Next Article in Journal / Special Issue
Decellularized Tendon Extracellular Matrix—A Valuable Approach for Tendon Reconstruction?
Previous Article in Journal
Redox Mechanisms in Regulation of Adipocyte Differentiation: Beyond a General Stress Response
Previous Article in Special Issue
Cell and Gene Therapy Approaches for Cardiac Vascularization

Cells 2012, 1(4), 994-1009; doi:10.3390/cells1040994

Review
Human Stem Cells and Articular Cartilage Regeneration
Atsuyuki Inui , Takashi Iwakura and A. Hari Reddi *
Center for Tissue Regeneration and Repair, Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, School of Medicine, University of California Davis, 4635 Second Avenue, Research Building I Room 2000, Sacramento 95817, CA, USA; Email: atsuyukiinui81@gamil.com (A.I.); t_iwakura1978@yahoo.co.jp (T.I.)
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed; Email: ahreddi@ucdavis.edu; Tel.: +1-916-734-5749; Fax: +1-916-752-5750.
Received: 3 September 2012; in revised form: 15 October 2012 / Accepted: 24 October 2012 /
Published: 5 November 2012

Abstract

: The regeneration of articular cartilage damaged due to trauma and posttraumatic osteoarthritis is an unmet medical need. Current approaches to regeneration and tissue engineering of articular cartilage include the use of chondrocytes, stem cells, scaffolds and signals, including morphogens and growth factors. Stem cells, as a source of cells for articular cartilage regeneration, are a critical factor for articular cartilage regeneration. This is because articular cartilage tissue has a low cell turnover and does not heal spontaneously. Adult stem cells have been isolated from various tissues, such as bone marrow, adipose, synovial tissue, muscle and periosteum. Signals of the transforming growth factor beta superfamily play critical roles in chondrogenesis. However, adult stem cells derived from various tissues tend to differ in their chondrogenic potential. Pluripotent stem cells have unlimited proliferative capacity compared to adult stem cells. Chondrogenesis from embryonic stem (ES) cells has been studied for more than a decade. However, establishment of ES cells requires embryos and leads to ethical issues for clinical applications. Induced pluripotent stem (iPS) cells are generated by cellular reprogramming of adult cells by transcription factors. Although iPS cells have chondrogenic potential, optimization, generation and differentiation toward articular chondrocytes are currently under intense investigation.
Keywords:
stem cells; articular cartilage; growth factors

1. Introduction

Articular cartilage (AC) is an avascular tissue, which consists of abundant extracellular matrix. AC does not heal spontaneously under physiological circumstances due to innate avascularity, low cellularity and low cell turnover [1] that can lead to progression of osteoarthritis (OA). OA is the most common musculoskeletal disease in the elderly and could become the fourth leading cause of disability by the year 2020 [2]. So far, there are limited options for OA treatment, such as pharmaceutical interventions and joint replacement surgery [3]. In terms of AC regeneration, many procedures, such as subchondral drilling, abrasion arthroplasty, osteochondral grafts and transplantation of mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) or chondrocytes, have been developed [4,5,6,7,8]. Differentiation toward cartilage was induced by morphogens, such as transforming growth factor (TGF)-β superfamily and members of the bone morphogenetic protein (BMP) family. The resulting differentiated chondrocytes expressed cartilage specific markers, such as type II collagen and Aggrecan. Currently, autologous chondrocyte transplantation is widely used for AC regeneration in clinic. However, donor site morbidity is a challenge [9]. Use of stem cells in combination with growth factors and scaffolds is another option for AC regeneration [1]. In the present review, we discuss chondrogenesis using stem cells and morphogenetic proteins for potential applications in regeneration of AC.

2. Stem Cells and Chondrogenesis

2.1. Adult Stem Cells

Stem cells are mainly classified into two kinds of cells: somatic stem cells and pluripotent stem cells. Somatic stem cells reside in various tissues or organs and have shown multipotency to regenerate damaged tissues [10]. MSCs have been studied intensively in the field of orthopedic research [11]. These cells are characterized as plastic-adherent, fibroblastic spindle-shaped, multipotent stem cells and can differentiate into bone, cartilage and adipose tissue [12]. Also, MSCs are distinguished from hematopoietic cells by being negative for hematopoietic markers such as CD14, CD34 and CD45, but expressing CD29, CD44, CD73 (SH3 and 4), CD90, CD105 (SH2) and CD166 [12,13]. During in vitro culture conditions, MSCs are known to change their surface marker expression [14]. MSCs have been isolated from various tissues, such as bone marrow, adipose, synovial tissue, muscle and periosteum [15]. These cell populations are heterogeneous and not clonal populations [14], and MSCs derived from various tissues tend to differ in their expansion capacity and differentiation ability to chondrocytes [16] (Table 1).

Fetal bovine serum (FBS) is widely added to culture medium to expand the populations [17]. However, the potential risk of zoonotic infection or immunogenic reaction is an ever-present danger and a drawback. To reduce these risks, the use of serum free MSC culture media has been developed [18,19].

2.1.1. Bone Marrow-derived MSCs (BMMSCs)

In the 1960s, the evidence that bone marrow (BM) includes mesenchymal cells that can generate connective tissue-forming cells was provided by the pioneering work of Friedenstein [20]. A number of investigators extended these observations and confirmed that the cells identified by Frirdenstein were multipotent and could differentiate into osteoblasts, chondrocytes and adipocytes [17,21,22,23,24]. In 1999, Pittenger et al. demonstrated that individual human MSCs, which form colonies during their expansion, could retain their multilineage potential [12].The standard methods for the isolation of BMMSCs is density gradient centrifugation method [17]. Using this method, nucleated cells are separated from nonnucleated red blood cells, and thereafter, MSCs are allowed to attach to a plastic culture dish [24]. It is noteworthy that BMMSCs are most widely studied to induce chondrogenesis in three-dimensional cultures. To date, the most promising growth factors for chondrogenesis of BMMSCs are TGF-β superfamily, such as TGF-β1, -β2 and -β3, and members of the BMP family, such as BMP-2, -6 or -7 [12,25,26,27,28,29,30,31,32,33,34]. While TGF-β1 was first used to enhance chondrogenesis [25,26], Barry et al. reported that the presence of TGF-β2 or -β3 could also induce chondrogenic differentiation [28]. When they were used in combination of BMP-2 or -6 with TGF-β3, higher collagen II expression was observed than using a single growth factor [31,32]. Although BMMSCs are widely used clinically as a stem cell source [35,36], aspiration of BM is an invasive and painful procedure, often requiring anesthesia and often with attendant morbidity [37].

