Category Archives: Embryonic Stem Cells


"Self-eating" Process of Stem Cells May be Key to New Regenerative Therapies – Mirage News

Translucently colored embryonic stem (ES) cell (upper right) and its differentiating derivatives (left and lower right). The small round bodies inside cells represent lysosomes, with the pink color indicating ones that are undergoing chaperone-mediated autophagy (CMA), a selective form of autophagy that is demonstrated only in mammals. CMA governs the balance between self-renewal and differentiation of ES cells. It is kept at low levels in undifferentiated ES cells to maintain the pluripotent state. Upon induction of differentiation, CMA flux increases due to the reduction of pluripotency factors, leading to changes in cellular metabolism and epigenetic landscape that favor differentiation.

PHILADELPHIAThe self-eating process in embryonic stem cells known as chaperone-mediated autophagy (CMA) and a related metabolite may serve as promising new therapeutic targets to repair or regenerate damaged cells and organs, Penn Medicine researchers show in a new study published online in Science.

Human bodies contain over 200 different types of specialized cells. All of them can be derived from embryonic stem (ES) cells, which relentlessly self-renew while retaining the ability to differentiate into any cell type in adult animals, a state known as pluripotency. Researchers have known that the cells metabolism plays a role in this process; however, it wasnt clear exactly how the cells internal wiring works to keep that state and ultimately decide stem cell fate.

The new preclinical study, for the first time, shows how the stem cells keeps CMA at low levels to promote that self-renewal, and when the stem cell is ready, it switches that suppression off to enhance CMA, among other activities, and differentiate into specialized cells.

Its an intriguing discovery in the field of stem cell biology and for researchers looking to develop therapies for tissue or organ regeneration, said senior author Xiaolu Yang, PhD, a professor of Cancer Biology at the Abramson Family Cancer Research Institute in the Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania. We reveal two novel ways to potentially manipulate the self-renewal and differentiation of stem cells: CMA and a metabolite, known as alpha-ketoglutarate, that is regulated by CMA. Rationally intervening or guiding these functions could be a powerful way to increase the efficiency of regenerative medicine approaches.

Autophagy is a cell-eating mechanism necessary for survival and function of most living organisms. When cells self-eat, the intracellular materials are delivered to lysosomes, which are organelles that help break down these materials. There are a few forms of autophagy. However, unlike the other forms, which are present in all eukaryotic cells, CMA is unique to mammals. To date, the physiological role of CMA remains unclear.

Using metabolomic and genetic laboratory techniques on the embryonic stem cells of mice, the researchers sought to better understand significant changes that took place during their pluripotent state and subsequent differentiation.

They found that CMA activity is kept at a minimum due to two cellular factors critical for pluripotencyOct4 and Sox2that suppresses a gene known as LAMP2A, which provides instructions for making a protein called lysosomal associated membrane protein-2 necessary in CMA. The minimal CMA activity allows stem cells to maintain high levels of alpha-ketoglutarate, a metabolite that is crucial to reinforce a cells pluripotent state, the researchers found.

When its time for differentiation, the cells begin to upregulate CMA due to the reduction in Oct4 and Sox2. Augmented CMA activity leads to the degradation of key enzymes responsible for the production of alpha-ketoglutarate. This leads to a reduction in alpha-ketoglutarate levels as well as an increases in other cellular activities to promote differentiation. These findings reveal that CMA and alpha-ketoglutarate dictate the fate of embryonic stem cells.

Embryonic stem cells are often called pluripotent due to their remarkable ability to give rise to every cell type in the body, except the placenta and umbilical cord. Embryonic stem cells not only provide a superb system to study early mammalian development, but also hold great promise for regenerative therapies to treat various human disorders. The development of stem-cell based regenerative medicine therapies has rapidly increased in the last decade, with several approaches in studies shown to repair damaged heart tissue, replace cells in solid organ transplantation, and in some cases address neurological disorders.

This newly discovered role of autophagy in the stem cell is the beginning of further investigations that could lead to researchers and physician-scientists to better therapies to treat various disorders, Yang said.

Penn co-authors of the study include the first author Yi Xu, a post-doctoral researcher in Yangs Lab, Yang Zhang and Sixiang Yu, also in Yangs lab, Lili Guo and Ian A. Blair of the department of Systems Pharmacology and Translational Therapeutics, Mengyuan Kan of the department of Biostatistics, Epidemiology and Informatics, as well as Juan C. Garca-Caaveras and Joshua D. Rabinowitz of Princeton University.

The study was supported the National Institutes of Health (R01CA182675, R01CA184867, R01CA235760, and P30ES013508, and the Department of Defense (W81XWH-15-1-0678).

View post:
"Self-eating" Process of Stem Cells May be Key to New Regenerative Therapies - Mirage News

Letters to editor: Sundial Bridge gathering, Donald Trump and COVID-19 – Record Searchlight

Redding Record Searchlight Published 8:00 a.m. PT July 26, 2020

Worshippers came to Redding's Sundial Bridge on July 22, 2020. The crowd put the community 'at risk' for COVID-19, Shasta County health officials say. Redding Record Searchlight

I am appalled and dismayed at thegathering at the Sundial Bridge earlier this week. First, it's unconscionable to gather hundreds of people during a pandemic, no masks or distancing in place.Second, no permit was issued for this gathering, nor was one applied for. The lack of responsibility for this event is amazing.Did no one know about it?Well, all those attendees certainly did, so it seems unlikely that the higher-ups at Bethel didn't, and apparently they made no effort to stop this travesty.Sean Feucht, the alleged organizer, has had events like this recently in other counties in California completely disregarding the health of the communities he gathers in.Christian?I think not.The disregard for local citizens and our community is quite apparent. We live in a rural area.It's helped us stay off the State Watch List, so more businesses can stay open.There are so many small businesses struggling to keep afloat and then a stunt like this is pulled that jeopardized everyone's health.Where were the police?Did no one in city government know about this? When the spike in COVID-19cases comes, it will be because of this unlawful, unnecessary gathering.

Hazel Hughes,Redding

The GOP has long sustained a frontal attack on the ultimate value of science to society. In 2016, national alarms sounded as science marches rang bells with gangs of teachers, liberal arts sympathizers, and mobs of parents, kids, scientists, librarians, researchers, and servers marching to protest. Fiftyyears ago Richard Nixon established the EPA. He put weight behind the GOPs previous value of an old Greek proverbs essence - A society grows great when old men plant trees whose shade they know they shall never sit in. And then the Republican party changed. Again and again. From creationism, opposition to embryonic stem cells, attempting to link abortion with breast cancer and mental illness, rejecting contraception while absolving itself of millions of unplanned pregnancies for society to absorb, to global warming, the GOP became something new. Today it is the spectacle, foolishness, and mockery displayed almost daily. Science isnt infallible. But it always gives the best odds towards truth in all it seeks in earnest. It is always playing the best odds. Carl Sagan called science a candle in the dark." Dont let the light go out. Restore scientific integrity to the federal government. Insist upon representatives who richly value science.

Max Walter, Redding

Regarding the recent Back the Blue rally: I think it was a great idea. I think most of us have great respect for the police, just not those few who make them look bad. I support Black Lives Matter and peaceful protests.I am against using riot police, mace, clubs, and shields against peaceful protesters. I am against police brutality and brutality inflicted by citizens against each other and the police. I am against police disguised in camo hauling people into unmarked vans like is happening, as I speak, in Portland, Oregon. I am against rioting and property damage by individuals who scream their support for a cause but are using it to engage in disruptive and damaging behavior and are behaving in a way that justifies police action. I believe that the use of deadly force should be exceedingly rare. I believe police unions are allowing bad police to stay on the job.All of these beliefs are not mutually exclusive nor should they be politicized into for or against police or protesters.

Joyce Lively, Redding

The key to stopping the COVID-19economy from turning into a major depression is what President Trump has already started: reducing government regulatory control of the economy and letting thefree market self-correct. This is what President Harding did during thedepression of 1920-21. The economy roared back.Contrarily, President Roosevelt instituted every Marxist and unconstitutional control on the economy as possible during the depression that started in 1929 and the downturn lasted 13 years.If it were not for the huge increase in output for World War II, who knows how long it would have lasted. Secondly, I see nothing but COVID-19ignorance caused by pronouncements from our politically corrupthealth agencies. First, masks worn by everyone will not keep anyone from contracting COVID-19 only properly fitted respirators will. And that is the problem with dictating mask use. It makes the few who are vulnerable to death from COVID-19 come out from self-quarantine where they should stay.

Carl Reed, Igo

Have we become a nation of anger? Reminds me of a 2-year-old throwing a tantrum, and then the parents give in to the child's demands. What happened to counting from one to 10 to calm down? If you feel you've suffered an injustice, does that give you the right to burn, loot, and injure anyone and anything? And who pays for the destroyed police cars and burned buildings? The hard-working taxpayers in this country. Take positive action. If you feel the police are not doing a good job, why don't you become a policeman and show everyone how to perform fairly. President Kennedy said, "Ask not what your country can do for you - ask what you can do for your country." Martin Luther King Jr.'swords were "I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character. How is your character?

Miriam Johnson, Redding

We have a national pandemic that has killed 140,000-pluspeople nationwide and 7,697-plusin California and all State Sen. Brian Dahle is concerned about is the governor re-shutting down small businesses in the state because the coronavirus infection and death rates exploded. The governor had to do this because people did not practice the recommended safety measures that minimize spreading the coronavirus and businesses did not enforce them.Dahle tells us that people should be able to decide for themselves what is best to prevent catching the coronavirus and that wearing breathing masks should be left up to personal choice according to a July 14 Record Searchlight story.If everyone had practiced the recommended safety measures the impact on business would have been significantly lower. Dahle doesnt understand this simple concept. Dahles ideas are making matters worse. This November we need to get rid of Dahle and replace him with Pamela Swartz who has the ability to find solutions to important issues.

Tom Laurent,Yreka

On July 17, I loaded my car with items bought from Walmart and left my purse in the cart, realized about 10 minutes later after driving off, what I had done, returned to Walmart and checked with customer service and they had my purse. I want to thank the good person that did this kindness and turned it in.

Polly Thomson, Redding

There's this constant push from President Trump along withSecretary of Education, Betsy DeVos,to fully reopen our schools just as they were before the pandemic. If my biology teacher were still alive, I can hear her exclaiming, "You'll not put my studentsin a petri dish!"Before this latest push, our president had led the way to demand that businesses return to normal so we got the wild and crowded beach parties along with bars fully open and serving up drinks, etc.As predicted by the experts,these moves were followedshortly by a stunning increase in the spread of the virus. If we follow Trump, we will literally be drinking away our kid's futures. If we all succumb to the Trump-DeVosSyndrome,it's very likely that our country will be hit with permanent damage

Parker Pollock, Redding

The Roman Empire survived for 2,500 years, plus or minus, America has lasted 250, plus or minus, and are there any comparisons to be drawn? The madness on our streets and those who are the perpetrators have the same M.O. as those of Rome. There are also the rioters that led to the Russian Revolution, The Red Army revolt, and most hostile takeovers throughout history. Stir up the youth with propaganda and false promises and let their Utopian lusts do the rest. What is taking place in America today had warning signs for the last 100 years as our government started dismantling our Constitution and Bill of Rights. Using the same "Cosmic Morality" that is being used today we were slowly led down the "entitlement" passageway until it firmly coupled with the Marxist promise of "Equality for all through communism." If you don't like America now folks you will hate what is waiting in the wings. Why are they destroying your past, your language, your ethics, your faith, your future? Because people without a past cannot learn from or dictate their future without a past.

Vernon Packer, Redding

Read or Share this story: https://www.redding.com/story/opinion/2020/07/26/letters-editor-sundial-bridge-gathering-donald-trump-and-covid-19/5505849002/

Read the original:
Letters to editor: Sundial Bridge gathering, Donald Trump and COVID-19 - Record Searchlight

Stem Cells Market Study for 2020 to 2026 Providing Information on Key Players, Growth Drivers and Industry Challenges|CCBC, Vcanbio, Boyalife – Owned

QY Research has Published Latest Trending Report on Global Stem Cells Market

Los Angeles, United State, The report titledGlobal Stem Cells Marketis one of the most comprehensive and important additions to QY Researchs archive of market research studies. It offers detailed research and analysis of key aspects of the global Stem Cells market. The market analysts authoring this report have provided in-depth information on leading growth drivers, restraints, challenges, trends, and opportunities to offer a complete analysis of the global Stem Cells market. Market participants can use the analysis on market dynamics to plan effective growth strategies and prepare for future challenges beforehand. Each trend of the global Stem Cells market is carefully analyzed and researched about by the market analysts.

Request Sample Report and Full Report TOC:https://www.qyresearch.com/sample-form/form/1436482/global-stem-cells-market

The Essential Content Covered in the GlobalStem Cells Market Report:

* Top Key Company Profiles. * Main Business and Rival Information * SWOT Analysis and PESTEL Analysis * Production, Sales, Revenue, Price and Gross Margin * Market Share and Size

Global Stem Cells Market is estimated to reach xxx million USD in 2020 and projected to grow at the CAGR of xx% during 2020-2026. According to the latest report added to the online repository of QY Research the Stem Cells market has witnessed an unprecedented growth till 2020. The extrapolated future growth is expected to continue at higher rates by 2025.

Top Players of Stem Cells Market are Studied: CCBC, Vcanbio, Boyalife, Beikebiotech,

The report provides a 6-year forecast (2020-2026) assessed based on how the Stem Cells market is predicted to grow in major regions likeUSA, Europe, Japan, China, India, Southeast Asia, South America, South Africa, Others.

