-
[show abstract]
[hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: This study investigated the ability of MnCl(2) as a cellular MRI contrast agent to determine the in vitro viability of human embryonic stem cells (hESC) and human bone marrow stromal cells (hBMSC). Basic MRI parameters including T(1) and T(2) values of MnCl(2)-labeled hESC and hBMSC were measured and viability signal of manganese (Mn(2+))-labeled cells was validated. Furthermore, the biological activity of Ca(2+)-channels was modulated utilizing both Ca(2+)-channel agonist and antagonist to evaluate concomitant signal changes. Metabolic effects of MnCl(2)-labeling were also assessed using assays for cell viability, proliferation, and apoptosis. Finally, in vivo Mn(2+)-guided MRI of the transplanted hESC was successfully achieved and validated by bioluminescence imaging.
Magnetic Resonance in Medicine 07/2009; 62(4):1047-54. · 2.96 Impact Factor
-
Soojung Shin,
Yu Sun,
Ying Liu,
Hanita Khaner,
Smita Svant,
Jingli Cai,
Qin Xiu Xu,
Bruce P Davidson,
Steven L Stice, Alan K Smith,
Steven A Goldman,
Benjamin E Reubinoff,
Ming Zhan,
Mahendra S Rao,
Jonathan D Chesnut
[show abstract]
[hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Multipotent neural stem cells (NSC) have been derived from human embryonic stem cells (hESC) as well as isolated from fetal tissues. However, there have been few exclusive markers of NSC identified to date, and the differences between NSC from various sources are poorly understood. Although cells isolated from these two sources share many important characteristics, it is not clear how closely they are related in terms of gene expression. Here, we compare the gene expression profiles of 11 lines of NSC derived from hESC (ES_NSC), four lines of NSC isolated from fetus (F_NSC), and two lines of restricted progenitors in order to characterize these cell populations and identify differences between NSC derived from these two sources. We showed that ES_NSC were clustered together with high transcriptional similarities but were distinguished from F_NSC, oligodendrocyte precursor cells, and astrocyte precursor cells. There were 17 genes expressed in both ES_NSC and F_NSC whose expression was not identified in restricted neural progenitors. Furthermore, the major differences between ES_NSC and F_NSC were mostly observed in genes related to the key neural differentiation pathways. Here, we show that comparison of global gene expression profiles of ES_NSC, F_NSC, and restricted neural progenitor cells makes it possible to identify some of the common characteristics of NSC and differences between similar stem cell populations derived from hESCs or isolated from fetal tissue. Disclosure of potential conflicts of interest is found at the end of this article.
Stem Cells 06/2007; 25(5):1298-306. · 7.78 Impact Factor
-
Marina Bibikova,
Eugene Chudin,
Bonnie Wu,
Lixin Zhou,
Eliza Wickham Garcia,
Ying Liu,
Soojung Shin,
Todd W Plaia,
Jonathan M Auerbach,
Dan E Arking, [......],
Johan Hyllner,
Padmavathy Vanguri,
Smita Savant-Bhonsale, Alan K Smith,
Aravinda Chakravarti,
Anirban Maitra,
Mahendra Rao,
David L Barker,
Jeanne F Loring,
Jian-Bing Fan
[show abstract]
[hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Human embryonic stem (hES) cells originate during an embryonic period of active epigenetic remodeling. DNA methylation patterns are likely to be critical for their self-renewal and pluripotence. We compared the DNA methylation status of 1536 CpG sites (from 371 genes) in 14 independently isolated hES cell lines with five other cell types: 24 cancer cell lines, four adult stem cell populations, four lymphoblastoid cell lines, five normal human tissues, and an embryonal carcinoma cell line. We found that the DNA methylation profile clearly distinguished the hES cells from all of the other cell types. A subset of 49 CpG sites from 40 genes contributed most to the differences among cell types. Another set of 25 sites from 23 genes distinguished hES cells from normal differentiated cells and can be used as biomarkers to monitor differentiation. Our results indicate that hES cells have a unique epigenetic signature that may contribute to their developmental potential.
Genome Research 10/2006; 16(9):1075-83. · 13.61 Impact Factor
