Characterization of liver function in transdifferentiated hepatocytes

Centre for Regenerative Medicine, Department of Biology and Biochemistry, University of Bath, Claverton Down, Bath, United Kingdom.
Journal of Cellular Physiology (Impact Factor: 3.87). 01/2006; 206(1):147-59. DOI: 10.1002/jcp.20438
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT We previously demonstrated that dexamethasone (Dex) induces the transdifferentiation (or conversion) of the pancreatic progenitor cell line AR42J-B13 (B13) to hepatocytes based on the expression of liver proteins. We have extended our original observations to determine: (1) the effects of Dex on pancreatic gene expression; (2) the time course of expression of liver enriched transcription factors during conversion from pancreatic to hepatic phenotype; (3) the functional potential of transdifferentiated hepatocytes; (4) the proliferative capacity of transdifferentiated hepatocytes; and (5) whether ectopic expression of transcription factors can induce the hepatic phenotype in pancreatic B13 cells. The results were as follows. The B13 cell markers amylase, synaptophysin, and neurofilament were lost in transdifferentiated hepatocytes compared to control cells and the liver enriched transcription factors C/EBPbeta and C/EBPalpha were induced first, followed by HNF4alpha and then RXRalpha. Using RT-PCR analysis and immunolocalisation studies, we detected hepatic markers (e.g., apolipoprotein B) in Dex-treated cells. In transdifferentiated hepatocytes albumin was secreted, insulin stimulated lipid deposition and ciprofibrate enhanced the expression of catalase. Proliferation of transdifferentiated hepatocytes is promoted in the presence of HGF and NEAA as indicated by the co-expression of the cell cycle markers cyclin D and phosphohistone H3 with liver proteins. Lastly, ectopic expression of C/EBPalpha or C/EBPbeta in AR42J-B13 cells was sufficient to induce transdifferentiation, based on nuclear localization of HNF4alpha and induction of UDP-glucuronosyltransferase expression. These results indicate that the B13 progenitor cell model is suitable for studying liver function and for understanding the molecular and cellular events that occur during transdifferentiation.