Segmentation by Type:Umbilical Cord Blood Stem Cell Embryonic Stem Cell Adult Stem Cell Other

Segmentation by Application:Diseases Therapy Healthcare

Reasons to Buy this Report:

Table of Contents

Table of Contents 1 Report Overview

1.1 Study Scope

1.2 Key Market Segments

1.3 Players Covered: Ranking by Stem Cells Revenue

1.4 Market Analysis by Type

1.4.1 Global Stem Cells Market Size Growth Rate by Type: 2020 VS 2026

1.4.2 Umbilical Cord Blood Stem Cell

1.4.3 Embryonic Stem Cell

1.4.4 Adult Stem Cell

1.4.5 Other

1.5 Market by Application

1.5.1 Global Stem Cells Market Share by Application: 2020 VS 2026

1.5.2 Diseases Therapy

1.5.3 Healthcare 1.6 Study Objectives 1.7 Years Considered 2 Global Growth Trends by Regions

2.1 Stem Cells Market Perspective (2015-2026)

2.2 Stem Cells Growth Trends by Regions

2.2.1 Stem Cells Market Size by Regions: 2015 VS 2020 VS 2026

2.2.2 Stem Cells Historic Market Share by Regions (2015-2020)

2.2.3 Stem Cells Forecasted Market Size by Regions (2021-2026) 2.3 Industry Trends and Growth Strategy 2.3.1 Market Top Trends 2.3.2 Market Drivers

2.3.3 Market Challenges

2.3.4 Porters Five Forces Analysis

2.3.5 Stem Cells Market Growth Strategy

2.3.6 Primary Interviews with Key Stem Cells Players (Opinion Leaders) 3 Competition Landscape by Key Players

3.1 Global Top Stem Cells Players by Market Size

3.1.1 Global Top Stem Cells Players by Revenue (2015-2020)

3.1.2 Global Stem Cells Revenue Market Share by Players (2015-2020)

3.1.3 Global Stem Cells Market Share by Company Type (Tier 1, Tier 2 and Tier 3)

3.2 Global Stem Cells Market Concentration Ratio

3.2.1 Global Stem Cells Market Concentration Ratio (CR5 and HHI)

3.2.2 Global Top 10 and Top 5 Companies by Stem Cells Revenue in 2019

3.3 Stem Cells Key Players Head office and Area Served

3.4 Key Players Stem Cells Product Solution and Service

3.5 Date of Enter into Stem Cells Market

3.6 Mergers & Acquisitions, Expansion Plans 4 Breakdown Data by Type (2015-2026)

4.1 Global Stem Cells Historic Market Size by Type (2015-2020)

4.2 Global Stem Cells Forecasted Market Size by Type (2021-2026) 5 Stem Cells Breakdown Data by Application (2015-2026)

5.1 Global Stem Cells Market Size by Application (2015-2020)

5.2 Global Stem Cells Forecasted Market Size by Application (2021-2026) 6 North America

6.1 North America Stem Cells Market Size (2015-2020)

6.2 Stem Cells Key Players in North America (2019-2020)

6.3 North America Stem Cells Market Size by Type (2015-2020)

6.4 North America Stem Cells Market Size by Application (2015-2020) 7 Europe

7.1 Europe Stem Cells Market Size (2015-2020)

7.2 Stem Cells Key Players in Europe (2019-2020)

7.3 Europe Stem Cells Market Size by Type (2015-2020)

7.4 Europe Stem Cells Market Size by Application (2015-2020) 8 China

8.1 China Stem Cells Market Size (2015-2020)

8.2 Stem Cells Key Players in China (2019-2020)

8.3 China Stem Cells Market Size by Type (2015-2020)

8.4 China Stem Cells Market Size by Application (2015-2020) 9 Japan

9.1 Japan Stem Cells Market Size (2015-2020)

9.2 Stem Cells Key Players in Japan (2019-2020)

9.3 Japan Stem Cells Market Size by Type (2015-2020)

9.4 Japan Stem Cells Market Size by Application (2015-2020) 10 Southeast Asia

10.1 Southeast Asia Stem Cells Market Size (2015-2020)

10.2 Stem Cells Key Players in Southeast Asia (2019-2020)

10.3 Southeast Asia Stem Cells Market Size by Type (2015-2020)

10.4 Southeast Asia Stem Cells Market Size by Application (2015-2020) 11 India

11.1 India Stem Cells Market Size (2015-2020)

11.2 Stem Cells Key Players in India (2019-2020)

11.3 India Stem Cells Market Size by Type (2015-2020)

11.4 India Stem Cells Market Size by Application (2015-2020) 12 Central & South America

12.1 Central & South America Stem Cells Market Size (2015-2020)

12.2 Stem Cells Key Players in Central & South America (2019-2020)

12.3 Central & South America Stem Cells Market Size by Type (2015-2020)

12.4 Central & South America Stem Cells Market Size by Application (2015-2020) 13Key Players Profiles

13.1 CCBC

13.1.1 CCBC Company Details

13.1.2 CCBC Business Overview and Its Total Revenue

13.1.3 CCBC Stem Cells Introduction

13.1.4 CCBC Revenue in Stem Cells Business (2015-2020))

13.1.5 CCBC Recent Development

13.2 Vcanbio

13.2.1 Vcanbio Company Details

13.2.2 Vcanbio Business Overview and Its Total Revenue

13.2.3 Vcanbio Stem Cells Introduction

13.2.4 Vcanbio Revenue in Stem Cells Business (2015-2020)

13.2.5 Vcanbio Recent Development

13.3 Boyalife

13.3.1 Boyalife Company Details

13.3.2 Boyalife Business Overview and Its Total Revenue

13.3.3 Boyalife Stem Cells Introduction

13.3.4 Boyalife Revenue in Stem Cells Business (2015-2020)

13.3.5 Boyalife Recent Development

13.4 Beikebiotech

13.4.1 Beikebiotech Company Details

13.4.2 Beikebiotech Business Overview and Its Total Revenue

Continued here:
Stem Cells Market Study for 2020 to 2026 Providing Information on Key Players, Growth Drivers and Industry Challenges|CCBC, Vcanbio, Boyalife - Owned

Germ cell – Wikipedia

A germ cell is any biological cell that gives rise to the gametes of an organism that reproduces sexually. In many animals, the germ cells originate in the primitive streak and migrate via the gut of an embryo to the developing gonads. There, they undergo meiosis, followed by cellular differentiation into mature gametes, either eggs or sperm. Unlike animals, plants do not have germ cells designated in early development. Instead, germ cells can arise from somatic cells in the adult (such as the floral meristem of flowering plants).[1][2][3]

Multicellular eukaryotes are made of two fundamental cell types. Germ cells produce gametes and are the only cells that can undergo meiosis as well as mitosis. These cells are sometimes said to be immortal because they are the link between generations. Somatic cells are all the other cells that form the building blocks of the body and they only divide by mitosis. The lineage of germ cells is called germ line. Germ cell specification begins during cleavage in many animals or in the epiblast during gastrulation in birds and mammals. After transport, involving passive movements and active migration, germ cells arrive at the developing gonads. In humans, sexual differentiation starts approximately 6 weeks after conception. The end-products of the germ cell cycle are the egg or sperm.[4]

Under special conditions in vitro germ cells can acquire properties similar to those of embryonic stem cells (ES). The underlying mechanism of that change is still unknown. These changed cells are then called embryonic germ cells (EG). Both EG and ES are pluripotent in vitro, but only ES has proven pluripotency in vivo. Recent studies have demonstrated that it is possible to give rise to primordial germ cells from ES.[5]

There are two mechanisms to establish the germ cell lineage in the embryo. The first way is called preformistic and involves that the cells destined to become germ cells inherit the specific germ cell determinants present in the germ plasm (specific area of the cytoplasm) of the egg (ovum). The unfertilized egg of most animals is asymmetrical: different regions of the cytoplasm contain different amounts of mRNA and proteins.

The second way is found in mammals, where germ cells are not specified by such determinants but by signals controlled by zygotic genes. In mammals, a few cells of the early embryo are induced by signals of neighboring cells to become primordial germ cells. Mammalian eggs are somewhat symmetrical and after the first divisions of the fertilized egg, the produced cells are all totipotent. This means that they can differentiate in any cell type in the body and thus germ cells. Specification of primordial germ cells in the laboratory mouse is initiated by high levels of bone morphogenetic protein (BMP) signaling, which activates expression of the transcription factors Blimp-1/Prdm1 and Prdm14.[6]

It is speculated that induction was the ancestral mechanism, and that the preformistic, or inheritance, mechanism of germ cell establishment arose from convergent evolution.[7] There are several key differences between these two mechanisms that may provide reasoning for the evolution of germ plasm inheritance. One difference is that typically inheritance occurs almost immediately during development (around the blastoderm stage) while induction typically does not occur until gastrulation. As germ cells are quiescent and therefore not dividing, they are not susceptible to mutation.

Since the germ cell lineage is not established right away by induction, there is a higher chance for mutation to occur before the cells are specified. Mutation rate data is available that indicates a higher rate of germ line mutations in mice and humans, species which undergo induction, than in C. elegans and Drosophila melanogaster, species which undergo inheritance.[8] A lower mutation rate would be selected for, which is one possible reason for the convergent evolution of the germ plasm. However, more mutation rate data will need to be collected across several taxa, particularly data collected both before and after the specification of primordial germ cells before this hypothesis on the evolution of germ plasm can be backed by strong evidence.

Primordial germ cells, germ cells that still have to reach the gonads, also known as PGCs, precursor germ cells or gonocytes, divide repeatedly on their migratory route through the gut and into the developing gonads.[9]

In the model organism Drosophila, pole cells passively move from the posterior end of the embryo to the posterior midgut because of the infolding of the blastoderm. Then they actively move through the gut into the mesoderm. Endodermal cells differentiate and together with Wunen proteins they induce the migration through the gut. Wunen proteins are chemorepellents that lead the germ cells away from the endoderm and into the mesoderm. After splitting into two populations, the germ cells continue migrating laterally and in parallel until they reach the gonads. Columbus proteins, chemoattractants, stimulate the migration in the gonadal mesoderm.[citation needed]

In the Xenopus egg, the germ cell determinants are found in the most vegetal blastomeres. These presumptive PGCs are brought to the endoderm of the blastocoel by gastrulation. They are determined as germ cells when gastrulation is completed. Migration from the hindgut along the gut and across the dorsal mesentery then takes place. The germ cells split into two populations and move to the paired gonadal ridges. Migration starts with 3-4 cells that undergo three rounds of cell division so that about 30 PGCs arrive at the gonads. On the migratory path of the PGCs, the orientation of underlying cells and their secreted molecules such as fibronectin play an important role.[citation needed]

Mammals have a migratory path comparable to that in Xenopus. Migration begins with 50 gonocytes and about 5,000 PGCs arrive at the gonads. Proliferation occurs also during migration and lasts for 34 weeks in humans.[citation needed]

PGCs come from the epiblast and migrate subsequently into the mesoderm, the endoderm and the posterior of the yolk sac. Migration then takes place from the hindgut along the gut and across the dorsal mesentery to reach the gonads (4.5 weeks in human beings). Fibronectin maps here also a polarized network together with other molecules. The somatic cells on the path of germ cells provide them attractive, repulsive, and survival signals. But germ cells also send signals to each other.[citation needed]

In reptiles and birds, germ cells use another path. PGCs come from the epiblast and move to the hypoblast to form the germinal crescent (anterior extraembryonic structure). The gonocytes then squeeze into blood vessels and use the circulatory system for transport. They squeeze out of the vessels when they are at height of the gonadal ridges. Cell adhesion on the endothelium of the blood vessels and molecules such as chemoattractants are probably involved in helping PGCs migrate.[citation needed]

The SRY (Sex-determining Region of the Y chromosome) directs male development in mammals by inducing the somatic cells of the gonadal ridge to develop into a testis, rather than an ovary.[10]Sry is expressed in a small group of somatic cells of the gonads and influences these cells to become Sertoli cells (supporting cells in testis). Sertoli cells are responsible for sexual development along a male pathway in many ways. One of these ways involves stimulation of the arriving primordial cells to differentiate into sperm. In the absence of the Sry gene, primordial germ cells differentiate into eggs. Removing genital ridges before they start to develop into testes or ovaries results in the development of a female, independent of the carried sex chromosome.[10]

Retinoic acid (RA) is an important factor that causes differentiation of primordial germ cells. In males, the mesonephros releases retinoic acid. RA then goes to the gonad causing an enzyme called CYP26B1 to be released by sertoli cells. CYP26B1 metabolizes RA, and because sertoli cells surround primordial germ cells (PGCs), PGCs never come into contact with RA, which results in a lack of proliferation of PGCs and no meiotic entry. This keeps spermatogenesis from starting too soon. In females, the mesonephros releases RA, which enters the gonad. RA stimulates Stra8, a critical gatekeeper of meiosis (1), and Rec8, causing primordial germ cells to enter meiosis. This causes the development of oocytes that arrest in meiosis I. [11]

Gametogenesis, the development of diploid germ cells into either haploid eggs or sperm (respectively oogenesis and spermatogenesis) is different for each species but the general stages are similar. Oogenesis and spermatogenesis have many features in common, they both involve:

Despite their homologies they also have major differences:[citation needed]

After migration primordial germ cells will become oogonia in the forming gonad (ovary). The oogonia proliferate extensively by mitotic divisions, up to 5-7 million cells in humans. But then many of these oogonia die and about 50,000 remain. These cells differentiate into primary oocytes. In week 11-12 post coitus the first meiotic division begins (before birth for most mammals) and remains arrested in prophase I from a few days to many years depending on the species. It is in this period or in some cases at the beginning of sexual maturity that the primary oocytes secrete proteins to form a coat called zona pellucida and they also produce cortical granules containing enzymes and proteins needed for fertilization. Meiosis stands by because of the follicular granulosa cells that send inhibitory signals through gap junctions and the zona pellucida. Sexual maturation is the beginning of periodic ovulation. Ovulation is the regular release of one oocyte from the ovary into the reproductive tract and is preceded by follicular growth. A few follicle cells are stimulated to grow but only one oocyte is ovulated. A primordial follicle consists of an epithelial layer of follicular granulosa cells enclosing an oocyte. The pituitary gland secrete follicle-stimulating hormones (FSHs) that stimulate follicular growth and oocyte maturation. The thecal cells around each follicle secrete estrogen. This hormone stimulates the production of FSH receptors on the follicular granulosa cells and has at the same time a negative feedback on FSH secretion. This results in a competition between the follicles and only the follicle with the most FSH receptors survives and is ovulated. Meiotic division I goes on in the ovulated oocyte stimulated by luteinizing hormones (LHs) produced by the pituitary gland. FSH and LH block the gap junctions between follicle cells and the oocyte therefore inhibiting communication between them. Most follicular granulosa cells stay around the oocyte and so form the cumulus layer. Large non-mammalian oocytes accumulate egg yolk, glycogen, lipids, ribosomes, and the mRNA needed for protein synthesis during early embryonic growth. These intensive RNA biosynthese are mirrored in the structure of the chromosomes, which decondense and form lateral loops giving them a lampbrush appearance (see Lampbrush chromosome). Oocyte maturation is the following phase of oocyte development. It occurs at sexual maturity when hormones stimulate the oocyte to complete meiotic division I. The meiotic division I produces 2 cells differing in size: a small polar body and a large secondary oocyte. The secondary oocyte undergoes meiotic division II and that results in the formation of a second small polar body and a large mature egg, both being haploid cells. The polar bodies degenerate.[12] Oocyte maturation stands by at metaphase II in most vertebrates. During ovulation, the arrested secondary oocyte leaves the ovary and matures rapidly into an egg ready for fertilization. Fertilization will cause the egg to complete meiosis II. In human females there is proliferation of the oogonia in the fetus, meiosis starts then before birth and stands by at meiotic division I up to 50 years, ovulation begins at puberty.[citation needed]