2.1.2. Adipose Tissue-Derived MSCs (ATMSCs)

In 2001, Zuk et al. identified ATMSCs from lipoaspirates, which have multilineage potential to differentiate into adipogenic, chondrogenic, myogenic and osteogenic cells [38]. Following studies also showed the multipotentiality of ATMSCs [39,40]. However, recent studies demonstrated that ATMSCs do not produce results comparable with those of BMMSCs when treated with a variety of growth factors, including TGF-β1, -β2, -β3, BMP-2, -6, -7 or IGF-1 [38,41,42,43,44]. While a combination of BMP-2 and TGF-β1 [45,46] or a combination of BMP-7 and TGF-β2 [44] amplified the chondrogenic potential by more than a single factor alone, combinations of BMP-2, -4 or -7 with TGF-β3 did not show synergetic effects [47]. Moreover, several reports showed that the chondrogenic potential of ATMSCs is not as extensive as that of BMSCs [33,45,48,49]. Despite their inferior chondrogenic potential, interest has increased in the use of ATMSCs, because they are relatively abundant and harvesting techniques of fat tissue might be less invasive than that of BM [33].

Table Table 1. In vitro chondrogenesis using adult human stem cells.

Click here to display table

Table 1. In vitro chondrogenesis using adult human stem cells.
Tissue SourceIsolation MethodCulture SystemGrowth Factors
Bone Marrow [26]Precoll PelletTGF-β1
Bone Marrow [12,27]Precoll PelletTGF-β3
Bone Marrow [28]Precoll PelletTGF-β1, 2, 3
Bone Marrow [29]Ficoll→CD105(+)cellsAlginate beadsBMP-2, GDF-2
Bone Marrow [30,34]FicollPelletTGF-β3, BMP-6
Bone Marrow [31]Precoll PelletTGF-β3, BMP-2
Bone Marrow [32]N/APelletTGF-β3, BMP-2, IGF-1
Adipose [38]Collagenase→Attached cellsMicromassTGF-β1
Adipose [41]Collagenase→Attached cellsAlginate BeadsTGF-β1
Adipose [42]Collagenase→Attached cellsPelletTGF-β2, IGF-1
Adipose [43]Collagenase→Attached cellsAlginate BeadsTGF-β1, 3, BMP-6, IGF-1
Adipose [49]Collagenase→Attached cellsPelletTGF-β3
Adipose [44]Collagenase→Attached cellsPelletTGF-β2, BMP-2, 6, 7
Syovium [50]Collagenase→Attached cellsMicromassTGF-β1
Syovium [16]Collagenase→Attached cellsPellet, collagen gelTGF-β3, BMP-2
Synovium [55]Collagenase→Attached cellsPelletTGF-β3, BMP-2, IGF-1, FGF-2, Retinoic Acid
Periosteum [50]Collagenase→Attached cellsMicromassTGF-β1, BMP2, 4, 7, GDF-5
Periosteum [16]Collagenase→Attached cellsPelletTGF-β3, BMP-2
Muscle [63]Trypsin→Attached cellsPelletTGF-β1
Muscle [16]Collagenase→Attached cellsPelletTGF-β3, BMP-2
Muscle [64]CD56+34+144+ cellsPelletTGF-β3, BMP-4
Traumatized Muscle [65]Collagenase→Attached cellsPelletTGF-β3

2.1.3. Synovium-Derived MSCs (SMSCs)

MSCs from human synovial membrane tissue, known as synovial-derived MSCs, were successfully isolated by De Bari et al. in 2001 [50]. Synovial membrane contains two types of cells: macrophage-like cells and fibroblast-like cells; the fibroblast-like cells are believed to be the source of MSCs [51]. Chondrogenesis from SMSCs has been reported by using growth factors such as TGF-β1, -β3 and BMP-2, -7, similar to other adult stem cells [16,52,53,54]. And combination of BMP-2 and TGF-β3 showed higher chondrogenic potential [55]. The fact that both synovium and cartilage are proven to originate from a common pool of progenitor cells [56] suggests that SMSCs may already possess a strong bias toward the production of cartilage tissue. In fact, several studies showed that SMSCs have greater chondrogenic potential than BMMSCs [16,51,57]. Also, it has been reported that multipotent capacity of SMSCs is not influenced by donor age or cell passages, and SMSCs have less senescence and great proliferation ability [16,50]. Clinically, arthroscopic surgery is necessary to obtain synovium, but the procedure is less invasive than harvesting BM. Thus, SMSCs could be an attractive and readily accessible cell source for cartilage regeneration.

2.1.4. Periosteum-Derived MSCs (PMSCs)

Periosteum is at the boundary between the bone and the surrounding soft tissues and contains multiple cell types that are thought to function as progenitor cells. Nakahara et al. reported in vivo chondrogenic potential of human PMSCs in 1991 [58]. It was not until 2006 that mesenchymal multipotency of adult human periosteal cells was demonstrated by single-cell lineage analysis [59]. They reported that TGF-β1 induced chondrogenesis consistently, but BMP-2, -4, -7 and GDF-5 did not. In the comparative analysis, the chondrogenic ability of PMSCs by treatment with TGF-β3 and BMP-2 was equal to that of BMMSCs [16]. However, harvesting periosteum is invasive and retains a high probability of donor-site morbidity.

2.1.5. Muscle-Derived Stem Cells (MDSCs)

The existence of progenitor cells in the skeletal muscle has been long postulated for a long time, based on the evidence that bone and cartilage formation was observed within the muscle tissue after implantation of demineralized bone matrix [60,61]. The origin of MDSC is thought to be a subpopulation of endothelial cells or pericytes associated with muscle capillaries [62]. Human MDSCs with multilineage potential were first reported by Mastrogiacomo in 2005 [63]. Treatment with TGF-β1 showed chondrogenic differentiation of human MDSCs [63]. Afterward, several groups reported the chondrogenic differentiation by utilizing growth factors including TGF-β1, -β3 or BMP-2, -4 [16,63,64]. Chondrogenic potential of MDSCs is controversial compared to BMMSCs. Whereas MDSCs from normal muscle showed lower chondrogenic potential compared to other MSCs [16], traumatized muscle derived MSCs exhibited similar phenotype and chondrogenic potential [65].

2.2. Pluripotent Stem Cells

The heterogeneity of MSC populations isolated from different tissues makes it difficult to determine the most appropriate tissue source for MSCs [66]. Somatic stem cells have limited in vitro proliferative potential, and their proliferative capacity and synthetic capacity declines with age [67,68], which restricts the use of MSCs in clinical application. On the other hand, pluripotent stem cells show unlimited proliferative capacity and are attractive for researchers as a better source of stem cells for tissue regeneration [2,66] (Table 2).

Table Table 2. In vitro chondrogenesis using human ES and iPScells.

