Comparison of 2D and 3D neural induction methods for the generation of neural progenitor cells from human induced pluripotent stem cells

Autor: Lajos László, Karl-Heinz Krause, Krisztina Pesti, Abinaya Chandrasekaran, Arpad Mike, Phetcharat Phanthong, Julianna Kobolák, Tamás Bellák, Orsolya Biró, Lone N. Rösingh, Vanessa Jane Hall, Narisorn Kitiyanant, Hasan X. Avci, Andras Dinnyes, Kinga Molnár, Annamária Téglási, Anna Ochalek
Jazyk: angličtina
Rok vydání: 2017
Předmět:
0301 basic medicine
PAX6 Transcription Factor
Neurite
Induced Pluripotent Stem Cells
Cell Culture Techniques
2D-3D neural induction
Cell Culture Techniques/methods
Biology
ddc:616.07
Neural Stem Cells/cytology/metabolism
hiPSC
Cell Line
PAX6 Transcription Factor/genetics/metabolism
Nestin
03 medical and health sciences
SOX1
Neural Stem Cells
Neural induction
Neurosphere
Electron microscopy
Humans
Neural progenitor cells
Induced pluripotent stem cell
lcsh:QH301-705.5
Nestin/genetics/metabolism
SOXB1 Transcription Factors
Induced Pluripotent Stem Cells/cytology/metabolism
Cell Differentiation
Cell Biology
General Medicine
Neural stem cell
Cell biology
Neuroepithelial cell
030104 developmental biology
lcsh:Biology (General)
nervous system
SOXB1 Transcription Factors/genetics/metabolism
Immunology
Patch clamp
Neural development
Developmental Biology
Zdroj: Stem Cell Research, Vol. 25 (2017) pp. 139-151
Stem Cell Research
Chandrasekaran, A, Avci, H, Ochalek, A, Rosingh, L, Molnar, K, Laszlo, L, Bellak, T, Teglasi, A, Pesti, K, Mike, A, Phanthong, P, Biro, O, Hall, V J, Kitiyanant, N, Krause, K-H, Kobolak, J & Dinnyés, A 2017, ' Comparison of 2D and 3D neural induction methods for the generation of neural progenitor cells from human induced pluripotent stem cells ', Stem Cell Research, vol. 25, pp. 139-151 . https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scr.2017.10.010
Stem Cell Research, Vol 25, Iss C, Pp 139-151 (2017)
ISSN: 1873-5061
DOI: 10.1016/j.scr.2017.10.010
Popis: Neural progenitor cells (NPCs) from human induced pluripotent stem cells (hiPSCs) are frequently induced using 3D culture methodologies however, it is unknown whether spheroid-based (3D) neural induction is actually superior to monolayer (2D) neural induction. Our aim was to compare the efficiency of 2D induction with 3D induction method in their ability to generate NPCs, and subsequently neurons and astrocytes. Neural differentiation was analysed at the protein level qualitatively by immunocytochemistry and quantitatively by flow cytometry for NPC (SOX1, PAX6, NESTIN), neuronal (MAP2, TUBB3), cortical layer (TBR1, CUX1) and glial markers (SOX9, GFAP, AQP4). Electron microscopy demonstrated that both methods resulted in morphologically similar neural rosettes. However, quantification of NPCs derived from 3D neural induction exhibited an increase in the number of PAX6/NESTIN double positive cells and the derived neurons exhibited longer neurites. In contrast, 2D neural induction resulted in more SOX1 positive cells. While 2D monolayer induction resulted in slightly less mature neurons, at an early stage of differentiation, the patch clamp analysis failed to reveal any significant differences between the electrophysiological properties between the two induction methods. In conclusion, 3D neural induction increases the yield of PAX6+/NESTIN+ cells and gives rise to neurons with longer neurites, which might be an advantage for the production of forebrain cortical neurons, highlighting the potential of 3D neural induction, independent of iPSCs' genetic background.
Databáze: OpenAIRE