A 10 - 20 m large somatic cell generally needs 24 hours to double its mass for mitosis. By this way it would take a very long time for that cell to reach the size of a mammalian egg with a diameter of 100 m (some insects have eggs of about 1,000 m or greater). Eggs have therefore special mechanisms to grow to their large size. One of these mechanisms is to have extra copies of genes: meiotic division I is paused so that the oocyte grows while it contains two diploid chromosome sets. Some species produce many extra copies of genes, such as amphibians, which may have up to 1 or 2 million copies. A complementary mechanism is partly dependent on syntheses of other cells. In amphibians, birds, and insects, yolk is made by the liver (or its equivalent) and secreted into the blood. Neighboring accessory cells in the ovary can also provide nutritive help of two types. In some invertebrates some oogonia become nurse cells. These cells are connected by cytoplasmic bridges with oocytes. The nurse cells of insects provide oocytes macromolecules such as proteins and mRNA. Follicular granulosa cells are the second type of accessory cells in the ovary in both invertebrates and vertebrates. They form a layer around the oocyte and nourish them with small molecules, no macromolecules, but eventually their smaller precursor molecules, by gap junctions.[citation needed]

The mutation frequency of female germline cells in mice is about 5-fold lower than that of somatic cells, according to one study.[13]

The mouse oocyte in the dictyate (prolonged diplotene) stage of meiosis actively repairs DNA damage, whereas DNA repair was not detected in the pre-dictyate (leptotene, zygotene and pachytene) stages of meiosis.[14] The long period of meiotic arrest at the four chromatid dictyate stage of meiosis may facilitate recombinational repair of DNA damages.[15]

Mammalian spermatogenesis is representative for most animals. In human males, spermatogenesis begins at puberty in seminiferous tubules in the testicles and go on continuously. Spermatogonia are immature germ cells. They proliferate continuously by mitotic divisions around the outer edge of the seminiferous tubules, next to the basal lamina. Some of these cells stop proliferation and differentiate into primary spermatocytes. After they proceed through the first meiotic division, two secondary spermatocytes are produced. The two secondary spermatocytes undergo the second meiotic division to form four haploid spermatids. These spermatids differentiate morphologically into sperm by nuclear condensation, ejection of the cytoplasm and formation of the acrosome and flagellum.[citation needed]

The developing male germ cells do not complete cytokinesis during spermatogenesis. Consequently, cytoplasmic bridges assure connection between the clones of differentiating daughter cells to form a syncytium. In this way the haploid cells are supplied with all the products of a complete diploid genome. Sperm that carry a Y chromosome, for example, is supplied with essential molecules that are encoded by genes on the X chromosome.[citation needed]

Success of germ cell proliferation and differentiation is also ensured by a balance between germ cell development and programmed cell death. Identification of death triggering signals and corresponding receptor proteins is important for the fertilization potential of males. Apoptosis in germ cells can be induced by variety of naturally occurring toxicant. Receptors belonging to the taste 2 family are specialized to detect bitter compounds including extremely toxic alkaloids. So taste receptors play a functional role for controlling apoptosis in male reproductive tissue. [16]

The mutation frequencies for cells throughout the different stages of spermatogenesis in mice is similar to that in female germline cells, that is 5 to 10-fold lower than the mutation frequency in somatic cells[17][13] Thus low mutation frequency is a feature of germline cells in both sexes. Homologous recombinational repair of double-strand breaks occurs in mouse during sequential stages of spermatogenesis, but is most prominent in spermatocytes.[15] The lower frequencies of mutation in germ cells compared to somatic cells appears to be due to more efficient removal of DNA damages by repair processes including homologous recombination repair during meiosis.[citation needed] Mutation frequency during spermatogenesis increases with age.[17] The mutations in spermatogenic cells of old mice include an increased prevalence of transversion mutations compared to young and middle-aged mice.[18]

Germ cell tumor is a rare cancer that can affect people at all ages. As of 2018, germ cell tumors account for 3% of all cancers in children and adolescents 0-19 years old.[19]

Germ cell tumors are generally located in the gonads but can also appear in the abdomen, pelvis, mediastinum, or brain. Germ cells migrating to the gonads may not reach that intended destination and a tumor can grow wherever they end up, but the exact cause is still unknown. These tumors can be benign or malignant.[20]

On arrival at the gonad, primordial germ cells that do not properly differentiate may produce germ cell tumors of the ovary or testis in a mouse model.[21]

Inducing differentiation of certain cells to germ cells has many applications. One implication of induced differentiation is that it may allow for the eradication of male and female factor infertility. Furthermore, it would allow same-sex couples to have biological children if sperm could be produced from female cells or if eggs could be produced from male cells. Efforts to create sperm and eggs from skin and embryonic stem cells were pioneered by Hayashi and Saitou's research group at Kyoto University.[22] These researchers produced primordial germ cell-like cells (PGLCs) from embryonic stem cells (ESCs) and skin cells in vitro.

Hayashi and Saitou's group was able to promote the differentiation of embryonic stem cells into PGCs with the use of precise timing and bone morphogenetic protein 4 (Bmp4). Upon succeeding with embryonic stem cells, the group was able to successfully promote the differentiation of induced pluripotent stem cells (iPSCs) into PGLCs. These primordial germ cell-like cells were then used to create spermatozoa and oocytes.[23]

Efforts for human cells are less advanced due to the fact that the PGCs formed by these experiments are not always viable. In fact Hayashi and Saitou's method is only one third as effective as current in vitro fertilization methods, and the produced PGCs are not always functional. Furthermore, not only are the induced PGCs not as effective as naturally occurring PGCs, but they are also less effective at erasing their epigenetic markers when they differentiate from iPSCs or ESCs to PGCs.

There are also other applications of induced differentiation of germ cells. Another study showed that culture of human embryonic stem cells in mitotically inactivated porcine ovarian fibroblasts (POF) causes differentiation into germ cells, as evidenced by gene expression analysis.[24]

Originally posted here:
Germ cell - Wikipedia

Cell Therapy Market Analysis Of Global Trends, Demand And Competition 2020-2028 – Owned

Trusted Business Insights answers what are the scenarios for growth and recovery and whether there will be any lasting structural impact from the unfolding crisis for the Cell Therapy market.

Trusted Business Insights presents an updated and Latest Study on Cell Therapy Market 2019-2026. The report contains market predictions related to market size, revenue, production, CAGR, Consumption, gross margin, price, and other substantial factors. While emphasizing the key driving and restraining forces for this market, the report also offers a complete study of the future trends and developments of the market.The report further elaborates on the micro and macroeconomic aspects including the socio-political landscape that is anticipated to shape the demand of the Cell Therapy market during the forecast period (2019-2029). It also examines the role of the leading market players involved in the industry including their corporate overview, financial summary, and SWOT analysis.

Get Sample Copy of this Report @ Cell Therapy Market Size, Share, Market Research and Industry Forecast Report, 2020-2027 (Includes Business Impact of COVID-19)

Industry Insights, Market Size, CAGR, High-Level Analysis: Cell Therapy Market

The global cell therapy market size was valued at USD 5.8 billion in 2019 and is projected to witness a CAGR of 5.4% during the forecast period. The development of precision medicine and advancements in Advanced Therapies Medicinal Products (ATMPS) in context to their efficiency and manufacturing are expected to be the major drivers for the market. In addition, automation in adult stem cell and cord blood processing and storage are the key technological advancements that have supported the growth of the market for cell therapy. The investment in technological advancements for decentralizing manufacturing of this therapy is anticipated to significantly benefit the market. Miltenyi Biotec is one of the companies that has contributed to the decentralization in manufacturing through its CliniMACS Prodigy device. The device is an all-in-one automated manufacturing system that exhibits the capability of manufacturing various cell types.

An increase in financing and investments in the space to support the launch of new companies is expected to boost the organic revenue growth in the market for cell therapy. For instance, in July 2019, Bayer invested USD 215 million for the launch of Century Therapeutics, a U.S.-based biotechnology startup that aimed at developing therapies for solid tumors and blood cancer. Funding was further increased to USD 250 billion by a USD 35 million contribution from Versant Ventures and Fujifilm Cellular Dynamics. The biomanufacturing companies are working in collaboration with customers and other stakeholders to enhance the clinical development and commercial manufacturing of these therapies. Biomanufacturers and OEMs such as GE healthcare are providing end-to-end flexible technology solutions to accelerate the rapid launch of therapies in the market for cell therapy. The expanding stem cells arena has also triggered the entry of new players in the market for cell therapy. Celularity, Century Therapeutics, Rubius Therapeutics, ViaCyte, Fate Therapeutics, ReNeuron, Magenta Therapeutics, Frequency Therapeutics, Promethera Biosciences, and Cellular Dynamics are some startups that have begun their business in this arena lately. Use-type Insights The clinical-use segment is expected to grow lucratively during the forecast period owing to the expanding pipeline for therapies. The number of cancer cellular therapies in the pipeline rose from 753 in 2018 to 1,011 in 2019, as per Cancer Research Institute (CRI). The major application of stem cell treatment is hematopoietic stem cell transplantation for the treatment of the immune system and blood disorders for cancer patients. In Europe, blood stem cells are used for the treatment of more than 26,000 patients each year. These factors have driven the revenue for malignancies and autoimmune disorders segment. Currently, most of the stem cells used are derived from bone marrow, blood, and umbilical cord resulting in the larger revenue share in this segment. On the other hand, cell lines, such as Induced Pluripotent Stem Cells (iPSC) and human Embryonic Stem Cells (hESC) are recognized to possess high growth potential. As a result, a several research entities and companies are making significant investments in R&D pertaining to iPSC- and hESC-derived products. Therapy Type Insights of Cell Therapy Market

An inclination of physicians towards therapeutic use of autologous and allogeneic cord blood coupled with rising awareness about the use of cord cells and tissues across various therapeutic areas is driving revenue generation. Currently, the allogeneic therapies segment accounted for the largest share in 2019 in the cell therapy market. The presence of a substantial number of approved products for clinical use has led to the large revenue share of this segment.

Furthermore, the practice of autologous tissue transplantation is restricted by the limited availability of healthy tissue in the patient. Moreover, this type of tissue transplantation is not recommended for young patients wherein tissues are in the growth and development phase. Allogeneic tissue transplantation has effectively addressed the above-mentioned challenges associated with the use of autologous transplantation. However, autologous therapies are growing at the fastest growth rate owing to various advantages over allogeneic therapies, which are expected to boost adoption in this segment. Various advantages include easy availability, no need for HLA-matched donor identification, lower risk of life-threatening complications, a rare occurrence of graft failure, and low mortality rate.

Regional Insights of Cell Therapy Market

The presence of leading universities such as the Institute for Stem Cell Biology and Regenerative Medicine, Stanford University, and Yale Stem Cell Center that support research activities in U.S. is one of the key factor driving the market for cell therapy in North America. Moreover, strong regulatory and financing support from the federal bodies for expansion of this arena in U.S. as well as Canada is driving the market. In Asia Pacific, the market is anticipated to emerge as a lucrative source of revenue owing to the availability of therapies at lower prices coupled with growing awareness among the healthcare entities and patients pertaining the potential of these therapies in chronic disease management. Japan is leading the Asian market for cell therapy, which can be attributed to its fast growth as a hub for research on regenerative medicine. Moreover, the Japan government has recognized regenerative medicine and cell therapy as a key contributor to the countrys economic growth. This has positively influenced the attention of global players towards the Asian market, thereby driving marketing operations in the region.

Market Share Insights of Cell Therapy Market

Some key companies operating in this market for cell therapy are Fibrocell Science, Inc.; JCR Pharmaceuticals Co. Ltd.; Kolon TissueGene, Inc.; PHARMICELL Co., Ltd.; Osiris Therapeutics, Inc.; MEDIPOST; Cells for Cells; NuVasive, Inc.; Stemedica Cell Technologies, Inc.; Vericel Corporation; and ANTEROGEN.CO.,LTD. These companies are collaborating with the blood centers and plasma collection centers in order to obtain cells for use in therapeutics development. Several companies have marked their presence in the market by acquiring small and emerging therapy developers. For instance, in August 2019, Bayer acquired BlueRock Therapeutics to establish its position in the market for cell therapy. BlueRock Therapeutics is a U.S. company that relies on a proprietary induced pluripotent stem cell (iPSC) platform for cell therapy development. Several companies are making an entry in the space through the Contract Development and Manufacturing Organization (CDMO) business model. For example, in April 2019, Hitachi Chemical Co. Ltd. acquired apceth Biopharma GmbH to expand its global footprint in the CDMO market for cell and gene therapy manufacturing.

Segmentations, Sub Segmentations, CAGR, & High-Level Analysis overview of Cell Therapy Market Research Report This report forecasts revenue growth at global, regional, and country levels and provides an analysis of the latest industry trends in each of the sub-segments from 2019 to 2030. For the purpose of this study, this market research report has segmented the global cell therapy market on the basis of use-type, therapy-type, and region:

Use-Type Outlook (Revenue, USD Million, 2019 2030)

Clinical-use

By Therapeutic Area

Malignancies

Musculoskeletal Disorders

Autoimmune Disorders

Dermatology

Others

By Cell Type

Stem Cell Therapies

BM, Blood, & Umbilical Cord-derived Stem Cells

Adipose derived cells

Others

Non-stem Cell Therapies

Research-use

Therapy Type Outlook (Revenue, USD Million, 2019 2030)

Allogeneic Therapies

Autologous Therapies

Quick Read Table of Contents of this Report @ Cell Therapy Market Size, Share, Market Research and Industry Forecast Report, 2020-2027 (Includes Business Impact of COVID-19)

Trusted Business Insights Shelly Arnold Media & Marketing Executive Email Me For Any Clarifications Connect on LinkedIn Click to follow Trusted Business Insights LinkedIn for Market Data and Updates. US: +1 646 568 9797 UK: +44 330 808 0580

More here:
Cell Therapy Market Analysis Of Global Trends, Demand And Competition 2020-2028 - Owned

Embryonic Stem-Cell Research: The Promise and the Reality …

by Charles Whitaker Forerunner, "Prophecy Watch," July 2006 2006-07-01

"Know that the Lord, He is God; It is He who has made us, and not we ourselves." Psalm 100:3

Embryonic stem-cell research is both scientifically feasible and morally permissibleat least according to the majority of the electorate in the State of California. In the November 2004 elections, an overwhelming majority of those voters approved an initiative that funds embryonic stem-cell research through $3 billion worth of bonds. Emotion rather than reason probably generated most of the "aye" votes, many voters responding to the biotech industry's marketing ploy of airing testimonials from desperately sick or injured celebrities. "Don't deny us the only hope we have," they pled. "A vote against embryonic stem-cell research is a vote against life."

California's electorate asideand apparently many in both Houses of Congress, where stem-cell research bills are now being debated, as wellis the harvesting of embryonic stems cells in fact moral? Is there any substantive scientific evidence that embryonic stem-cell research can make good on its promises to cure? Who loses from this research? Who gains?