Click here to display table

Table 2. In vitro chondrogenesis using human ES and iPScells.
Tissue Source (Cell line )MSC differentiation MethodCulture SystemGrowth Factors
ES cell (H9) [78]EB 5days→EB digestion & platingCo-culture with chondrocyteNone
ES cell (BG02) [87]EB 10days→EB digestion & platingPellet, PEDGA hydrogelTGF-β1, BMP-2
ES cell (BG02) [79]ES colony (cultured with chondrocyte ) derived cellsPellet, PEDGA hydrogelTGF-β1
ES cell (H1, H9) [115]EB 10days→ EB derived cell with, w/o EB digestionMicromassBMP-2
ES cell (BG01, 02) [84]EB 5days→ EB derived cell w/o EB digestionSelf assemblyTGF-β1
ES cell (BG01V) [116]EB 21days →EB dissociationSelf assemblyTGF-β1, 3, BMP-2, IGF-1
ES cell (H9) [85]EB 5days→ EB digestion & platingES colony digestion & platingMicromassTGF-β1, SB431542
ES cell (H9) [75]ES colony digestion & platingPelletTGF-β1, BMP-7
ES cell (SA167, AS034, AS034.1) [80]ES colony (cultured with chondrocyte ) derived cellsPellet, Agarose gelTGF-β3
ES cell (BG01V) [88]EB 21days →EB digestion & self assemblySelf assembly in Agarose gelTGF-β1
ES cell (H9) [83]EB 5days →EB micromass 21days→digestion & platingPelletTGF-β1, BMP-2
ES cell (H9) [77]EB 5days→ EB digestion & platingES colony digestion & platingPelletTGF-β1, BMP-2
ES cell (H9, BG01V) [117]EB 7, 21, 42days→ EB digestion & self assemblySelf assembly in Agarose gelNone
ES cell (H9) [81]EB 21daysEB in Agarose gel co-culture with chondrocyteTGF-β1, BMP-2, 4, 6, PDGFbb, Shh
ES cell (H9) [86]EB 21days in normoxia / hypoxiaAgarose gelNone
ES cell (H9) [118]Co-culture with mouse stoma cell followed by CD34+/CD73- sortingPelletTGF-β1
ES cell (HUES3, ZJUhES-1) [119]ES colony dissociation with Y-27632 (ROCK inhibitor)MonolayerTGF-β3
ES cell (H9) [82]EB 5days →EB micromass 21days→digestion & platingPellet, hyaluronan hydrogelTGF-β1, BMP-2, 7, GDF-5, IGF-1
ES cell (HUES1,7,8) [76]Direct differentiation from ES colonyMonolayerWnt3a, ActivinA, FGF-2, BMP-4, Follostatin, GDF-5, Neurotrophin-4
iPS (fibroblast) [120]EB 7days→EB derived cells w/o EB digestionPelletTGF-β3
iPS (HDFa-YK26) [114]iPS colony dissociation with Y-27632 (ROCK inhibitor)PelletTGF-β1
iPS (OA chondrocyte) [2]OA chondrocyte derived iPS transfected with TGF-β1Co- culture with normal articular chondrocyteNone
iPS (OA synovial cell) [66]EB 5days→EB derived cells with EB digestionPellet, Agarose gelBMP-2

2.2.1. Embryonic Stem (ES) Cells

The most well-known pluripotent stem cells are ES cells first reported in the mouse in 1981 and in humans in 1998 [69,70,71]. ES cells are derived from the inner cell mass of a blastocyst. The ability of ES cells to form cartilage is well known, because they can form teratoma containing cartilage when they are transplanted into nude mice [72]. However, the in vitro chondrogenesis condition is yet to be determined. As the first step towards differentiation, most ES cell culture protocols follow embryoid bodies (EBs) formation [72]. EBs are free-floating aggregates of ES cells and can differentiate at random into lineages of all three germ layers—endoderm, mesoderm and ectoderm. These EBs, or single cells derived from these EBs, are used in the subsequent differentiation steps. In the first report of in vitro chondrogenesis from mouse ES cells, an EB culture system was used. The cartilage like regions displayed various stages of chondrogenesis [73]. Though EB method is convenient for inducing differentiation by the interaction of the cells within the EBs, this method possesses certain limitations. First, it is difficult to dissect the differentiation mechanisms by using single cells. In addition, it is difficult to control the size or number of EBs [74]. Meanwhile, chondrogenesis without EB formation has been reported using co-culture methods or several combinations of growth factors [75,76,77]. Vats et al. first reported chondrogenesis of human ES cells using a co-culture method with articular chondrocytes [78]. Co-culture methods were also reported in presence of TGF-β1 or -β3 [79,80]. However, the effects of growth factors are hardly analyzed in the co-culture method. Several growth factors, such as, FGFs, IGF, PDGF and Wnt, have been used for ES cell chondrogenesis without co-culture [72,81,82]. As studied in adult stem cell chondrogenesis, TGF-β1 and -β3 play main roles in ES cell chondrogenesis. BMP-2, -4, -6 and -7 also have been used [76,77,82], and combinations of TGF-β1 and BMPs enhanced the chondrogenic differentiation [75,81,83]. However, these are more complex, as the observed results are dependent on the state of differentiation of the progenitor/stem cells. Although TGF-β1 increased chondrogenesis in differentiated ES derived cells [79,80,84], it inhibited chondrogenesis of undifferentiated EBs [85]. Optimizing culture environment is another approach for ES cell chondrogenesis; a hypoxia condition could enhance chondrogenesis [86], and the culture of EB derived cells in the gel could mimic physiological condition for chondrogenesis [81,87,88]. Although ES cells are an attractive cell source for regenerative medicine, establishment of ES cell lines involves embryo destruction and is overshadowed by ethical concerns for clinical application.

2.2.2. Induced Pluripotent Stem (iPS) Cells

The truly exciting work in 2006 by Takahashi and Yamanaka selected 24 candidate genes that are highly expressed in ES cells. They introduced candidate genes into mouse fibroblasts by retrovirus-mediated transfections and then discovered a minimal combination of four factors (Oct3/4, Sox2, c-Myc and Klf4) could induce the cells to have similar properties as the ES cells. These cells have been christened as induced pluripotent stem (iPS) cells [89]. In 2007, generation of human iPS cells was reported using the same factors [90] or a set of four factors (Oct4, Sox2, Nanog, Lin28) [91]. In addition to mouse and human iPS cells, iPS cells from other species, such as monkey, rat, pig and equine, have already been established [92,93,94,95]. Important features of iPS cells are their unlimited proliferation in vitro , while maintaining their pluripotency and their ability of being induced by patient-specific cells [96]. Thus, iPS cells can supply disease or patient specific stem cells for transplantation therapy, drug discovery and oncology or disease pathogenesis research with minimal ethical concerns as compared to ES cells. The original iPS cells exhibit numerous transgene integrations due to retrovirus transfection and tumorigenic risk due to use of c-Myc. To reduce these risks, establishment of iPS cells without c-Myc [97] or using lentivirus, adenovirus or proteins [98,99,100] with a combination of small molecules, which enhance a reprogramming efficiency [101,102], have been reported. Continuous progress in stem cell research has been accomplished by their culture technique. ES cells and iPS cells used to be maintained on mouse-derived feeder cells with animal-derived serum medium. Although the feeder cells are inactivated via radiation or mitomycin, the potential risk of contamination of active mouse fibroblast or zoonotic infection cannot be denied. To avoid these risks, feeder cell- and serum-free culture were established for ES cells [103,104] and applied to iPS cell culture [105,106]. Thus, these technical refinements might lead to safer and more efficient clinical use of iPS cells.