Download full-text


Available from: Chia-Ning Shen, Jan 27, 2015
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Hepatic progenitor cells are local stem cells in the liver and they can be differentiated into either hepatocytes or cholangiocytes depending on different stimulations. These stimulations include extracellular growth factors and intracellular transcription factors. Bone morphogenetic protein 4 (BMP4) is a member of transforming growth factor beta (TGF-beta) superfamily and was first identified as growth factor to induce ectopic bone formation from skeletal muscle. Role of BMP4 in the liver is still unclear especially its role in hepatic progenitor cells (HPCs) differentiation. BMP4 was used to stimulate rat HPCs (WB-F344 cells) and differentiation of WB-F344 cells was investigated by reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) and Western blot analysis. Both adenovirus delivered BMP4 and recombinant BMP4 were able to induce expression of hepatocyte markers such as albumin, TAT-1, and G6Pase but not cholangiocyte markers such as beta4-integrin and CK19. BMP4 induced differentiation of WB-F344 cells toward hepatocytes was mediated by increase in phosphorylation of Smad1 and ERK1/2. Moreover, BMP4 also stimulated expression of transcription factor--C/EBP-alpha, which involved in differentiation of WB-F344 cells toward hepatocytes. BMP4 is able to stimulate WB-F344 cells differentiation toward hepatocyte lineage.
    Journal of Cellular Physiology 07/2009; 220(1):72-81. DOI:10.1002/jcp.21731
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Workshop participants agreed that genotoxicity tests in mammalian cells in vitro produce a remarkably high and unacceptable occurrence of irrelevant positive results (e.g. when compared with rodent carcinogenicity). As reported in several recent reviews, the rate of irrelevant positives (i.e. low specificity) for some studies using in vitro methods (when compared to this "gold standard") means that an increased number of test articles are subjected to additional in vivo genotoxicity testing, in many cases before, e.g. the efficacy (in the case of pharmaceuticals) of the compound has been evaluated. If in vitro tests were more predictive for in vivo genotoxicity and carcinogenicity (i.e. fewer false positives) then there would be a significant reduction in the number of animals used. Beyond animal (or human) carcinogenicity as the "gold standard", it is acknowledged that genotoxicity tests provide much information about cellular behaviour, cell division processes and cellular fate to a (geno)toxic insult. Since the disease impact of these effects is seldom known, and a verification of relevant toxicity is normally also the subject of (sub)chronic animal studies, the prediction of in vivo relevant results from in vitro genotoxicity tests is also important for aspects that may not have a direct impact on carcinogenesis as the ultimate endpoint of concern. In order to address the high rate of in vitro false positive results, a 2-day workshop was held at the European Centre for the Validation of Alternative Methods (ECVAM), Ispra, Italy in April 2006. More than 20 genotoxicity experts from academia, government and industry were invited to review data from the currently available cell systems, to discuss whether there exist cells and test systems that have a reduced tendency to false positive results, to review potential modifications to existing protocols and cell systems that might result in improved specificity, and to review the performance of some new test systems that show promise of improved specificity without sacrificing sensitivity. It was concluded that better guidance on the likely mechanisms resulting in positive results that are not biologically relevant for human health, and how to obtain evidence for those mechanisms, is needed both for practitioners and regulatory reviewers. Participants discussed the fact that cell lines commonly used for genotoxicity testing have a number of deficiencies that may contribute to the high false positive rate. These include, amongst others, lack of normal metabolism leading to reliance on exogenous metabolic activation systems (e.g. Aroclor-induced rat S9), impaired p53 function and altered DNA repair capability. The high concentrations of test chemicals (i.e. 10 mM or 5000 microg/ml, unless precluded by solubility or excessive toxicity) and the high levels of cytotoxicity currently required in mammalian cell genotoxicity tests were discussed as further potential sources of false positive results. Even if the goal is to detect carcinogens with short in vitro tests under more or less acute conditions, it does not seem logical to exceed the capabilities of cellular metabolic turnover, activation and defence processes. The concept of "promiscuous activation" was discussed. For numerous mutagens, the decisive in vivo enzymes are missing in vitro. However, if the substrate concentration is increased sufficiently, some other enzymes (that are unimportant in vivo) may take over the activation-leading to the same or a different active metabolite. Since we often do not use the right enzyme systems for positive controls in vitro, we have to rely on their promiscuous activation, i.e. to use excessive concentrations to get an empirical correlation between genotoxicity and carcinogenicity. A thorough review of published and industry data is urgently needed to determine whether the currently required limit concentration of 10mM or 5000 microg/ml, and high levels of cytotoxicity, are necessary for the detection of in vivo genotoxins and DNA-reactive, mutagenic carcinogens. In addition, various measures of cytotoxicity are currently allowable under OECD test guidelines, but there are few comparative data on whether different measures would result in different maximum concentrations for testing. A detailed comparison of cytotoxicity assessment strategies is needed. An assessment of whether test endpoints can be selected that are not intrinsically associated with cytotoxicity, and therefore are less susceptible to artefacts produced by cytotoxicity, should also be undertaken. There was agreement amongst the workshop participants that cell systems which are p53 and DNA-repair proficient, and have defined Phase 1 and Phase 2 metabolism, covering a broad set of enzyme forms, and used within the context of appropriately set limits of concentration and cytotoxicity, offer the best hope for reduced false positives. Whilst there is some evidence that human lymphocytes are less susceptible to false positives than the current rodent cell lines, other cell systems based on HepG2, TK6 and MCL-5 cells, as well as 3D skin models based on primary human keratinocytes also show some promise. Other human cell lines such as HepaRG, and human stem cells (the target for carcinogenicity) have not been used for genotoxicity investigations and should be considered for evaluation. Genetic engineering is also a valuable tool to incorporate missing enzyme systems into target cells. A collaborative research programme is needed to identify, further develop and evaluate new cell systems with appropriate sensitivity but improved specificity. In order to review current data for selection of appropriate top concentrations, measures and levels of cytotoxicity, metabolism, and to be able to improve existing or validate new assay systems, the participants called for the establishment of an expert group to identify the in vivo genotoxins and DNA-reactive, mutagenic carcinogens that we expect our in vitro genotoxicity assays to detect as well as the non-genotoxins and non-carcinogens we expect them not to detect.
    Mutation Research/Fundamental and Molecular Mechanisms of Mutagenesis 04/2007; 628(1):31-55. DOI:10.1016/j.mrgentox.2006.11.008
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: We propose a cascading framework of binary classifiers to extract and combine intra-image and inter-class semantics for image indexing and retrieval. Support vector detectors are first trained on semantic support regions without image segmentation. The reconciled and aggregated detection-based indexes then serve as input for support vector learning of image classifiers to generate class-relative image indexes. During retrieval, similarities based on both indexes are combined to rank images. Query by-example experiments on 2400 heterogeneous consumer photos with 16 semantic queries show that the combined matching approach is better than matching with single index. It also outperformed combined matching of color and texture features by 55% in average precision.
    Pattern Recognition, 2004. ICPR 2004. Proceedings of the 17th International Conference on; 01/2004