In this two-part article, we will review embryonic stem-cell research: its nature and goals, its scientific challenges, its moral issues, and its alternatives. What is it all about?

Let us start by getting the terms straight.

Embryology 101

(Underlined words are defined in the glossary at the end.)

There are two types of human reproduction: sexual and asexual. In sexual reproduction, the male gamete (or sperm cell) unites with the female gamete (or egg cell) to produce a zygote. This union is called fertilization. Half the chromosomes of the zygote come from the sperm cell, half from the egg cell.

Sexual reproduction comes in two varieties. The first, and more common, is fertilization through coition. This is in utero fertilization, where the zygote comes into being in the uterus. The second kind is in vitro fertilization (IVF), where the sperm unites with an egg in a laboratory Petri dish. From that point, the zygote (and later, the embryo) can develop in culture.

Asexual reproduction is commonly called cloning. Procedurally, the nucleus of an egg cell is removed in the laboratory. Then, the nucleus from another type of cell, any body cell, is "inserted" into that egg cell. Stimulating this egg cell with an electrical charge creates a viable zygote.

While not usually part of the syllabus of Embryology 101, it is important to understand two things about embryos.

1. First, every human zygote, no matter how it is produced, is a human being who is in his first stage of development. Every zygote is an individual. Unless death intervenes, the zygote will become an embryo, then a fetus, then an infant, then an adolescent, and eventually an adult.

2. Second, the absence of a sperm does not render an embryo created through cloning anything less than a full-fledged embryo. A cloned embryo is an embryo in every sense of the term. One writer mentions that even a stem-cell researcher as prominent as John Gearhard of Johns Hopkins University insists that the cloned organism starts out its existence as a zygote/embryo.1

Upon its creation, the zygote has two tasks immediately ahead of it. In the case of natural conception, it must implant itself into the wall of the womb. If it does not accomplish this implantation soon, it will perish for lack of nourishment. All human life, at whatever stage, must have sustenance and a proper environment to continue living.2

Embryology Development

The zygote's other task is to growto split into more cells. It starts this process almost immediately, and in the case of in utero fertilization, long before womb-attachment. Growing, the zygote becomes an embryo and later a fetus. Importantly, initial growth does not simply mean adding more cells; it does not merely imply "getting bigger." At this point, adding size, as a boy does when he "bulks up" by exercising his muscles, is not the aim in a person's development. Instead, from the single-cell zygote must spring each of the 210 basic cell types in the human body. Examples of such cell types include brain cells, bone cells, red blood cells. These are called adult cells.

Adult cells by definition perform highly specialized tasks. Red blood cells provide a good example of this specialization. Their task is to supply oxygen to other cells. They are able to carry out that task because they have iron in them. The iron oxidizes; it rusts. (That is why "red" blood cells appear red.) The oxidization process means that oxygen becomes attached to the iron. It is in fact the rusted iron, carried by these red blood cells, which provides oxygen to other cells.

The zygote's task, then, is not just to add numbers of cells, but to produce 210 different types of adult cells. The process by which a zygote does this is called cellular differentiation. Here is where embryonic stem cells enter the picture. When a zygote begins to split into other cells, it does not form specialized, adult cells. Rather, it forms stem cells. These stem cells facilitate cellular differentiation. Stem in this usage means "source" or "origin," as in the sentence, "Adultery stems from lustful thoughts." Thus, specialized (adult) cells stem from stem cells.

Cellular differentiation works this way: When a stem cell divides, it forms two cells.

One is a look-alike; it replaces the original stem cell.

The other cell is truly remarkable; it has the ability to split into something new. That something new is a differentiated stem cell, and it is quite different from the stem cell that produced it. This new stem cell is a more specialized cell, but it is not yet an adult cell.

A Stepping-Stone Process

Think of this new, different stem cell as one "stepping stone" toward the final product, an adult cell. Between original zygote and final adult cell, several stepping-stones will be needed. Each stone brings you closer to that adult cell. With each successive splitting of a stem cell, a more specialized cell comes into being, until, after a number of "generations," the adult cell appears. That cell may be, say, a red blood cellhighly specialized in its function. It could be a white blood cell, a brain cell, a bone cellany of 210 distinct types of adult cells.

What might be the basic difference between stem cells and adult cells? It is probably the type of cells they are capable of producing.

Adult cells can produce only after their kind. A white blood cell cannot breed a brain cell, but only another white blood cell.

However, the zygote and stem cells are able to produce cells quite different from themselves. The zygote is called totipotentable to generate all other cells. The earliest stem cells, those descending directly from the zygote, are also characterized by totipotency; they, too, can ultimately (that is, through several "generations" of splits) produce all other types of cellsbrain cells, bone cells, etc.

Importantly, this differentiation is not random but is tightly organized. Something signals a particular stem cell to act as the ultimate progenitor of a brain cell. That something also signals another stem cell to produce, after several generations, a liver cell. One expert summarizes the challenge this way:

Embryonic development is one of the most fascinating of all biological processes. A newly fertilized egg faces the daunting challenge of not only generating all of the tissues of the mature animal but organizing them into a functionally integrated whole. . . . If a developing embryo is not to end up a mass of disorganized tissues, it must do more than generate adult cell types. Embryos must orchestrate and choreograph an elaborate stage production that gives rise to a functional organism. They must direct intricate cell movements that bring together populations of cells only to separate them again, mold and shape organs through the birth of some cells and the death of others, and build ever more elaborate interacting systems while destroying others that serve only transient, embryonic functions. Throughout the ceaseless building, moving, and remodeling of embryonic development, new cells with unique characteristics are constantly being generated and integrated into the overall structure of the developing embryo. Science has only the most rudimentary understanding of the nature of the blueprint that orders embryonic development.3

Although not understood by man, this "blueprint that orders" is vitally important in the development of the individual. Stem cells that take ordersfollow the blueprintbuild healthy bodies. Stem cells that do not take orders result in a monster. Monster is the English translation of the Greek word teratoma, a type of tumor (benign or malignant) whose initial cells appear totipotent (or at least multipotent). They are like stem cells, keen to produce a wide variety of adult cell types (skin, bone, muscle, hair, teeth). However, the tissue they generate is "all massed together in a chaotic lump. . . . Unlike embryos, tumors generate adult cell types in a hopelessly undirected manner."4 The teratoma's initial stem-like cells lack a blueprint, or at least refuse to follow one. The result can be an often lethal, malignant monster.

Dissociated Embryonic Stem Cells

What is the nature of this ordering blueprint? Put differently: What generates the signals that tell a particular stem cell to differentiate into a red blood cell as distinct from a bone cell? How does a given stem cell know to generate a line of stem cells that will finally culminate in, say, an adult brain cell?

In this area, there are more questions than answers. Scientists know that there are three types of signals:

1. Molecular: Chemical substances are known to provide signals to embryonic stem cells.

2. Electrical: It is widely recognized that embryonic development takes place in an electrical field.

3. Mechanical: Embryonic stem cells seem to respond to structural tensions provided by cells in their proximity.

In the early 1990s, scientists learned that they could physically "extract" some stem cells from an embryo they had created through in vitro fertilization or through cloning. These separated (or "harvested") cells are called dissociated embryonic stem cells. In culture, these cells reproduce indefinitelyand fast! "One small flask of cells . . . will generate a quantity of stem cells roughly equivalent in weight to the entire human population of the earth in less than sixty days."5 However, these harvested stem cells simply reproduce; they do not differentiate into more and more specialized adult cell types. This is because they lack signals. Separated from the embryo, these dissociated cells find no blueprint to follow. They become a mass of unorganized (indeed, disorganized) cells, not unlike a teratoma.

This finding disheartened scientists until they discovered they could simulate (or replicate) those signals, or at least the chemical ones. Wow! What a blockbuster! Just provide the right signals, and there, in culture, is produced adult, disease-free cells of whatever type is needed to bring about a cure.

Let us say a scientist "signaled" these disassociated stem cells to differentiate, ultimately, into pancreatic cells, which are adult cells. Once produced in sufficient number, these adult pancreas cells could be implanted into a person with a bad pancreas, a diabetic. The effect, scientists promise, would be curative. The pancreas would eventually start producing insulin normally.

Such is the promise of embryonic stem-cell research. That is why the celebrities in California praised it so much. That is why a majority of voters added $3 billion to California's already burdensome indebtedness. The biotech firms love every minute (uh, dollar) of it!

In Search of a Better Blueprint

Bottom line, what is embryonic stem-cell research all about? Certainly, it is about determining which signal produces a pancreas cell, which produces a white blood cell, which one a bone cell, and so on. It is a search for effective signals to embryonic stem cells.

Far more fundamentally, however, it is a search for a blueprint. It is a search to find the organizing plan the zygote/embryo follows as it differentiates cells, configures them into systems, and integrates them into the single organism scientists call homo sapiens. In short, stem-cell research is the search for the pattern God uses to "fashion" us in the womb.6Psalm 139:13-16 makes it clear that God saw David's blueprint before his first stem cell split; the person David was the result of God's working "skillfully" according to that plan. David writes,

For You have formed my inward parts; You have covered me in my mother's womb. I will praise You, for I am fearfully and wonderfully made. . . . My frame was not hidden from You, When I was made in secret, And skillfully wrought in the lowest parts of the earth. Your eyes saw my substance, being yet unformed.

We can be sure that scientists, if they could figure out that blueprint, would want to make it "better." They would want to create their kind of person, a superman. Paying no attention at all to Psalm 100:3, they forget that man does not create man. God does.

Next month, we will look at the scientific challenges and moral issues that surround embryonic stem-cell research.

Glossary of Terms

Adult Cell A specialized cell, like a brain or heart cell. Unlike stem cells, an adult cell can produce cells only of its own type. Many biologists identify about 210 discreet types of adult cells.

Adult Stem Cells Stem cells present in the extra-uterine individual, retrievable by biopsy. Not to be confused with adult cells.

Cellular Differentiation The process by which stem cells generate cells quite different from themselves. The generated cells are different in that they are more specialized.

Cloning A fertilization process marked by the absence of a male gamete (sperm). The nucleus of an egg cell is removed in the laboratory. Then, the nucleus from any other body cell is "inserted" into that egg cell. Stimulating the egg cell with an electrical charge creates a zygote, which can develop in culture. The individual produced is said to be a clone of the donor who supplied the substituted nucleus.

Disassociated Embryonic Stem Cells Embryonic stem cells that are extracted from an embryo created through in vitro fertilization or through cloning. The cells so "harvested" from the embryo can be nurtured in culture, where they split indefinitely and quickly. The embryo that donates the stem cells dies.

Embryo An individual (human or animal) from the time the zygote first begins cellular differentiation. In the case of human, the organism is termed an embryo through the eighth week after fertilization.

Embryonic Stem Cells Stem cells that are the immediate descendants of the zygote. Responding to molecular, electrical, and mechanical stimuli (or signals), these cells produce more specialized stem cells, which in turn produce even more specialized stem cells. The ultimate product is an adult cell, such as a white or red blood cell.

Female Gamete Egg (ovum).

Fertilization The process by which the male gamete (sperm) unites with the female gamete (egg). The immediate result is a new individual in the zygote stage of development. Fertilization can be sexual, effected through coition or IVF, or asexual, effected through cloning.

Fetus In humans, an individual from the ninth week after fertilization until parturition (birth).

Implantation The process by which the zygote/embryo attaches itself to the womb for sustenance.

In utero Fertilization Sexual fertilization wherein the male gamete (sperm) unites with the female gamete (egg) in the uterus. This is coition, the traditional method of fertilization.

In vitro Fertilization Sexual fertilization wherein the male gamete (sperm) unites with the female gamete (egg) in a laboratory Petri dish. The embryo can then develop in culture. Acronym: IVF.

Male Gamete Sperm cell.

Multipotent Capable of differentiating into (that is, ultimately producing) a number of other types of cells, but not all types of cells, Multipotency is a characteristic of stem cells that are more than one generation away from original stem cells. Such cells are more specialized, and are less able to generate any type of cell. The more specialized a cell (that is, the more generations it is away from the original stem cells) the less multipotent it is. Also termed pluripotent.

Pre-Embryo An embryo before implantation in the womb. This term has no meaningful biological referent. "Pre-embryo" implies that the fertilized organism, before attachment to the womb, is not an embryo at all. By definition, however, the zygote became an embryo immediately after it began to split. In other words, an embryo is an embryo, regardless of its state of womb-attachment. Before attachment, an embryo is still an embryojust an un-implanted one. The term pre-embryo implies that a zygote/embryo is not a human organism until attachment and can therefore be destroyed. It is a term coined by politically-minded bio-technicians to give them "time" to kill, a window of time between fertilization and attachment. The term seeks to skirt the moral issue of murder.

Stem Cell A cell that becomes the source (hence, "stem") of other cells. Stem cells can produce more specialized cells, such as brain or bone cells. See totipotent and multipotent.

Teratoma A type of tumor resulting from multipotent (pluripotent) cells. Because the initial cells carry the characteristic of multipotency, they are similar to stem cells. However, the teratoma's cells follow no blueprint. They do not produce an organism with integrated systems, but a confused mass of tissue. In these tumors appear cell types quite different from that of the surrounding tissue (for instance, an ovarian teratoma may contain hair, teeth, and even sweat glands). Also referred to as teratomata.

Totipotent Able to differentiate into (that is, ultimately produce) all other types of cells. Totipotency is a characteristic of the zygote and of the stem cells that are its immediate progeny.

Zygote The highly specialized single cell resulting from fertilization.

Descriptive Bibliography

Campbell, Stuart, MD, Watch Me Grow! St. Martin's Press. Dr. Campbell trail-blazed the use of ultrasound. Watch Me Grow! presents a truly remarkable week-by-week window into human embryonic and fetal intrauterine development. These are not the blurry images of early ultrasound, but beautifully clear and crisp 3-D and 4-D images of younguns on their way to parturition. Watch Me Grow! is 112 pages of awe-inspiring magnificence, a remarkable use of technology to display God's glory.

Colson, Charles and Cameron, Nigel, eds., Human Dignity in the Biotech Century: A Christian Vision for Public Policy, InterVarsity Press. This collection of surveys by experts covers every facet of modern biotechnology: IVF, cloning, stem-cell research, genetic engineering. Eric Cohen, editor of the New Atlantis, reviews this book in the January 2005 number of First Things (http://www.firstthings.com/ftissues/ft0501/reviews/cohen.htm).

Condic, L. Maureen, "The Basic Facts about Stem Cells," First Things, January 2002, p. 30. This short article provides the "must know" facts about stem-cell research. This article is available at http://www.firstthings.com/ftissues/ft0201/articles/condic.html.