Treatments of blood, neural and cardiovascular disease models with iPS cell transplantation have already been reported [107,108,109,110]. Compared to these fields, the research for AC regeneration using iPS cells has just begun. Teramura et al. reported mouse iPS-EB derived cells expressed surface markers similar to MSCs. These cells could differentiate toward cartilage using TGFβ-3 and BMP-2 [111]. Treatment of EBs with all trans-retinoic acid followed by TGFβ-3 and BMP-2 could also induce chondrogenesis [112]. Regarding human iPS cells, neural stem-cell-derived iPS cell showed chondrogenic potential after EB formation [113]. While in these reports the EB formation method was used, Liu et al. reported MSC derivation and chondrogenesis from human iPS cells without EB formation, culturing on thin type I collagen coated plates in presence of ROCK inhibitor Y-27632 [114]. In terms of disease-specific iPS cells, human OA chondrocyte-derived iPS cells have been established. They showed chondrogenic potential using EB formation or co-culture with chondrocytes [2,66] that demonstrated a potential as an alternative cell source for degenerative disease treatment.

3. Conclusions

Chondrogenesis using different sources of stem cells has been investigated for several years. However, there are still lingering questions and challenges. Tissue specific MSCs are widely studied; however, their reactions to growth factors vary from tissue to tissue. Even though adult stem cells are isolated from the same tissue, their proliferative rate or differentiation potential vary from patient to patient. Thus, there is still uncertainty about the MSC characteristics. Since these adult stem cells are heterogeneous populations, several surface markers can be used to sort these populations. Standardizing cell isolation and sorting might be useful to analyze the variation between tissue specific stem cells or between patients. ES cells are more proliferative compared to adult stem cells. However, their high proliferative rates have potential oncogenic concerns after transplantation into the recipients. In conclusion, the analysis and optimization of morphogens, such as BMPs and growth factors at each differentiation step, are key to the successful AC regeneration using stem cells.

