionary treatment option for numerous diseases, including heart disease, stroke and for tissue damage and neural regeneration,” said Chazenbalk.

Purifying and isolating Muse-AT stem cells does not require the use of a cell sorter or other specialized, high-tech machinery. Muse-AT stem cell can grow in liquid suspension, where they grow as small spheres or as adherent cells that pile on top of each other to form aggregates, which is rather similar to embryonic stem cells and the embryoid bodies that they form.

Isolation and morphologic characterization of Muse-ATs. (A) Schematic of Muse-AT isolation and activation from their quiescent state by exposure to cellular stress. Muse-AT cells were obtained after 16 hours, with incubation with collagenase in DMEM medium without FCS at 4°C under very low O2 (See Methods). (B) FACS analysis demonstrates that 90% of isolated cells are both SSEA3 and CD105 positive. (C) Muse-AT cells can grow in suspension, forming spheres or cell clusters as well as individual cells (see red arrows) or (D) Muse-AT cells can adhere to the dish and form cell aggregates. Under both conditions, individual Muse-AT cells reached a diameter of approximately 10µm and cell clusters reached a diameter of up to 50µm, correlating to stem cell proliferative size capacity. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0064752.g001
Isolation and morphologic characterization of Muse-ATs.
(A) Schematic of Muse-AT isolation and activation from their quiescent state by exposure to cellular stress. Muse-AT cells were obtained after 16 hours, with incubation with collagenase in DMEM medium without FCS at 4°C under very low O2 (See Methods). (B) FACS analysis demonstrates that 90% of isolated cells are both SSEA3 and CD105 positive. (C) Muse-AT cells can grow in suspension, forming spheres or cell clusters as well as individual cells (see red arrows) or (D) Muse-AT cells can adhere to the dish and form cell aggregates. Under both conditions, individual Muse-AT cells reached a diameter of approximately 10µm and cell clusters reached a diameter of up to 50µm, correlating to stem cell proliferative size capacity.
doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0064752.g001

We have been able to isolate these cells using a simple and efficient method that takes about six hours from the time the fat tissue is harvested,” said Chazenbalk. “This research offers a new and exciting source of fat stem cells with pluripotent characteristics, as well as a new method for quickly isolating them. These cells also appear to be more primitive than the average fat stem cells, making them potentially superior sources for regenerative medicine.”

Embryonic stem cells and induced pluripotent stem cells are the two main sources of pluripotent stem cells. However, both of these stem cells have an uncontrolled capacity for differentiation and proliferation, which leads to the formation of undesirable teratomas, which are benign tumors that can become teratocarcinomas, which are malignant tumors. According to Chazenbalk, little progress has been made in resolving this defect (I think he overstates this).

Muse-AT stem cells were discovered by a research group at Tokohu University in Japan and were isolated from skin and bone marrow rather than fat (see Tsuchiyama K, et al., J Invest Dermatol. 2013 Apr 5. doi: 10.1038/jid.2013.172). The Japanese group showed that Muse-AT stem cells do not form tumors in laboratory animals. The UCLA group was also unable to get Muse-AT stem cells to form tumors in laboratory animals, but more work is necessary to firmly establish that these neither form tumors nor enhance the formation of other tumors already present in the body.

Chazenbalk also thought that Muse-AT stem cells could provide an excellent model system for studying the effects of cellular stress and how cancer cells survive and withstand high levels of cellular stress.

Chazenbalk is understandable excited about his work, but other stem cells scientists remain skeptical that this stem cells population has the plasticity reported or that these cells are as easily isolated as Chazenbalk says.  For a more skeptical take on this paper, see here.