Condic, "Stem Cells and False Hopes," First Things, August/September 2002, p. 20. Ms. Condic, Assistant Professor of Neurobiology and Anatomy at the University of Utah, discusses the exploitation of desperately sick individuals by biotech firms. This article is available at http://www.firstthings.com/ftissues/ft0208/opinion/condic.html.

Saunders, Jr., William L., "Embryology: Inconvenient Facts," First Things, December 2004, p. 15. Saunders, Senior Fellow and Director of the Center for Human Life and Bioethics, presents authoritative arguments for the nature of zygote and embryo, and shows how modern bio-technicians hide meaning behind verbal sophistries. This article is available at http://www.firstthings.com/ftissues/ft0412/opinion/saunders.htm

National Catholic Bioethics Quarterly. This big journal (each issue is over 200 pages) is published by the National Catholic Bioethics Center in Boston. Because of the obvious Catholic focus, members of God's church will find many articles off base, yet this journal remains one of the best single sources of reasoned information on the subjects of bioethics and biotechnology. Some articles are quite technical. For more information, write the National Catholic Bioethics Quarterly, PO Box 3000, Denville, NJ 07834-9772 ($48/year).

Endnotes

1 Saunders, Jr., William L, "Embryology: Inconvenient Facts," First Things, December 2004, p. 15. 2 After the mid-1980s, bio-technicians spoke of a pre-embryo as an organism before womb-attachment. The implication is that the pre-embryo is non-human; the implanted embryo human. This false concept will be discussed more fully in Part Two. Suffice it to say that there is really no such thing as a pre-embryo. An embryo is an embryo. An unattached one is an embryo in every sense of the definition. It is just unattached. 3 Condic, Maureen, "The Basics about Stem Cells," First Things, January 2002, p 30. 4 Ibid. 5 Ibid. 6 See Psalm 119:73.

Original post:
Embryonic Stem-Cell Research: The Promise and the Reality ...

Chaperone-mediated autophagy regulates the pluripotency of …

Autophagy regulates stemness

Embryonic stem cells can propagate indefinitely and differentiate when called to do so. Xu et al. now analyze how cellular metabolism affects the balance between pluripotency and differentiation (see the Perspective by Borsa and Simon). For cells in the pluripotent state, the transcription factors Oct4 and Sox2 suppress chaperone-mediated autophagy (CMA). When CMA is released with differentiation, the isocitrate dehydrogenases IDH1 and IDH2 are degraded, resulting in less -ketoglutarate, which is needed by the histone and DNA demethylases that sustain pluripotency. CMA thus links cellular metabolism to epigenetic regulation, tipping the balance between pluripotent renewal and differentiation.

Science, this issue p. 397; see also p. 373

Embryonic stem cells can propagate indefinitely in a pluripotent state, able to differentiate into all types of specialized cells when restored to the embryo. What sustains their pluripotency during propagation remains unclear. Here, we show that core pluripotency factors OCT4 and SOX2 suppress chaperone-mediated autophagy (CMA), a selective form of autophagy, until the initiation of differentiation. Low CMA activity promotes embryonic stem cell self-renewal, whereas its up-regulation enhances differentiation. CMA degrades isocitrate dehydrogenases IDH1 and IDH2 and reduces levels of intracellular -ketoglutarate, an obligatory cofactor for various histone and DNA demethylases involved in pluripotency. These findings suggest that CMA mediates the effect of core pluripotency factors on metabolism, shaping the epigenetic landscape of stem cells and governing the balance between self-renewal and differentiation.

View original post here:
Chaperone-mediated autophagy regulates the pluripotency of ...

Genetic puzzle: How mice can be modified to help in the race to develop coronavirus therapies – Genetic Literacy Project

For more than three decadesMichael Koob has been working out complicated puzzles using the tools of molecular biology and genetics. Today his deliberative labors are paying offwith untold implications for the study of human disease and the development of drug therapies and vaccines. Koob has figured out how to replace entire genes of laboratory mice with their human counterparts, transporting huge segments of human DNA to their proper corresponding location in mouse chromosomes. Now he is applying his genetic puzzle-solving ingenuity to the scourge of the COVID-19 pandemic.

An LMP associate professor, Koob launched his molecular investigations while a graduate student at the University of Wisconsin in Madison, where he earned a PhD in molecular and cellular biology in 1990. His graduate adviser was the legendary molecular geneticist Waclaw Szybalski. Koob and Szybalski pioneered a technique they called Achilles heel cleavage that cuts DNA in a single targeted location, which enabled them to create large DNA segments. Koob joined the LMP faculty in 1995. He brought with him those early insights about how to use molecular tools to manipulate DNA in human and animal cells and thereby answer questions about health and disease.

Now Koob has set his sights onCOVID-19, the disease caused by coronavirusSARS-CoV-2 infection. SARS-CoV-2 respiratory viruses enter human lung tissue via a cell-surface receptor molecule called angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 orACE2. Once in the lung the virus multiplies and travels throughout the organ, in some patients causing Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome (ARDS), which can be fatal.

But theres a problem in using mice to understand SARS-CoV-2 infection and COVID-19 disease progression. In the mouse, the ACE2 receptor doesnt bind the virus, so mice dont get infected and show the respiratory symptoms we see in people, Koob said. But what if mice expressed the human gene for the ACE2 receptor instead of their own? That would potentially enable investigators to track COVID-19 pathology beginning with infection and viral replication in airway epithelial cells all the way to lower lung zones where the virus often settles, consolidates, and can cause viral pneumonia. That mouse model is under construction in Koobs laboratory.

Infection at the entry point would make the mouse model work for COVID-19, and full human ACE2 receptor gene substitution for the mouse version should make infection possible, Koob said. The internal viral replication will be maintained between the mouse and humans. So this should model the infection route, disease progression in the lungs, everything like that. Its really just basic cell biology. If you want to mimic what happens in a person the most important thing really is to get the cell types correct. If the right cells are ACE2 receptor-positive, then you can mimic what happens in people.

Other research groups have transferred only a small part of the ACE2 receptor DNA gene sequence into mice, creating transgenic animals but ones that do not mimic the potentially lethal lung pathology of a SARS-CoV-2 infection and COVID-19, such as ARDS. Koobs team will replace the entire mouse ACE2 receptor gene with the entire human ACE2 receptor gene plus associate regulatory sequencestransferring in all some 70,000 DNA sequences to the precise location on the mouse chromosome where its own ACE2 receptor gene once resided. The mouse gene will be gone, and the human gene will be there, Koob said. It now becomes a human ACE2 receptor gene in a true sense. The sequence of tissues that become positive for ACE2 receptor expression should be recapitulated.

When a human gene is put in the same spot where the mouse gene once resided, genomic regulatory factors come into play that are appropriate for that gene, Koob said. Theres a global regulatory context to take into account in animals that have a common ancestor, which all mammals do. Mice and humans arefairly close on the evolutionary tree. So theres global regulation if we put it in the right spot. The right spot transfer of the human gene construct is into a mouse embryonic stem cell, which Koob then puts into a blastocyst or early mouse embryo. Selective breeding yields mice with the human gene in all cells and tissues.

Related article: Viewpoint: Coronavirus pandemic accelerates progress toward tech-driven, sustainable food system

A search of the databaseClinicalTrials.govyields more than 400 studies when the terms COVID-19 and lung therapy are combined. Small molecule drugs, therapeutic antibodies and antivirals, immunotherapies, stem cells and natural killer cells, steroids, and laser and radiotherapies are among the lung injury therapies currently being investigated. A validated, reliable, and clinically informative mouse model for testing COVID-19 lung injury therapies would be invaluable, as it would be for future coronavirus vaccine trials.

Koob anticipates his human ACE2 receptor gene mouse strain will be ready by this fall. He will send it by courier toJackson Laboratory(JAX) in Bar Harbor, Maine to join more than 11,000 strains of mice that JAX distributes to researchers around the world. JAX will breed the mice over several months while Koob and LMP professorsSteve JamesonandKris Hogquistand Department of Medicine assistant professorTyler Bold, all at the Center for Immunology, conduct characterization and SARS-CoV-2 infection studies of the mice in aLevel 3 biosafetyfacility. JAX is currently distributingKoobs full gene replacement mouse strainthat carries the human microtubule-associated proteintau, which is responsible for the neurofibrillary tangles in the brain associated with Alzheimers disease and other dementias. Koob is making full gene replacement mouse models of other neurodegenerative diseases.

Our philosophy is to make our mouse strains available to the research community in an expedited way, Koob said. I contacted JAX about this ACE2 receptor gene replacement mouse. Theyre very happy to collaborate with us because they dont have anything like this. And were making it available to researchers without restrictions.

With Koob and his laboratory scientist Kellie Benzow as inventors, the University has filed a patent onMethods of full gene replacement and transgenic non-human cells comprising full human genes.

Its been a long time since Koob collaborated with his graduate adviser Waclaw Szybalski, now a 98-year-old professor emeritus. Together their research careers encompass the history of molecular biology going back to the early 1950s with the discovery of the DNA double helix. Szybalski was born in 1921 just after a pandemic virus infected an estimated one-third of the Earths population and killed tens of millions of people. A century later, with another pandemic raging, the timing couldnt be better for his student to exercise his manifest molecular inventiveness.

William Hoffman is a writer and editor at the University of Minnesota. He has worked closely with faculty in genetics and bioengineering, medical technology and bioscience industries, and the science policy and ethics communities. He is author with Leo Furcht of Divergence, Convergence, and Innovation: East-West Bioscience in an Anxious Age, Asian Biotechnology and Development Review, Nov. 2014.

A version of this article was originally published at the University of Minnesota website and has been republished here with permission. The University of Minnesota can be found on Twitter @UMNews

Go here to see the original:
Genetic puzzle: How mice can be modified to help in the race to develop coronavirus therapies - Genetic Literacy Project

‘Embryoids’ not the breakthrough they’re made out to be – The B.C. Catholic

Last year, Nature magazine reported scientists had discovered a way to produce large numbers of living beings that resemble primitive human embryos. These synthetic embryos, known as embryoids, raise extremely significant ethical issues.

Catholic teaching on biomedical ethics says direct experimentation on human embryos is barred, as is the use of embryonic stem cells (Catechism of the Catholic Church). With the latest development on embryoids, does the new technique fall afoul of either Catholic principle?

(Asked his views on the new technology, Catholic bioethicist Father Tad Pacholczyk agreed the ethical issue hinges in part on the question of whether embryoids constitute embryos in their full developmental potential or not, and there would remain debate over that question.)

First lets ask, what are embryoids? In short, these are embryonic stem cells that have been coaxed into developing like an early embryo in order to study how the embryo grows and develops. The motivation behind this research is to study gestational periods not currently permitted for experimentation embryonic growth beyond 14 days.

If this research doesnt actually require embryos and can be generated from other living things while still providing the same development path, this would be a true breakthrough enabling us to reduce the use of actual embryos in experimentation. However, there is a catch.

The embryonic stem cells being used are the same ones that have been used over and over by many scientists for dubious scientific reasons. Although the Nature article shies away from their true nature and the need to scale up this development to the degree expected, this would drastically increase demand for them. The primary source is currently aborted children, a very large and serious ethical concern. So, while the is of embryoids is touted as an advance, it is most certainly not.

There are additional ethical issues regarding the possibilities that these stem cells can develop as an actual embryo. This could be a revolutionary change, but it is not clear to me that this is in fact the case, and much research would have to be done in order to prove this. What this would entail is an advance in human cloning as the new human embryo would carry the identical genes to the source of the embryonic stem cells. In essence, the children killed through abortion would be cloned.

The other question raised concerns adult stem cells. Generally, advances in adult stem cells have been more successful than those using embryonic stem cells in clinical trials and are in accord with what the Church teaches. Would it be possible to coax adult stem cells to develop in this manner? If so, what are the consequences for this type of research?

It would be a staggering development if this were so, because it would permit mass human cloning based on the manipulation of adult stem cells. This has a variety of ethical consequences that Im not sure this article has the scope to touch, least of all being the ethics surrounding the commodification of human life and the abuse that such technology could entail with respect to both genetic manipulation and so called breeding for stock.

If this technology does what it claims it can do (and this is a big if, many advancements have been shown not to be), it seems that this would fall afoul of the Catechism regarding the separation of the procreative from the unitive aspects of sex. If these cells can and do grow as embryos do, this would be yet another form of procreation similar to the use of in-vitro fertilization. But we are not quite there yet, and research would have to be conducted to prove that this was in fact the case.

However, the fact that this research does use and harvests embryonic stem cells from aborted babies renders this research invalid according to the principles of the Catholic Church. Whatever further developments this approach garners may or may not incur other problems, but it is very important that Catholics know and understand the process being used with the science of embryoids.

It is also important that they understand that while it is unknown whether embryoids have a development limit, we are bound to respect them as if they are embryos due to the ethical principle of primum non nocere. If we are uncertain as to the true status of an entity, then we must treat it as if it were the entity it could be.

Calling embryoids artificial embryos is a lie because the research requires the use of embryonic stem cells, which are most certainly not artificial. If this research did forgo the use of embryonic stem cells, it would be another very significant development, but this research does not do this and it is important to understand this in light of claims to the contrary.

In short, this development needs careful examination to determine what the limits of embryoid growth are and whether this growth does or does not have a limit. This would establish the true nature of the embryoid and whether there is anything that distinguishes an embryoid from an embryo.

As is, this particular research and this approach is contrary to Catholic teachings barring the use of embryonic stem cells. It may also fall afoul of Catholic principles concerning other reproductive technologies, like IVF, but that is at present unknown.

Sean Ollech is a Prince George writer and B.C. Catholic contributor.

Excerpt from:
'Embryoids' not the breakthrough they're made out to be - The B.C. Catholic

RACK7 recognizes H3.3G34R mutation to suppress expression of MHC class II complex components and their delivery pathway in pediatric glioblastoma -…

INTRODUCTION

Histone point mutations have been identified as possible driver mutations in pediatric gliomas, chondroblastomas, and giant cell tumors of bone (13). Specifically, mutation of lysine-27 (K) to methionine (M) on histone H3.3 or H3.1 is associated with pediatric diffuse intrinsic pontine gliomas (DIPGs) and glioblastomas (GBMs) arising in midline structures, while glycine34 (G) to arginine (R) or valine (V) mutation on histone H3.3 are linked to GBM arising in the cerebral cortex of older adolescents and young adults (2, 3). Histone mutations have also been linked to giant cell tumor of bone and chondroblastoma (1). Besides histone H3, mutations were also identified in all four core histones in human cancers recently (4).