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References and Notes

  1. Heng, B.C.; Cao, T.; Lee, E.H. Directing stem cell differentiation into the chondrogenic lineage in vitro . Stem Cells 2004, 22, 1152–1167. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Wei, Y.; Zeng, W.; Wan, R.; Wang, J.; Zhou, Q.; Qiu, S.; Singh, S.R. Chondrogenic differentiation of induced pluripotent stem cells from osteoarthritic chondrocytes in alginate matrix. Eur. Cell. Mater. 2012, 23, 1–12. [Google Scholar]
  3. Lohmander, L.S.; Roos, E.M. Clinical update: Treating osteoarthritis. Lancet 2007, 370, 2082–2084. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Smith, G.D.; Knutsen, G.; Richardson, J.B. A clinical review of cartilage repair techniques. J. Bone Joint. Surg. Br. 2005, 87, 445–449. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Okamoto, Y.; Nakagawa, Y.; Maekawa, M.; Kobayashi, M.; Nakamura, T. Osteochondral grafting for treatment of a massive chondral defect in the knee of a young adult with anterior cruciate ligament deficit. Arthroscopy 2007, 1024, e1021–e1024. [Google Scholar]
  6. Miniaci, A.; Tytherleigh-Strong, G. Fixation of unstable osteochondritis dissecans lesions of the knee using arthroscopic autogenous osteochondral grafting (mosaicplasty). Arthroscopy 2007, 23, 845–851. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Frenkel, S.R.; Bradica, G.; Brekke, J.H.; Goldman, S.M.; Ieska, K.; Issack, P.; Bong, M.R.; Tian, H.; Gokhale, J.; Coutts, R.D.; et al. Regeneration of articular cartilage-evaluation of osteochondral defect repair in the rabbit using multiphasic implants. Osteoarthr. Cartil. 2005, 13, 798–807. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Ebert, J.R.; Fallon, M.; Ackland, T.R.; Wood, D.J.; Janes, G.C. Arthroscopic Matrix-Induced Autologous Chondrocyte Implantation: 2-Year Outcomes. Arthroscopy 2012, 28, 952–964. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Matricali, G.A.; Dereymaeker, G.P.; Luyten, F.P. Donor site morbidity after articular cartilage repair procedures: A review. Acta Orthop. Belg. 2010, 76, 669–674. [Google Scholar]
  10. Vats, A.; Bielby, R.C.; Tolley, N.S.; Nerem, R.; Polak, J.M. Stem Cells Lancet. 2005, 366, 592–602.
  11. Jorgensen, C.; Noel, D. Mesenchymal stem cells in osteoarticular diseases. Regen. Med. 2011, 6, 44–51. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Pittenger, M.F.; Mackay, A.M.; Beck, S.C.; Jaiswal, R.K.; Douglas, R.; Mosca, J.D.; Moorman, M.A.; Simonetti, D.W.; Craig, S.; Marshak, D.R. Multilineage potential of adult human mesenchymal stem cells. Science 1999, 284, 143–147. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Dominici, M.; Le Blanc, K.; Mueller, I.; Slaper-Cortenbach, I.; Marini, F.; Krause, D.; Deans, R.; Keating, A.; Prockop, D.; Horwitz, E. Minimal criteria for defining multipotent mesenchymal stromal cells. The International Society for Cellular Therapy position statement. Cytotherapy 2006, 8, 315–317. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Kaiser, S.; Hackanson, B.; Follo, M.; Mehlhorn, A.; Geiger, K.; Ihorst, G.; Kapp, U. BM cells giving rise to MSC in culture have a heterogeneous CD34 and CD45 phenotype. Cytotherapy 2007, 9, 439–450. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Jung, Y.; Bauer, G.; Nolta, J.A. Concise review: Induced pluripotent stem cell-derived mesenchymal stem cells: progress toward safe clinical products. Stem Cells 2012, 30, 42–47. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Sakaguchi, Y.; Sekiya, I.; Yagishita, K.; Muneta, T. Comparison of human stem cells derived from various mesenchymal tissues: Superiority of synovium as a cell source. Arthritis. Rheum. 2005, 52, 2521–2529. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Haynesworth, S.E.; Goshima, J.; Goldberg, V.M.; Caplan, A.I. Characterization of cells with osteogenic potential from human marrow. Bone 1992, 13, 81–88. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Agata, H.; Watanabe, N.; Ishii, Y.; Kubo, N.; Ohshima, S.; Yamazaki, M.; Tojo, A.; Kagami, H. Feasibility and efficacy of bone tissue engineering using human bone marrow stromal cells cultivated in serum-free conditions. Biochem. Biophys. Res. Commun. 2009, 382, 353–358. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Chase, L.G.; Lakshmipathy, U.; Solchaga, L.A.; Rao, M.S.; Vemuri, M.C. A novel serum-free medium for the expansion of human mesenchymal stem cells. Stem Cell Res. Ther. 2010, 1, 8. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Friedenstein, A.J.; Piatetzky, S.I.I.; Petrakova, K.V. Osteogenesis in transplants of bone marrow cells. J. Embryol. Exp. Morphol. 1966, 16, 381–390. [Google Scholar]
  21. Ashton, B.A.; Allen, T.D.; Howlett, C.R.; Eaglesom, C.C.; Hattori, A.; Owen, M. Formation of bone and cartilage by marrow stromal cells in diffusion chambers in vivo. Clin. Orthop. Relat. Res. 1980, 294–307. [Google Scholar]
  22. Bab, I.; Passi-Even, L.; Gazit, D.; Sekeles, E.; Ashton, B.A.; Peylan-Ramu, N.; Ziv, I.; Ulmansky, M. Osteogenesis in in vivo diffusion chamber cultures of human marrow cells. Bone Miner. 1988, 4, 373–386. [Google Scholar]
  23. Caplan, A.I. Mesenchymal stem cells. J. Orthop. Res. 1991, 9, 641–650. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Prockop, D.J. Marrow stromal cells as stem cells for nonhematopoietic tissues. Science 1997, 276, 71–74. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Johnstone, B.; Hering, T.M.; Caplan, A.I.; Goldberg, V.M.; Yoo, J.U. In vitro chondrogenesis of bone marrow-derived mesenchymal progenitor cells. Exp. Cell Res. 1998, 238, 265–272. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Yoo, J.U.; Barthel, T.S.; Nishimura, K.; Solchaga, L.; Caplan, A.I.; Goldberg, V.M.; Johnstone, B. The chondrogenic potential of human bone-marrow-derived mesenchymal progenitor cells. J. Bone Joint. Surg. Am. 1998, 80, 1745–1757. [Google Scholar]
  27. Mackay, A.M.; Beck, S.C.; Murphy, J.M.; Barry, F.P.; Chichester, C.O.; Pittenger, M.F. Chondrogenic differentiation of cultured human mesenchymal stem cells from marrow. Tissue Eng. 1998, 4, 415–428. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Barry, F.; Boynton, R.E.; Liu, B.; Murphy, J.M. Chondrogenic differentiation of mesenchymal stem cells from bone marrow: Differentiation-dependent gene expression of matrix components. Exp. Cell Res. 2001, 268, 189–200. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Majumdar, M.K.; Wang, E.; Morris, E.A. BMP-2 and BMP-9 promotes chondrogenic differentiation of human multipotential mesenchymal cells and overcomes the inhibitory effect of IL-1. J. Cell Physiol. 2001, 189, 275–284. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Sekiya, I.; Colter, D.C.; Prockop, D.J. BMP-6 enhances chondrogenesis in a subpopulation of human marrow stromal cells. Biochem. Biophys. Res. Commun. 2001, 284, 411–418. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Schmitt, B.; Ringe, J.; Haupl, T.; Notter, M.; Manz, R.; Burmester, G.R.; Sittinger, M.; Kaps, C. BMP2 initiates chondrogenic lineage development of adult human mesenchymal stem cells in high-density culture. Differentiation 2003, 71, 567–577. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Indrawattana, N.; Chen, G.; Tadokoro, M.; Shann, L.H.; Ohgushi, H.; Tateishi, T.; Tanaka, J.; Bunyaratvej, A. Growth factor combination for chondrogenic induction from human mesenchymal stem cell. Biochem. Biophys. Res. Commun. 2004, 320, 914–919. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Puetzer, J.L.; Petitte, J.N.; Loboa, E.G. Comparative review of growth factors for induction of three-dimensional in vitro chondrogenesis in human mesenchymal stem cells isolated from bone marrow and adipose tissue. Tissue Eng. Part B Rev. 2010, 16, 435–444. [Google Scholar]
  34. Sekiya, I.; Vuoristo, J.T.; Larson, B.L.; Prockop, D.J. In vitro cartilage formation by human adult stem cells from bone marrow stroma defines the sequence of cellular and molecular events during chondrogenesis. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2002, 99, 4397–4402. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Horwitz, E.M.; Prockop, D.J.; Fitzpatrick, L.A.; Koo, W.W.; Gordon, P.L.; Neel, M.; Sussman, M.; Orchard, P.; Marx, J.C.; Pyeritz, R.E.; et al. Transplantability and therapeutic effects of bone marrow-derived mesenchymal cells in children with osteogenesis imperfecta. Nat Med. 1999, 5, 309–313. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Ankrum, J.; Karp, J.M. Mesenchymal stem cell therapy: Two steps forward, one step back. Trends Mol. Med. 2010, 16, 203–209. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Lee, S.Y.; Miwa, M.; Sakai, Y.; Kuroda, R.; Niikura, T.; Kurosaka, M. Osteogenic potential of cells in vitro derived from haemarthrosis of the knee induced by injury to the anterior cruciate ligament. J. Bone Joint Surg. Br. 2006, 88, 129–133. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Zuk, P.A.; Zhu, M.; Mizuno, H.; Huang, J.; Futrell, J.W.; Katz, A.J.; Benhaim, P.; Lorenz, H.P.; Hedrick, M.H. Multilineage cells from human adipose tissue: implications for cell-based therapies. Tissue Eng. 2001, 7, 211–228. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Wickham, M.Q.; Erickson, G.R.; Gimble, J.M.; Vail, T.P.; Guilak, F. Multipotent stromal cells derived from the infrapatellar fat pad of the knee. Clin. Orthop. Relat. Res. 2003, 196–212. [Google Scholar]
  40. Guilak, F.; Lott, K.E.; Awad, H.A.; Cao, Q.; Hicok, K.C.; Fermor, B.; Gimble, J.M. Clonal analysis of the differentiation potential of human adipose-derived adult stem cells. J. Cell Physiol. 2006, 206, 229–237. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Erickson, G.R.; Gimble, J.M.; Franklin, D.M.; Rice, H.E.; Awad, H.; Guilak, F. Chondrogenic potential of adipose tissue-derived stromal cells in vitro and in vivo. Biochem. Biophys. Res. Commun. 2002, 290, 763–769. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Im, G.I.; Shin, Y.W.; Lee, K.B. Do adipose tissue-derived mesenchymal stem cells have the same osteogenic and chondrogenic potential as bone marrow-derived cells? Osteoarthr. Cartil. 2005, 13, 845–853. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Estes, B.T.; Wu, A.W.; Guilak, F. Potent induction of chondrocytic differentiation of human adipose-derived adult stem cells by bone morphogenetic protein 6. Arthritis. Rheum. 2006, 54, 1222–1232. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Kim, H.J.; Im, G.I. Combination of transforming growth factor-beta2 and bone morphogenetic protein 7 enhances chondrogenesis from adipose tissue-derived mesenchymal stem cells. Tissue Eng. Part A 2009, 15, 1543–1551. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Mehlhorn, A.T.; Niemeyer, P.; Kaiser, S.; Finkenzeller, G.; Stark, G.B.; Sudkamp, N.P.; Schmal, H. Differential expression pattern of extracellular matrix molecules during chondrogenesis of mesenchymal stem cells from bone marrow and adipose tissue. Tissue Eng. 2006, 12, 2853–2862. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Mehlhorn, A.T.; Niemeyer, P.; Kaschte, K.; Muller, L.; Finkenzeller, G.; Hartl, D.; Sudkamp, N.P.; Schmal, H. Differential effects of BMP-2 and TGF-beta1 on chondrogenic differentiation of adipose derived stem cells. Cell Prolif. 2007, 40, 809–823. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Hennig, T.; Lorenz, H.; Thiel, A.; Goetzke, K.; Dickhut, A.; Geiger, F.; Richter, W. Reduced chondrogenic potential of adipose tissue derived stromal cells correlates with an altered TGFbeta receptor and BMP profile and is overcome by BMP-6. J. Cell Physiol. 2007, 211, 682–691. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Huang, J.I.; Kazmi, N.; Durbhakula, M.M.; Hering, T.M.; Yoo, J.U.; Johnstone, B. Chondrogenic potential of progenitor cells derived from human bone marrow and adipose tissue: A patient-matched comparison. J. Orthop. Res. 2005, 23, 1383–1389. [Google Scholar]
  49. Afizah, H.; Yang, Z.; Hui, J.H.; Ouyang, H.W.; Lee, E.H. A comparison between the chondrogenic potential of human bone marrow stem cells (BMSCs) and adipose-derived stem cells (ADSCs) taken from the same donors. Tissue Eng. 2007, 13, 659–666. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. De Bari, C.; Dell'Accio, F.; Tylzanowski, P.; Luyten, F.P. Multipotent mesenchymal stem cells from adult human synovial membrane. Arthritis Rheum. 2001, 44, 1928–1942. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Jones, B.A.; Pei, M. Synovium-Derived Stem Cells: A Tissue-Specific Stem Cell for Cartilage Engineering and Regeneration. Tissue Eng. Part B Rev. 2012, 18, 301–311. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Nishimura, K.; Solchaga, L.A.; Caplan, A.I.; Yoo, J.U.; Goldberg, V.M.; Johnstone, B. Chondroprogenitor cells of synovial tissue. Arthritis. Rheum. 1999, 42, 2631–2637. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Colter, D.C.; Sekiya, I.; Prockop, D.J. Identification of a subpopulation of rapidly self-renewing and multipotential adult stem cells in colonies of human marrow stromal cells. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2001, 98, 7841–7845. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Park, Y.; Lutolf, M.P.; Hubbell, J.A.; Hunziker, E.B.; Wong, M. Bovine primary chondrocyte culture in synthetic matrix metalloproteinase-sensitive poly(ethylene glycol)-based hydrogels as a scaffold for cartilage repair. Tissue Eng. 2004, 10, 515–522. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Shirasawa, S.; Sekiya, I.; Sakaguchi, Y.; Yagishita, K.; Ichinose, S.; Muneta, T. In vitro chondrogenesis of human synovium-derived mesenchymal stem cells: Optimal condition and comparison with bone marrow-derived cells. J. Cell Biochem. 2006, 97, 84–97. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Archer, C.W.; Dowthwaite, G.P.; Francis-West, P. Development of synovial joints. Birth Defects Res. C Embryo Today 2003, 69, 144–155. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Yoshimura, H.; Muneta, T.; Nimura, A.; Yokoyama, A.; Koga, H.; Sekiya, I. Comparison of rat mesenchymal stem cells derived from bone marrow, synovium, periosteum, adipose tissue, and muscle. Cell Tissue Res. 2007, 327, 449–462. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Nakahara, H.; Dennis, J.E.; Bruder, S.P.; Haynesworth, S.E.; Lennon, D.P.; Caplan, A.I. In vitro differentiation of bone and hypertrophic cartilage from periosteal-derived cells. Exp. Cell Res. 1991, 195, 492–503. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. De Bari, C.; Dell'Accio, F.; Vanlauwe, J.; Eyckmans, J.; Khan, I.M.; Archer, C.W.; Jones, E.A.; McGonagle, D.; Mitsiadis, T.A.; Pitzalis, C.; et al. Mesenchymal multipotency of adult human periosteal cells demonstrated by single-cell lineage analysis. Arthritis. Rheum. 2006, 54, 1209–1221. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Van de Putte, K.A.; Urist, M.R. Osteogenesis in the interior of intramuscular implants of decalcified bone matrix. Clin. Orthop. Relat. Res. 1965, 43, 257–270. [Google Scholar]