Overexpression of an H3K27M transgene causes a global decrease in H3K27me3, possibly by inhibiting the enzymatic activity of the Polycomb repressive complex 2 (PRC2) through an interaction with the catalytic subunit, EZH2 (5, 6). The K27M mutation cooperates with activated PDGFRA (platelet-derived growth factor receptor a), combined with p53 loss, to induce gliomagenesis (79). Another histone mutation, H3.3K36M, reduces H3K36 methylation, and recombinant H3.3K36M-containing nucleosomes inhibit the enzymatic activities of NSD2 and SETD2 (10, 11). The differentially expressed genes associated with H3K36 di- and trimethylation in the H3.3K36M cells are enriched in cancer pathways (11). The H3.3G34R/V transgenes have also been shown to reduce H3K36me3 levels on the same and nearby nucleosomes by inhibiting the activity of the H3K36 trimethyltransferase, SETD2 (5), but whether H3.3G34R/V is consistently associated with a reduced H3K36 methylation level in tumor samples remains unclear (2, 5). Unlike H3K27M, the role of H3.3G34R in cancer is less clear. For instance, expression of H3.3G34R in p53-deficient neural progenitor cells has no impact on proliferation when compared with H3.3K27M-expressing cells (9). By and large, the mechanisms by which the G34R mutation regulates chromatin and tumorigenesis are incompletely understood.

RACK7 (ZMYND8) was previously identified as a reader of the dual histone mark, H3K4me1/H3K14ac (12), and is related to BS69 (ZMYND11) that binds H3.3K36me3 (13, 14). RACK7 has been shown to repress transcription of metastasis-linked genes and has been proposed to have an antimetastasis function (12). RACK7 has also been shown to bind to active enhancers, where it suppresses overactivation of enhancers, which drive expression of genes involved in tumorigenesis (15). Here, we provide both in vitro and in vivo evidence demonstrating that RACK7 recognizes the H3.3G34R mutation. Correction of the H3.3G34R mutation and knocking out RACK7 in human pediatric H3.3G34R-containing pGBM cells both lead to up-regulation of MHC (major histocompatibility complex) class II immune response genes and vesicle pathway genes that facilitate transportation of MHC class II molecules, suggesting that G34R and RACK7 function together in cells, possibly to regulate MHC class II immune response.

MHC class II genes encode proteins that present antigenic peptides to CD4+ T cells to initiate and control immune responses (16, 17). Therefore, the expression of MHC class II genes is usually restricted to the antigen-presenting cells (APCs) such as dendritic cells, macrophages, and B cells (16). However, expression of MHC class II genes has also been detected in the CNS (central nervous system), including neural stem cells (18), microglia cells (19), and IFN-induced astrocytes (20), raising the possibility that MHC II molecules may play a role in the CNS. In humans, MHC class II proteins have three classical molecules: human leukocyte antigen (HLA)DR, HLA-DP, and HLA-DQ. The MHC class II molecule is a heterodimer consisting of an alpha and a beta chain assembled in the endoplasmic reticulum (ER) together with an invariant chain CD74 (aka Ii) (16). The MHC IICD74 complex is transported from the ER, through the Golgi complex and trans-Golgi network, to the endosome/lysosome compartments (17, 21, 22), where CD74 is degraded, and peptides from endocytosed pathogens bind to MHC class II molecules with the help of HLA-DM and HLA-DO (22). HLA-DM and HLA-DO are two chaperones, which balance the antigen peptides binding to MHC class II molecules, making sure only strong peptideMHC II bonds can form (23, 24). Last, MHC IIpeptides containing vesicles fuse with the plasma membrane to activate T cells (22). Classical MHC class II genes, their chaperones, and CD74 are all under the control of the master transcription factor, CIITA (16), which we identify as a direct target of RACK7. Our findings suggest that RACK7 binds H3.3G34R and suppresses transcription of CIITA and vesicle pathwayrelated genes that are necessary for the activation of the MHC class II immune pathway. Given the established roles of the MHC class II genes in cancer, our findings may therefore be relevant to understanding the mechanism by which H3.3G34R regulates pediatric GBM.

RACK7 is a chromatin-binding protein with three tandemly arranged reader domains, including PHD (plant homeodomain), Bromo, and PWWP (Pro-Trp-Trp-Pro) domains (Fig. 1A), and is highly related to BS69 (aka ZMYND11), which has recently been identified as a specific reader of histone H3.3K36me3 (13, 14). Unlike BS69, RACK7 does not bind H3.3K36me3 due to the replacement of two amino acids in the binding pocket that are critical for H3.3K36me3 recognition (25). A recent study suggests that RACK7 reads the dual histone mark H3K4me1 and H3K14ac (12). While searching for histone modifications/mutations that RACK7 recognizes, we unexpectedly found that RACK7, but not BS69, preferentially bound the histone H3.3G34R peptide in vitro (Fig. 1B and fig. S1A). To confirm this finding, we assembled oligonucleosomes carrying either wild-type or mutant histone H3. Consistently, full-length RACK7 purified from Sf9 insect cells preferentially bound H3.3G34R oligonucleosomes, but not those carrying K27M, K36M, or unmodified H3.3 or H3.1 (Fig. 1C). The binding specificity of RACK7 for H3.3G34R was further supported by in vitro pull-down assays using peptides carrying substitutions of G34 to other amino acids including V, D, H, S, K, L, and W. Only G34R and G34K peptides showed binding with RACK7 (fig. S1B). Further binding experiments showed that RACK7 did not discriminate between H3.1 and H3.3 as evidenced by its binding to both H3.1G34R and H3.3G34R (fig. S1C).

(A) Schematic representation of the domain structure of human RACK7. Numbers indicate amino acid positions at the boundaries of various domains. (B) In vitro peptide pull-down assays using various H3.3 peptides and HA-tagged full-length RACK7 purified from insect cells. (C) Nucleosome-binding assays using different designer nucleosomes assembled in vitro and HA-tagged full-length RACK7 purified from insect cells. (D and E) In vitro peptide pull-down assays using wild-type H3.3 or H3.3G34R peptide and various RACK7 internal deletion mutants purified from insect cells (D) and isolated domains of RACK7 fused with GST (E). (F) MST analysis of the interaction between GST-PHDRACK7 with H3.3G34R (left) and H3.3 wild-type (right) peptides. The Kd value is indicated. Data are represented as means SD from three biological replicates. (G) In vitro peptide pull-down assays using H3.3G34R peptide with wild-type or D104A mutated PHDRACK7 fused with GST purified from Escherichia coli. (H and I) Peptide pull-down assays using long peptides (amino acids 1 to 44) as indicated with HA-tagged RACK7 full length purified from insect cells (H) and GST-tagged PHDRACK7 purified from E. coli (I). All experiments were repeated three times.

To identify the domain of RACK7 that mediates H3.3G34R recognition, we purified RACK7 deletion mutant proteins lacking each of the three potential reader domains. As shown in Fig. 1D, removal of the PHD domain abrogated binding to H3.3G34R peptides in vitro, suggesting that the PHD domain is necessary for RACK7 to bind H3.3G34R. Deletion of Bromo domain also reduced the binding to H3.3G34R peptides, suggesting that this domain may be necessary for optimal binding of RACK7 to H3.3G34R. We next purified the three reader domains individually and performed in vitro binding assays. As shown in Fig. 1E, the PHD domain alone (PHDRACK7) bound H3.3G34R, while the Bromo and PWWP domains showed barely detectable interactions with the H3.3G34R peptide. These results suggest that the PHD domain is necessary and sufficient to mediate H3.3G34R recognition by RACK7. Using microscale thermophoresis (MST) (26, 27), we found that PHDRACK7 bound to H3.3G34R peptide with a dissociation constant (Kd) of approximately 6 M but showed no detectable binding to wild-type H3.3 peptides under the same assay conditions (Fig. 1F). To further define the binding property of PHDRACK7, we mutated and analyzed each and every amino acid in the PHD domain and found a mutation (D104A) that appears to disrupt the binding of RACK7 to the H3.3G34R peptide in vitro (Fig. 1G). In contrast to the 6 M Kd of the wild-type PHDRACK7 binding to the H3.3G34R peptide, the MST assay failed to fit a binding curve for PHDRACK7 (D104A), suggesting that PHDRACK7 (D104A) has very little, if at all, binding activity for H3.3G34R peptide (fig. S1D). It should be noted that the same mutation, D104A, reduces the binding activity of RACK7 to the H3 N terminus by approximately fourfold (12). Together, our results suggest that D104A has a more pronounced impact on PHDRACK7 binding to H3.3G34R than to the N-terminal tail of H3.3.

As discussed above, RACK7 has previously been reported to bind histone to the N-terminal tail of histone H3 (H3K4me0 and H3K4me1) (12). Our in vitro binding assays further showed that RACK7 appeared to bind H3.3G34R (amino acids 22 to 44) more strongly than H3K4me0 (H3), H3K4me1, and H3K4me2 (amino acids 1 to 21) (fig. S1E, compare lanes 1, 2, and 3 with lane 9, pull-down ratio is shown at the bottom). Consistently, with a longer histone H3.3 peptide (amino acids 1 to 44), the G34R mutation also increased the binding ability of both full-length RACK7 (Fig. 1H and fig. S1F) and PHDRACK7 (Fig. 1I and fig. S1F), further supporting that RACK7 preferentially binds H3.3G34R. Introducing H3K14ac into a histone peptide containing the G34R mutation (H3.3K14acG34R; 1 to 44) had no influence on the binding to G34R (fig. S1G). In addition, the mono-, di-, and trimethylation of H3.3K36 also do not interfere with the interaction of G34R with RACK7 in vitro (fig. S1H). Collectively, our biochemical data support the notion that PHDRACK7 specifically recognizes H3.3G34R, primarily through binding the key residue G34R in the mutant histone H3 tail.

We next wished to determine whether RACK7 also preferentially binds H3.3G34R-decorated chromatin in cells. To do this, we used three human pediatric GBM (pGBM) cell lines (3). SJ-HGGx6c and SJ-HGGx42c are heterozygous for the G34R mutation in H3F3A (referred to as R6, R42), which encodes H3.3, while SJ-HGGx39c has wild-type H3F3A (referred to as WT39). Immunofluorescence staining showed that RACK7 is localized in the nucleus in all three tumor cell lines, indicating that the H3.3G34R mutation did not alter RACK7 subcellular localization (fig. S2A). We carried out RACK7 chromatin immunoprecipitation sequencing (ChIP-seq) and identified 9844, 8843, and 452 RACK7 peaks in R6, R42, and WT39, respectively. By removing the peaks shared with the H3.3 wild-type cell line, WT39, we identified 9632 and 8660 unique RACK7 peaks in the two H3.3G34R cell lines, R6 and R42, respectively (fig. S2B). We randomly selected six RACK7 peaks and confirmed their enrichment in both R42 and R6 cells as compared with the WT39 cells by ChIPquantitative polymerase chain reaction (qPCR) (Fig. 2A). Snapshots of RACK7 enrichment peaks in all three pGBM lines are shown in Fig. 2B. A snapshot of RACK7 ChIP-seq biological repeats in all three pGBM lines is shown in fig. S2C. These results suggest that RACK7 has more extensive chromatin binding in H3.3G34R pGBM cells when compared with the H3.3 wild-type pGBM cells.

(A) ChIP-qPCR validation of selected RACK7-bound peaks in pGBM R6, R42, and WT39 cells. Data are represented as means SD from three biological replicates, ***P < 0.001, two-tailed Students t-test. (B) Genome browser snapshot of selected RACK7 ChIP-seq signals in pGBM R42, R6, and WT39 cells. (C) Sanger sequencing result shows the sequence of H3F3A in R6 and R6WT H3.3 (top) cells and R42 and R42WT H3.3 (bottom) cells. (D) Heatmap analysis of RACK7 ChIP-seq signals in R6 and R6WT H3.3 (left) and R42 and R42WT H3.3 (right) cells. bp, base pair. (E) Venn diagram analysis of RACK7 ChIP-seq unique genes between two comparisons, R6 with R6WT H3.3 and R42 with R42WT H3.3, respectively. (F) Genome browser snapshot of selected RACK7 ChIP-seq signals in R6, R6WT H3.3, R42, and R42WT H3.3 cells.

RACK7 was previously shown to bind active enhancers in the breast cancer cell line ZR-75-30, and RACK7 knockout (KO) decreases the level of H3K4me1 codecorated by RACK7, which is a histone mark associated with enhancers (15). Our ChIP-seq analysis in these three pGBM cells found no notable differences of H3K4me1 at genomic locations cobound by RACK7 between the two H3.3G34R-containing (R6 and R42) and the wild-type H3.3WT (WT39) pGBM cells (fig. S2D). In addition, while 73.2% of RACK7 peaks overlap with both H3K4me1 and H3K27ac in ZR-75-30 cells, we found only 14.1 and 29.3% coenrichment of the RACK7 peaks with H3K4me1 in R6 and R42, respectively. Furthermore, RACK7 does not appear to associate with histone demethylases (data not shown), as was shown in ZR-75-30 cells. Together, these findings suggest that molecular mechanisms by which RACK7 functions may be cell type dependent.

To determine whether the increased RACK7 enrichment in R6 and R42 cells is due to the histone mutation, H3.3G34R, we corrected H3.3G34R in R6 and R42 cells to wild-type H3.3 by CRISPR-Cas9mediated knock-in (generating R6WT H3.3 and R42WT H3.3) (Fig. 2C). The correction of H3.3G34R to H3.3 wild type abrogated RACK7 enrichment (Fig. 2D), indicating that H3.3G34R is necessary for the formation of the unique RACK7 peaks in both R6 and R42 cell lines. After mapping these unique peaks to the nearest gene, we identified 2337 genes with RACK7 bound nearby that are common to R6 and R42 cells but are absent in the corresponding corrected lines, R6WT H3.3 and R42WT H3.3 (Fig. 2E). As a control, we found comparable RACK7 protein levels in these cell lines (R6, R6WT H3.3, R42, and R42WT H3.3) (fig. S2E), and their nuclear localizations are unaltered by the genetic manipulation of the histone mutation (fig. S2F). We again confirmed the genome-wide ChIP-seq data by ChIP-qPCR analysis of RACK7 at the same six genomic regions (fig. S2G). A snapshot of the genomic regions is shown in Fig. 2F. Together, these findings suggest that H3.3G34R promotes RACK7 binding to H3.3G34R-decorated chromatin regions, consistent with our in vitro biochemical data that RACK7 preferentially binds H3.3G34R histones.