  61. Sampath, T.K.; Nathanson, M.A.; Reddi, A.H. In vitro transformation of mesenchymal cells derived from embryonic muscle into cartilage in response to extracellular matrix components of bone. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 1984, 81, 3419–3423. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Peng, H.; Huard, J. Muscle-derived stem cells for musculoskeletal tissue regeneration and repair. Transpl. Immunol. 2004, 12, 311–319. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  63. Mastrogiacomo, M.; Derubeis, A.R.; Cancedda, R. Bone and cartilage formation by skeletal muscle derived cells. J. Cell Physiol. 2005, 204, 594–603. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  64. Zheng, B.; Cao, B.; Crisan, M.; Sun, B.; Li, G.; Logar, A.; Yap, S.; Pollett, J.B.; Drowley, L.; Cassino, T.; et al. Prospective identification of myogenic endothelial cells in human skeletal muscle. Nat. Biotechnol. 2007, 25, 1025–1034. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  65. Jackson, W.M.; Aragon, A.B.; Djouad, F.; Song, Y.; Koehler, S.M.; Nesti, L.J.; Tuan, R.S. Mesenchymal progenitor cells derived from traumatized human muscle. J. Tissue Eng. Regen. Med. 2009, 3, 129–138. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  66. Kim, M.J.; Son, M.J.; Son, M.Y.; Seol, B.; Kim, J.; Park, J.; Kim, J.H.; Kim, Y.H.; Park, S.A.; Lee, C.H.; et al. Generation of human induced pluripotent stem cells from osteoarthritis patient-derived synovial cells. Arthritis. Rheum. 2011, 63, 3010–3021. [Google Scholar]
  67. Stenderup, K.; Justesen, J.; Clausen, C.; Kassem, M. Aging is associated with decreased maximal life span and accelerated senescence of bone marrow stromal cells. Bone 2003, 33, 919–926. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  68. Roobrouck, V.D.; Ulloa-Montoya, F.; Verfaillie, C.M. Self-renewal and differentiation capacity of young and aged stem cells. Exp. Cell Res. 2008, 314, 1937–1944. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  69. Evans, M.J.; Kaufman, M.H. Establishment in culture of pluripotential cells from mouse embryos. Nature 1981, 292, 154–156. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  70. Martin, G.R. Isolation of a pluripotent cell line from early mouse embryos cultured in medium conditioned by teratocarcinoma stem cells. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 1981, 78, 7634–7638. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  71. Thomson, J.A.; Itskovitz-Eldor, J.; Shapiro, S.S.; Waknitz, M.A.; Swiergiel, J.J.; Marshall, V.S.; Jones, J.M. Embryonic stem cell lines derived from human blastocysts. Science 1998, 282, 1145–1147. [Google Scholar]
  72. Jukes, J.M.; van Blitterswijk, C.A.; de Boer, J. Skeletal tissue engineering using embryonic stem cells. J. Tissue Eng. Regen. Med. 2010, 4, 165–180. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  73. Kramer, J.; Hegert, C.; Guan, K.; Wobus, A.M.; Muller, P.K.; Rohwedel, J. Embryonic stem cell-derived chondrogenic differentiation in vitro : Activation by BMP-2 and BMP-4. Mech. Dev. 2000, 92, 193–205. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  74. Yamashita, J.K. ES and iPS cell research for cardiovascular regeneration. Exp. Cell Res. 2010, 316, 2555–2559. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  75. Nakagawa, T.; Lee, S.Y.; Reddi, A.H. Induction of chondrogenesis from human embryonic stem cells without embryoid body formation by bone morphogenetic protein 7 and transforming growth factor beta1. Arthritis. Rheum. 2009, 60, 3686–3692. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  76. Oldershaw, R.A.; Baxter, M.A.; Lowe, E.T.; Bates, N.; Grady, L.M.; Soncin, F.; Brison, D.R.; Hardingham, T.E.; Kimber, S.J. Directed differentiation of human embryonic stem cells toward chondrocytes. Nat. Biotechnol. 2010, 28, 1187–1194. [Google Scholar]
  77. Gong, G.; Ferrari, D.; Dealy, C.N.; Kosher, R.A. Direct and progressive differentiation of human embryonic stem cells into the chondrogenic lineage. J. Cell Physiol. 2010, 224, 664–671. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  78. Vats, A.; Bielby, R.C.; Tolley, N.; Dickinson, S.C.; Boccaccini, A.R.; Hollander, A.P.; Bishop, A.E.; Polak, J.M. Chondrogenic differentiation of human embryonic stem cells: the effect of the micro-environment. Tissue Eng. 2006, 12, 1687–1697. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  79. Hwang, N.S.; Varghese, S.; Elisseeff, J. Derivation of chondrogenically-committed cells from human embryonic cells for cartilage tissue regeneration. PLoS One 2008, 3, e2498. [Google Scholar]
  80. Bigdeli, N.; Karlsson, C.; Strehl, R.; Concaro, S.; Hyllner, J.; Lindahl, A. Coculture of human embryonic stem cells and human articular chondrocytes results in significantly altered phenotype and improved chondrogenic differentiation. Stem Cells 2009, 27, 1812–1821. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  81. Hoben, G.M.; Willard, V.P.; Athanasiou, K.A. Fibrochondrogenesis of hESCs: Growth factor combinations and cocultures. Stem Cells Dev. 2009, 18, 283–292. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  82. Toh, W.S.; Lee, E.H.; Guo, X.M.; Chan, J.K.; Yeow, C.H.; Choo, A.B.; Cao, T. Cartilage repair using hyaluronan hydrogel-encapsulated human embryonic stem cell-derived chondrogenic cells. Biomaterials 2010, 31, 6968–6980. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  83. Toh, W.S.; Guo, X.M.; Choo, A.B.; Lu, K.; Lee, E.H.; Cao, T. Differentiation and enrichment of expandable chondrogenic cells from human embryonic stem cells in vitro . J. Cell Mol. Med. 2009, 13, 3570–3590. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  84. Terraciano, V.; Hwang, N.; Moroni, L.; Park, H.B.; Zhang, Z.; Mizrahi, J.; Seliktar, D.; Elisseeff, J. Differential response of adult and embryonic mesenchymal progenitor cells to mechanical compression in hydrogels. Stem Cells 2007, 25, 2730–2738. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  85. Yang, Z.; Sui, L.; Toh, W.S.; Lee, E.H.; Cao, T. Stage-dependent effect of TGF-beta1 on chondrogenic differentiation of human embryonic stem cells. Stem Cells Dev. 2009, 18, 929–940. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  86. Koay, E.J.; Athanasiou, K.A. Hypoxic chondrogenic differentiation of human embryonic stem cells enhances cartilage protein synthesis and biomechanical functionality. Osteoarthri. Cartil. 2008, 16, 1450–1456. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  87. Hwang, N.S.; Varghese, S.; Zhang, Z.; Elisseeff, J. Chondrogenic differentiation of human embryonic stem cell-derived cells in arginine-glycine-aspartate-modified hydrogels. Tissue Eng. 2006, 12, 2695–2706. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  88. Koay, E.J.; Athanasiou, K.A. Development of serum-free, chemically defined conditions for human embryonic stem cell-derived fibrochondrogenesis. Tissue Eng. Part A 2009, 15, 2249–2257. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  89. Takahashi, K.; Yamanaka, S. Induction of pluripotent stem cells from mouse embryonic and adult fibroblast cultures by defined factors. Cell 2006, 126, 663–676. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  90. Takahashi, K.; Tanabe, K.; Ohnuki, M.; Narita, M.; Ichisaka, T.; Tomoda, K.; Yamanaka, S. Induction of pluripotent stem cells from adult human fibroblasts by defined factors. Cell 2007, 131, 861–872. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  91. Yu, J.; Vodyanik, M.A.; Smuga-Otto, K.; Antosiewicz-Bourget, J.; Frane, J.L.; Tian, S.; Nie, J.; Jonsdottir, G.A.; Ruotti, V.; Stewart, R.; et al. Induced pluripotent stem cell lines derived from human somatic cells. Science 2007, 318, 1917–1920. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  92. Liu, H.; Zhu, F.; Yong, J.; Zhang, P.; Hou, P.; Li, H.; Jiang, W.; Cai, J.; Liu, M.; Cui, K.; et al. Generation of induced pluripotent stem cells from adult rhesus monkey fibroblasts. Cell Stem Cell 2008, 3, 587–590. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  93. Liao, J.; Cui, C.; Chen, S.; Ren, J.; Chen, J.; Gao, Y.; Li, H.; Jia, N.; Cheng, L.; Xiao, H.; et al. Generation of induced pluripotent stem cell lines from adult rat cells. Cell Stem Cell 2009, 4, 11–15. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  94. Esteban, M.A.; Xu, J.; Yang, J.; Peng, M.; Qin, D.; Li, W.; Jiang, Z.; Chen, J.; Deng, K.; Zhong, M.; et al. Generation of induced pluripotent stem cell lines from Tibetan miniature pig. J. Biol. Chem. 2009, 284, 17634–17640. [Google Scholar]
  95. Nagy, K.; Sung, H.K.; Zhang, P.; Laflamme, S.; Vincent, P.; Agha-Mohammadi, S.; Woltjen, K.; Monetti, C.; Michael, I.P.; Smith, L.C.; et al. Induced pluripotent stem cell lines derived from equine fibroblasts. Stem Cell Rev. 2011, 7, 693–702. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  96. Okita, K.; Yamanaka, S. Induction of pluripotency by defined factors. Exp. Cell Res. 2010, 316, 2565–2570. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  97. Nakagawa, M.; Koyanagi, M.; Tanabe, K.; Takahashi, K.; Ichisaka, T.; Aoi, T.; Okita, K.; Mochiduki, Y.; Takizawa, N.; Yamanaka, S. Generation of induced pluripotent stem cells without Myc from mouse and human fibroblasts. Nat. Biotechnol. 2008, 26, 101–106. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  98. Sommer, C.A.; Stadtfeld, M.; Murphy, G.J.; Hochedlinger, K.; Kotton, D.N.; Mostoslavsky, G. Induced pluripotent stem cell generation using a single lentiviral stem cell cassette. Stem Cells 2009, 27, 543–549. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  99. Stadtfeld, M.; Nagaya, M.; Utikal, J.; Weir, G.; Hochedlinger, K. Induced pluripotent stem cells generated without viral integration. Science 2008, 322, 945–949. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  100. Chen, L.; Liu, L. Current progress and prospects of induced pluripotent stem cells. Sci. China C Life Sci. 2009, 52, 622–636. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  101. Saitoh, T.; Fujita, N.; Jang, M.H.; Uematsu, S.; Yang, B.G.; Satoh, T.; Omori, H.; Noda, T.; Yamamoto, N.; Komatsu, M.; et al. Loss of the autophagy protein Atg16L1 enhances endotoxin-induced IL-1beta production. Nature 2008, 456, 264–268. [Google Scholar]
  102. Huangfu, D.; Osafune, K.; Maehr, R.; Guo, W.; Eijkelenboom, A.; Chen, S.; Muhlestein, W.; Melton, D.A. Induction of pluripotent stem cells from primary human fibroblasts with only Oct4 and Sox2. Nat. Biotechnol. 2008, 26, 1269–1275. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  103. Ludwig, T.E.; Levenstein, M.E.; Jones, J.M.; Berggren, W.T.; Mitchen, E.R.; Frane, J.L.; Crandall, L.J.; Daigh, C.A.; Conard, K.R.; Piekarczyk, M.S.; et al. Derivation of human embryonic stem cells in defined conditions. Nat. Biotechnol. 2006, 24, 185–187. [Google Scholar]
  104. Ludwig, T.E.; Bergendahl, V.; Levenstein, M.E.; Yu, J.; Probasco, M.D.; Thomson, J.A. Feeder-independent culture of human embryonic stem cells. Nat Methods 2006, 3, 637–646. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  105. Maherali, N.; Hochedlinger, K. Guidelines and techniques for the generation of induced pluripotent stem cells. Cell Stem Cell 2008, 3, 595–605. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  106. Hayashi, Y.; Chan, T.; Warashina, M.; Fukuda, M.; Ariizumi, T.; Okabayashi, K.; Takayama, N.; Otsu, M.; Eto, K.; Furue, M.K.; et al. Reduction of N-glycolylneuraminic acid in human induced pluripotent stem cells generated or cultured under feeder- and serum-free defined conditions. PLoS One 2010, 5, e14099. [Google Scholar]
  107. Hanna, J.; Wernig, M.; Markoulaki, S.; Sun, C.W.; Meissner, A.; Cassady, J.P.; Beard, C.; Brambrink, T.; Wu, L.C.; Townes, T.M.; et al. Treatment of sickle cell anemia mouse model with iPS cells generated from autologous skin. Science 2007, 318, 1920–1923. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  108. Wernig, M.; Zhao, J.P.; Pruszak, J.; Hedlund, E.; Fu, D.; Soldner, F.; Broccoli, V.; Constantine-Paton, M.; Isacson, O.; Jaenisch, R. Neurons derived from reprogrammed fibroblasts functionally integrate into the fetal brain and improve symptoms of rats with Parkinson's disease. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2008, 105, 5856–5861. [Google Scholar]
  109. Narazaki, G.; Uosaki, H.; Teranishi, M.; Okita, K.; Kim, B.; Matsuoka, S.; Yamanaka, S.; Yamashita, J.K. Directed and systematic differentiation of cardiovascular cells from mouse induced pluripotent stem cells. Circulation 2008, 118, 498–506. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  110. Zhang, J.; Wilson, G.F.; Soerens, A.G.; Koonce, C.H.; Yu, J.; Palecek, S.P.; Thomson, J.A.; Kamp, T.J. Functional cardiomyocytes derived from human induced pluripotent stem cells. Circ. Res. 2009, 104, e30–e41. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  111. Teramura, T.; Onodera, Y.; Mihara, T.; Hosoi, Y.; Hamanishi, C.; Fukuda, K. Induction of mesenchymal progenitor cells with chondrogenic property from mouse-induced pluripotent stem cells. Cell. Reprogram. 2010, 12, 249–261. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  112. Bilousova, G.; Hyun Jun, D.; King, K.B.; Delanghe, S.; Chick, W.S.; Torchia, E.C.; Chow, K.S.; Klemm, D.J.; Roop, D.R.; Majka, S.M. Osteoblasts Derived from Induced Pluripotent Stem Cells form Calcified Structures in Scaffolds both in vitro and in vitro . Stem Cells 2011, 29, 206–216. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  113. Medvedev, S.P.; Grigor'eva, E.V.; Shevchenko, A.I.; Malakhova, A.A.; Dementyeva, E.V.; Shilov, A.A.; Pokushalov, E.A.; Zaidman, A.M.; Aleksandrova, M.A.; Plotnikov, E.Y.; et al. Human induced pluripotent stem cells derived from fetal neural stem cells successfully undergo directed differentiation into cartilage. Stem Cells Dev. 2011, 20, 1099–1112. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  114. Liu, Y.; Goldberg, A.J.; Dennis, J.E.; Gronowicz, G.A.; Kuhn, L.T. One-step derivation of mesenchymal stem cell (MSC)-like cells from human pluripotent stem cells on a fibrillar collagen coating. PLoS One 2012, 7, e33225. [Google Scholar]
  115. Toh, W.S.; Yang, Z.; Liu, H.; Heng, B.C.; Lee, E.H.; Cao, T. Effects of culture conditions and bone morphogenetic protein 2 on extent of chondrogenesis from human embryonic stem cells. Stem Cells 2007, 25, 950–960. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  116. Koay, E.J.; Hoben, G.M.; Athanasiou, K.A. Tissue engineering with chondrogenically differentiated human embryonic stem cells. Stem Cells 2007, 25, 2183–2190. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  117. Hoben, G.M.; Koay, E.J.; Athanasiou, K.A. Fibrochondrogenesis in two embryonic stem cell lines: Effects of differentiation timelines. Stem Cells 2008, 26, 422–430. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  118. Kopher, R.A.; Penchev, V.R.; Islam, M.S.; Hill, K.L.; Khosla, S.; Kaufman, D.S. Human embryonic stem cell-derived CD34+ cells function as MSC progenitor cells. Bone 2010, 47, 718–728. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  119. Wu, R.; Gu, B.; Zhao, X.; Tan, Z.; Chen, L.; Zhu, J.; Zhang, M. Derivation of multipotent nestin(+)/CD271 (−)/STRO-1 (−) mesenchymal-like precursors from human embryonic stem cells in chemically defined conditions. Hum. Cell. 2011. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  120. Villa-Diaz, L.G.; Brown, S.E.; Liu, Y.; Ross, A.M.; Lahann, J.; Parent, J.M.; Krebsbach, P.H. Derivation of Mesenchymal Stem Cells from Human Induced Pluripotent Stem Cells Cultured on Synthetic Substrates. Stem Cells 2012, 30, 1174–1181. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Cells EISSN 2073-4409 Published by MDPI AG, Basel, Switzerland RSS E-Mail Table of Contents Alert