To explore the function of the histone mutation H3.3G34R, we performed genome-wide transcriptomic analysis of R6, R42, R6WT H3.3, and R42WT H3.3 by RNA sequencing (RNA-seq). Compared with H3.3G34R, we found 1882 up-regulated and 1510 down-regulated genes that are in common in both corrected, knock-in cells (R6WT H3.3 and R42WT H3.3) (Fig. 3A). Among the 1882 up-regulated genes, we found RACK7 occupancy of 253 genes in the two H3.3G34R pGBM lines, but not in H3.3-corrected, knock-in cells (fig. S3A). These genes were enriched in vesicle (P = 7.77 108) and membrane-bounded vesicle (P = 2.95 108) Gene Ontology (GO) pathways (Fig. 3B). In contrast, the 154 down-regulated genes decorated by RACK7 in two H3.3G34R lines (fig. S3B) are associated with less significant GO terms (Fig. 3C). These results suggest that loss of RACK7 chromatin occupancy gives rise to transcriptional up-regulation of vesicle pathwayrelated genes in R6WT H3.3 and R42WT H3.3 cells, which is consistent with previous reports that RACK7 acts as a transcriptional repressor via its chromatin binding (12, 15).

(A) Venn diagram analysis of the up-regulated genes [1.5-fold (P < 0.05)] (top) and down-regulated genes [1.5-fold (P < 0.05)] (bottom) in R6WT H3.3 and R42WT H3.3 cells, relative to R6 and R42, respectively. (B and C) Gene Ontology (GO) analysis of up-regulated genes [1.5-fold (P < 0.05)] (B) and down-regulated genes [1.5-fold (P < 0.05)] (C) that have lost RACK7 binding in R6WT H3.3 and R42WT H3.3 cells. GO terms are ordered by P values from biological proces, cellular component, and molecular function analysis. MAP, mitogen-activated protein. (D) Heatmap analysis of the top 50 up-regulated genes based on the RNA-seq data in R6WT H3.3 and R42WT H3.3 cell lines compared with those of their parental cells (R6 and R42), respectively. Sample order is based on the sum of log2(fold change). Scale indicated Z score, defined as (FPKM mean FPKM)/SD. Two biological repeats for each cell lines were used. (E) ChIP-qPCR validation of RACK7-bound CIITA peaks, HLA-DRA, HLA-DQA, and CD74 in R6 (line 1), R6WT H3.3 (line 2), R42 (line 3), and R42WT H3.3 (line 4) cells. Data are represented as means SD from three biological replicates, **P < 0.01 and ***P < 0.001, two-tailed Students t test. N.S., not significant.

To further analyze the RNA-seq data implicating the vesicle pathways in the H3.3 knock-in cells, we plotted heatmap of the top 50 up-regulated genes from the 1882 genes up-regulated in common in both H3.3 knock-in cell lines. Unexpectedly, we also found up-regulation of MHC class II genes, their chaperones, CD74, and their master regulator, CIITA (Fig. 3D). In contrast, the transcription level of MHC class I genes appeared unaffected (fig. S3C). We found no evidence that RACK7 binds to MHC class II genes, or their chaperones and CD74 in H3.3G34R cells (Fig. 3E and fig. S3D), suggesting that they are not directly regulated by RACK7. All these genes are known to be controlled by CIITA (16). We found that CIITA gene is decorated by RACK7 in H3.3G34R cells (R6 and R42) (Fig. 3E and fig. S3E). This region was reported to be involved in regulating CIITA transcription (28). Our results suggest that RACK7 indirectly suppresses MHC class II gene expression by directly repressing transcription of the master regulator, CIITA. Because MHC class II molecules were known to be delivered from the ER to the cell surface through vesicles (22), our results further suggest that RACK7 and H3.3G34R work together to suppress transcription of genes involved in the MHC class II complex and their delivery pathways.

If the biological effects of H3.3G34R are mediated primarily by the recruitment of RACK7, then we would predict that the impact of RACK7 removal will be akin to that of correcting the histone G34R genetic mutation. We addressed this hypothesis by knocking out RACK7 in R6 and R42 (generating R6RACK7 KO and R42RACK7 KO), respectively (fig. S4A), and next performed the genome-wide RNA-seq analysis. As a result, abrogating RACK7 (by KO) had a significant correlation with correcting the G34R mutation (wild-type H3 knock-in) when each transcriptome was compared with its parental line (R6 and R42) (Fig. 4A). Knocking out RACK7 in R6 and R42 results in 2484 and 2523 up-regulated genes when compared with each parental cell line, respectively (fig. S4B). Among them, 1293 genes were up-regulated in both R6RACK7 KO and R42RACK7 KO cells (fig. S4B). When compared with the 1882 coup-regulated genes in H3.3 knock-in cells (Fig. 3A), we identified 765 genes that were coup-regulated in all R6RACK7 KO, R42RACK7 KO, R6WT H3.3, and R42WT H3.3 cells (Fig. 4B). These 765 coup-regulated genes were enriched in GO terms of vesicle (P = 9.27 1011), membrane-bounded vesicle (P = 1.09 1011), and MHC class II protein complex (P = 1.13 108) pathways (Fig. 4C). Similarly, MHC class II genes, their chaperones, CD74, and CIITA show high transcriptional changes in the RACK7 KO cells (fig. S4C) as well, while in contrast, MHC class I genes were unaffected (fig. S4D). Collectively, our results suggest that knocking out RACK7 and knocking in H3.3 to correct the G34R mutation both activate the same groups of genes involved in MHC class II protein complex and vesicle pathways.

(A) Scatter plot of log2(fold change) gene expression in R6WT H3.3 and R6RACK7 KO cells (left) and R42WT H3.3 and R42RACK7 KO cells (right), relative to R6 and R42, respectively. Pearsons product-moment correlation was analyzed by R. (B and C) Venn diagram (B) and GO (C) analysis of coup-regulated genes [1.5-fold(P < 0.05)] in wild-type H3.3 knock-in and RACK7 KO cells relative to their parental cells. (D) RT-qPCR analysis of mRNA levels of genes in indicated cells. ACTB, actin beta. (E) Western blot analysis of HLA-DRA and HLA-DRB5 in indicated cells. (F) R6, R6WT H3.3, and R6RACK7 KO, which, stably expressing YFP (yellow), were stained for CD74 (red) and 4,6-diamidino-2-phenylindole (DAPI) (blue) and imaged by confocal microscopy. (G) Flow cytometric analysis of the cell surface expression of HLA-DR in indicated cells. (H) RT-qPCR analysis of select genes in R6, R6RACK7 KO, and R6RACK7 KO rescued with a RACK7 transgene (left), and in R42, R42RACK7 KO, and R42RACK7 KO rescued with a RACK7 transgene (right) cells. Data in (D) and (H) are represented as means SD from three biological replicates, **P < 0.01 and ***P < 0.001, two-tailed Students t test.

We next confirmed up-regulation of MHC class II genes, their chaperone genes, CD74, and CIITA by reverse transcription qPCR (RT-qPCR) not only in R6RACK7 KO, R42RACK7 KO but also in R6WT H3.3, R42WT H3.3 cells (Fig. 4D). Up-regulation of two representative MHC class II genes was also confirmed by Western blotting (Fig. 4E). Confocal microscopy showed the appearance of CD74 in the perinuclear region vesicles but not cell surface in R6RACK7 KO and R6WT H3.3 cells (Fig. 4F), which is consistent with previous reports that CD74 works as a chaperone at the beginning step of the MHC class II molecule delivery process (17). Up-regulation of MHC class II genes appears to translate to more MHC class II proteins on the cell surface in either RACK7 KO or H3.3 knock-in cells (Fig. 4G), which is likely to be assisted by the increased expression of vesicle transport genes in these cells. To further confirm the role of RACK7 in H3.3G34R cells, we reintroduced wild type (fig. S4E) and the binding-defective mutant, RACK7D104A (fig. S4F), into R6RACK7 KO and R42RACK7 KO cells, respectively. Reintroducing wild-type RACK7, but not the binding-defective RACK7D104A, suppressed the up-regulation of CIITA and MHC class II genes in both R6RACK7 KO and R42RACK7 KO cells (Fig. 4H and fig. S4G). ChIP-qPCR of the tagged H3.3G34R showed that CIITA was decorated by H3.3G34R (fig. S4H) in the H3.3G34R cells, consistent with our model that RACK7 regulates gene expression in these pGBM cells by binding histone H3.3G34R. Furthermore, our ChIP-qPCR analysis of chromatin purified from RACK7 KO cells rescued by either wild-type or RACK7D104A shows that wild-type RACK7 associates better with the CIITA gene locus than the binding-defective mutant RACK7D104A (fig. S4I). Collectively, these findings demonstrate that RACK7 occupies the CIITA locus through binding H3.3G34R. As a control, knocking out RACK7 in WT39 cells (fig. S4J) did not appear to up-regulate MHC class II genes (under real-time PCR detectability). Collectively, these findings suggest that H3.3G34R and RACK7 collaborate to suppress the entire molecular program that ensures the expression and presence of MHC class II gene products on the cell surface.

Because RACK7 only decorates the CIITA gene but not the MHC class II genes in H3.3G34R cells (R6 and R42) (Fig. 3E and fig. S3, D and E), we next investigated whether up-regulation of MHC class II genes observed in RACK7 KO and H3.3 knock-in cells was dependent on the CIITA gene. We used CRISPR-Cas9 to KO CIITA in R6RACK7 KO and R6WT H3.3 cells and found decreased levels of HLA-DR on the cell surface in R6RACK7 KO + CIITA KO and R6WT H3.3 + CIITA KO when compared with the R6RACK7 KO and R6WT H3.3 cells (Fig. 5A). This result suggests that CIITA is necessary for the up-regulation of MHC class II genes and its associated genes in RACK7 KO and H3.3 knock-in cells.

(A) Flow cytometric analysis of HLA-DR antibodystained R6, R6WT H3.3, R6RACK7 KO, R6CIITA KO, R6WT H3.3 + CIITA KO, and R6RACK7 KO + CIITA KO cells. All cells contain YFP transgene (detailed in Materials and Methods). YFP-positive cells were used to analyze the cell surface expression of HLA-DR. (B) RT-qPCR of gene expressions in R6, R6WT H3.3, and R6RACK7 KO cells. Data are represented as means SD from three biological replicates, ***P < 0.001, two-tailed Students t test. (C) Flow cytometric analysis of HLA-DR antibodystained R6QKI KO, R6WT H3.3 + QKI KO, and R6RACK7 KO + QKI KO cells, compared with their parental cells in (A). All cells contain YFP transgene (detailed in Materials and Methods). YFP-positive cells were used to analyze the cell surface expression of HLA-DR. (D) Flow cytometric analysis of the HLA-DR antibodystained R6 (top), R6WT H3.3 (middle), and R6RACK7 KO (bottom) lenti-CRISPR KO GFAP, VIM, and OCIAD2, respectively. All cells contain YFP transgene (detailed in Materials and Methods). YFP-positive cells were used to analyze the cell surface expression of HLA-DR.

To determine whether the RACK7 target genes up-regulated in both H3.3 knock-in and RACK7 KO cells participated in the regulation of the transportation of MHC class II molecules, we chose four genes, QKI, GFAP, VIM, and OCIAD2, which are likely direct targets of RACK7 (fig. S5A) for further investigation. Their transcriptional up-regulation in R6RACK7 KO and R6WT H3.3 was validated by RT-qPCR (Fig. 5B). Among these genes, QKI (quaking) was an RNA binding protein and was recently identified as a regulator of endolysosomes, as its deletion down-regulates endolysosomes and helps glioma stem cells to maintain their stemness (29). GFAP (glial fibrillary acidic protein) and VIM (vimentin) are intermediate filament proteins, and astrocytes deficient in GFAP and VIM have less vesicle mobility and nondirectional movement, thus reduced MHC class II molecules delivery (30). OCIAD2 (OCIA domain containing 2) is a cancer-related protein that localizes to early endosomes (31). We first knocked out QKI in R6, R6RACK7 KO, and R6WT H3.3 cells, respectively. Knocking out QKI decreased the HLA-DR molecules in the cell surface of these cells (R6RACK7 KO and R6WT H3.3 cells) (Fig. 5C) when compared with R6, R6RACK7 KO, and R6WT H3.3 cells (Fig. 5A, top). Likewise, knocking out the additional RACK7 target genes, GFAP, VIM, and OCIAD2, also led to a reduction in the MHC class II molecules on the cell surface in R6RACK7 KO and R6WT H3.3 cells (Fig. 5D). Together, these results suggest that RACK7 directly suppresses the transcription of CIITA and genes involved in vesicle pathways to potentially inhibit the MHC class II immune response.

In addition to MHC class II molecules, we also found up-regulation of genes (Fig. 4B) associated with cell differentiation in R6RACK7 KO, R42RACK7 KO, R6WT H3.3, and R42WT H3.3 cells (P = 1.83 104; 158 genes). Thirty-three of these genes (158) appear to be direct targets of RACK7, as they were decorated by RACK7 on chromatin in both H3.3G34R cells (R6 and R42) but not in the H3.3 knock-in cells, in which the G34R mutation was corrected to wild type (Fig. 6A and fig. S6A). We validated transcriptional up-regulation of some of these genes by RT-qPCR (Fig. 6B). One of these RACK7 target genes, GFAP, which is expressed in astrocytes (32), was further confirmed by Western blotting (fig. S6B) and immunofluorescence (Fig. 6C). The up-regulation of GFAP was rescued by wild-type RACK7 but not by the binding-defective mutant, RACK7D104A, in the RACK7 KO cells (Fig. 6D). RACK7 chromatin binding in the RACK7 KO cells was restored by reintroducing wild-type RACK7 but not the D104A mutant (fig. S4I). Collectively, our results demonstrate that knocking out RACK7 or knocking in H3.3 in H3.3G34R pGBM enhances expression of differentiation genes such as GFAP and enhances MHC class II immune response. Reduced GFAP expression is associated with tumor progression in a mouse glioma model (32). However, these human GBM cell lines failed to generate tumors in vivo (both intracranial and subcutaneous injections) within a period of 2 to 3 months. Although longer-term observations may be necessary to determine whether these cell lines form tumor in vivo, we find that correction of the G34R mutation or knocking out RACK7 both reduced the migration and invasion capabilities of these cells (Fig. 6E). The migration and invasion phenotypes were rescued by wild-type RACK7 but not by the binding-defective mutant, RACK7D104A (Fig. 6E), suggesting that binding of RACK7 to H3.3G34R may be important for increased migration and invasion of these pGBM cells.

(A) Heatmap analysis of RACK7-decorated genes involved in cell differentiation (GO: 0030154) and up-regulated in R42WT H3.3, R42RACK7 KO, R6WT H3.3, and R6RACK7 KO cell lines. Scale indicated Z score, defined as (FPKM mean FPKM)/SD. Two biological repeats for each cell lines were used. (B) RT-qPCR of gene expression in R6, R6WT H3.3, and R6RACK7 KO and R42, R42WT H3.3, and R42RACK7 KO cells. (C) Immunofluorescence of GFAP in R6, R6WT H3.3, and R6RACK7 KO (lines 1 and 2) and R42, R42WT H3.3, and R42RACK7 KO (lines 3 and 4) cells. (D) RT-qPCR of the GFAP mRNA expression level in R42RACK7 KO and R42RACK7 KO cells rescued with wild-type or D104A mutated RACK7 transgene. (E) In vitro migration (top) and invasion (bottom) assays examining the migration and invasion abilities of the R42, R42WT H3.3, R42RACK7 KO, and R42RACK7 KO rescued with wild-type or D104A-mutated RACK7 transgene cells. Data in (B), (D), and (E) are represented as means SD from three biological replicates, *P < 0.05, **P < 0.01, and ***P < 0.001, two-tailed Students t test.

We identified RACK7 as a reader for H3.3G34R, and this conclusion is supported by multiple biochemical and ChIP-seq data. Furthermore, we demonstrate that the preferential association of RACK7 with the H3.3G34R mutant histone in pGBM cell lines helps to suppress gene expression programs, including the entire program important for the expression and delivery of MHC class II proteins to the cancer cell surface.

We have provided multiple lines of evidence that RACK7 preferentially binds H3.3G34R in vitro. We also described several independent experiments that support binding of RACK7 to histone H3.3G34Rdecorated chromatin regions in vivo. Specifically, we demonstrate that RACK7 ChIP-seq peaks are significantly reduced when H3.3G34R is corrected to wild-type H3.3 (Fig. 2D). Consistently, there are more RACK7 ChIP-seq peaks in the H3.3G34R-containing pGBM (R6 and R42) than in H3.3 wild-type pGBM cells (WT39). To circumvent the lack of a validated, ChIP-grade H3.3G34R antibody, we introduced H3.3G34Rhemagglutinin epitope YPYDVPDYA (HA) transgene into R6 and R42 cells and performed ChIP-qPCR using an HA antibody. Our results showed that RACK7-bound regions around CIITA, GFAP, and other four genes were also decorated by H3.3G34R (fig. S4H), consistent with our hypothesis that RACK7 binds H3.3G34R in vivo.

To determine whether the ability of RACK7 to regulate gene expression is dependent on its binding to H3.3G34R-decorated chromatin in vivo, we attempted to identify a RACK7 mutant that fails to bind H3.3G34R. However, this effort was complicated by the fact that RACK7 was also known to bind the N-terminal tail of histone H3 (12). We were unable to find a mutation that strictly affects binding to G34R but not the N-terminal tail of histone H3. Nevertheless, we succeeded in finding a mutation (D104A in the PHD domain of RACK7), which appears to have a more profound effect on binding to G34R than to the N-terminal tail of H3. Specifically, the D104A mutation reduces binding to G34R from a Kd of 6 M to essentially no binding as opposed to about only a fourfold reduction in binding to the N-terminal H3. The D104A mutation failed to restore suppression of RACK7 target genes such as CIITA (fig. S4G) (which we show to be decorated by H3.3G34R histone in the H3.3G34R-containing pGBM cells) and also displayed a reduced chromatin enrichment on these genes (fig. S4I). RACK7D104A also failed to rescue the cell migration and invasion phenotypes (Fig. 6E). We therefore favor the hypothesis that the effect of RACK7 in vivo is mediated primarily by binding to G34R, although we cannot completely exclude possible contributions of RACK7 binding to the N-terminal tail of histone H3.

The transportation of MHC class II molecules by vesicles has been well demonstrated previously (22). During this process, MHC class II molecules are delivered from the ER through the Golgi to endosome compartments. Early endosomes (21), the late endosome/lysosome (17), and the multivesicular body (17) are all involved in this process. Besides these vesicles, MHC class II molecules were detected in exosomes as well (22). In our results, a cohort of up-regulated genes, upon RACK7 KO or H3.3 knock-in, are clustered in the vesicle GO pathway (P = 9.27 1011, 186 genes), specifically on ER-to-Golgi transport vesicle membrane (P = 6.53 105, 10 genes), trans-Golgi network (P = 7.96 105, 19 genes), endosome (P = 6.33 105, 48 genes), lysosome (P = 4.92 108, 44 genes), and extracellular exosome pathway (P = 1.39 108, 142 genes). Our results therefore suggest that the H3.3G34R mutation in conjunction with RACK7 regulate genes that participate in multiple steps of the biogenesis and delivery of MHC class II molecules.

The role of the MHC II immune response in antitumor immunity is becoming increasingly appreciated (33). In diffuse large B cell lymphoma (DLBCL), the MHC class II gene expression signature is correlated with a good outcome (34), while HLA-DM expression predicts improved survival in patients with breast carcinoma (35). MHC IIpositive melanomas have improved response rates and clinical benefit to PD-1 (programmed cell death 1)/PD-L1 (programmed cell death ligand 1) inhibition (36). Agents that are used to treat cancer, such as the histone deacetylase (HDAC) and DNA methyltransferase inhibitors, increase the expression of MHC class II (summarized in table S1) (3740), suggesting that an elevated MHC class II immune response may have a role in therapeutic responses. Thus, inhibiting the function of RACK7 in H3.3G34R-containing pGBM may help to increase the effect of immunotherapy or other therapy approaches. Last, we found that loss of RACK7 chromatin binding at its target genes in RACK7 KO or H3.3 knock-in cells switches the cells to a more differentiated state. The expression of the differentiation-associated genes in the RACK7 KO and H3.3 knock-in cells may therefore lower their capacity to generate brain tumor.

What is the clinical significance of our finding that H3.3G34R/RACK7 mediates repression of the MHC class II genes in H3.3G34R-containing pGBM? To begin to address this issue, we compared expression of the master regulator of MHC class II genes, CIITA, in pediatric high-grade gliomas (HGGs) with H3.3G34R/V, H3K27M, or wild-type H3 across all brain locations (n = 210) using data from Mackay et al. (41). H3.3G34R/V tumors showed lower expression compared with H3K27M (P = 0.0006, t test). However, these tumors arise in different brain regions, and H3.3G34R/V tumors are typically found in older adolescent through young adulthood ages. In a more refined cohort (n = 99) trying to match location of H3.3G34R/V HGGs, the trend to lower expression in H3.3G34R/V tumors (n = 19), compared with cortical pediatric HGGs with wild-type H3 (n = 80), did not reach statistical significance (P = 0.19, t test). Matching the tumor locations is our best estimate of an appropriate control comparison. However, the distinct DNA methylation signatures of H3.3G34R/V tumors likely reflect differences in tumor cell origin, at least in part. Other HGGs may have different basal expression of MHC due to cell of origin and may also have alternate mutations that influence MHC class IIrelated expression patterns. These data highlight the power of our experimental approach using isogenic cells that have identical genetic background except for the status of H3.3 (one carries H3.3G34R, and the other is wild-type H3.3). This controlled comparison removes the noise contributed by different cells of origin and heterogeneity of other mutations and allowed us to conclude that H3.3G34R plays a role in regulating these important genes. Future experiments are necessary to investigate the in vivo significance of our finding.

RACK7 was reported to suppress tumorigenesis, in part by repressing S100A family oncogenes (15). It also has an antimetastasis function by inhibiting multiple metastasisassociated genes (12). However, we did not find global transcriptional up-regulation of these genes upon RACK7 KO or H3.3 knock-in except for S100A3 and epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR), which were decorated by RACK7 in H3.3G34R cells. S100A3 and S100A5 expression differed markedly in the solid tumor tissues in relation to the astrocytic tumor types and grades (42). EGFR is frequently mutated and/or overexpressed in different types of human cancers (41), but not in pediatric H3.3G34R GBM (41). Although up-regulation of S100A3 and EGFR by inhibiting RACK7 is implicated in increasing invasive ability in previous reports (12, 15), their roles in H3.3G34R-associated pGBM remain to be determined in the future.

In addition to G34R, H3.3G34V mutation is also associated with human pGBMs (2). However, unlike H3.3G34R, H3.3G34V does not bind recombinant RACK7 directly (Fig. 2B). We recently identified an H3.3G34V-binding protein, which also interacts with RACK7 in the human H3.3G34V cells [KNS42 (43)], and histone H3.3G34V peptides pulled down RACK7 from lysate of an H3.3G34V cell line (data not shown), suggesting that RACK7 may bind H3.3G34V indirectly in H3.3G34V pGBM cells. Much work remains to be done to understand the mechanism of action of the H3G34V mutation, but our preliminary results suggest that both mutations may recruit RACK7, although the underlying biochemical mechanisms may differ.

Together, our findings identify RACK7 as a reader of H3.3G34R and demonstrate that the H3.3G34R mutation functions by recruiting RACK7 to suppress the expression of MHC class II genes (indirectly) and transport genes (directly), resulting in decreased expression of MHC class II molecules at the cell surface. Association of RACK7 with H3.3G34R also suppresses expression of genes associated with differentiation functions. Abrogation of RACK7 enhances expression of MHC class II genes and (possibly enhanced MHC class IImediated immune response) differentiation genes (possibly increased differentiation) in these tumor cells. Although the cell origin for H3.3G34R-associated pGBM is still unclear, the fact that normal neural stem cells, astrocytes, and microglia cells (1820) could express MHC class II genes supports our hypothesis that suppression of the MHC class II gene expression and delivery in the yet-to-be-identified cells due to the H3.3G34R mutation may contribute to tumorigenesis. Collectively, our findings not only provide molecular insights into H3.3G34R function but also suggest that targeting RACK7 may be an effective way to treat G34R-carrying pGBM.

The DNA fragments corresponding to various truncations of human RACK7 were subcloned into the modified pGEX-6P1 or pGEX-4T-1 vector, and the plasmids were transformed into Escherichia coli strain Rosetta (DE3). The transformants were grown at 37C to OD600 (optical density at 600 nm) of 0.8, and protein expression was induced by adding 0.2 mM isopropyl--d-thiogalactopyranoside (IPTG). After further culturing at 16C for 16 hours, cells were harvested and lysed with the buffer containing 20 mM tris-HCl (pH 8.0), 150 mM NaCl, 1 mM EDTA, 0.2% Triton X-100, 1 mM phenylmethylsulfonyl fluoride (PMSF), and 1 mM dithiothreitol (DTT). The supernatant was incubated with Glutathione Sepharose (GE) beads for 2 hours, and glutathione S-transferase (GST)tagged proteins were eluted with the elution buffer containing 50 mM tris-HCl (pH 8.0) and 20 mM glutathione.

The HA-tagged full-length and deleted human RACK7 were subcloned into the pFastBac HT-A vector, and viruses were generated according to the Bac-to-Bac Baculovirus Expression System (Invitrogen). The Sf9 cells infected by virus were cultured at 28C for 48 hours and then harvested and lysed with the buffer containing 20 mM tris-HCl (pH 7.4), 300 mM NaCl, 0.2% Triton X-100, 10% glycerol, 0.5 mM EDTA, 1 mM PMSF, and 1 mM DTT. The HA infinity beads were added into the supernatant and incubated at 4C for 2 hours, and HA-tagged protein was eluted with the elution buffer containing 200 mM tris-HCl (pH 7.9), 150 mM KCl, 0.2 mM EDTA, 5 mM MgCl2, 0.1% NP-40, and HA-tag peptide (0.2 mg/ml; amino acid: YPYDVPDYA). The HA-tag peptide was synthesized by Beijing Scilight Biotechnology LLC.

For peptide pull-down assays, recombinant, full-length HA-tagged RACK7 and mutants were purified from insect cell Sf9, while PHD, Bromo, and PWWP domains of RACK7 were purified from E. coli. Two micrograms of full-length RACK7 or mutant proteins was incubated with 2 l (concentration, 0.1 mM) of various biotinylated histone peptides in the binding buffer [20 mM tris-HCl (pH 7.3), 150 mM NaCl, 0.1% NP-40] at 4C for 4 hours. The protein-peptide complexes were immobilized to streptavidin beads (Millipore) at 4C for 1 hour. The bound proteins were washed with binding buffer and separated on 10% SDSpolyacrylamide gel electrophoresis (PAGE) followed by Coomassie blue staining. Modified histone peptides were synthesized by Beijing Scilight Biotechnology LLC.

The determination of the binding capacity of PHDRACK7 and PHDRACK7 (D104A) to wild-type or G34R-mutated histone peptides (amino acids 22 to 44) was performed by MST (NanoTemper, Monolith NT.115) according to the manufacturers instruction with 20% light-emitting diode (LED) and 40% MST power (27). The purified recombinant GST-PHDRACK7 and PHDRACK7 (D104A) protein were labeled with NHS-647 (NanoTemper Technologies) and applied at a final concentration of 50 nM. The final concentrations of peptides ranged from 15.259 nM to 500 M. Both proteins and peptides were diluted in 20 mM tris-HCl (pH 8.0), 100 mM NaCl, 0.5% NP-40. Samples were filled into standard, treated capillaries (NanoTemper Technologies). The MST data were analyzed by thermophoresis with temperature jump.

The open reading frames of histone H2A, H2B, H4, wild-type or mutant histone H3.3 were subcloned into the pET28a vector, and the plasmids were transformed into E. coli strain Rosetta (DE3). The transformants were grown at 37C to OD600 of 0.8, and protein expression was induced by adding 0.2 mM IPTG. After further culturing at 37C for 2 hours, cells were harvested and lysed with lysis buffer containing 50 mM tris-HCl (pH 7.5), 100 mM NaCl, 1 mM EDTA, and 1 mM PMSF. The bacterial lysates were then sonicated at 200-W power, 30 s on and 30 s off for 20 cycles. The pellets were washed three times with lysis buffer plus 1% Triton X-100 and three times with lysis buffer; resuspended in unfolding buffer containing 7 M guanidinium-HCl, 20 mM tris-HCl (pH 7.5), and 10 mM DTT; and mixed gently for 1 hour at room temperature. The purified histones were quantitated by 15% SDS-PAGE followed by Coomassie blue staining.

Histone octamers were obtained by mixing the four unfolded recombinant histones isolated as described above in equimolar amounts with approximately 4 mg of total protein in about 1 ml of volume. Then, the mixtures were dialyzed at 4C against 2 liters of refolding buffer [10 mM tris-HCl (pH 7.5), 2 M NaCl, 1 mM EDTA, and 5 mM -mercaptoethanol] with at least three buffer changes. Either the second or third dialysis step was performed overnight. The samples were centrifuged to remove any precipitates, and proteins were concentrated to 250 l with a Millipore microconcentrator (10-kDa cutoff; Millipore, UFV4BGC00). Then, the samples were loaded onto a HiLoad Superdex 200 HR 10/30 column equilibrated with refolding buffer. Recombinant core histone octamers were eluted with a relative molecular mass of 100 kDa and were analyzed by 15% SDS-PAGE followed by Coomassie blue staining.

Recombinant oligonucleosomes were obtained by mixing the recombinant core histone octamers and plasmid containing tandem 147base pair DNA fragments in a mass ratio of 1:1.2 at room temperature for 15 min. Then, the mixtures were dialyzed at 4C against 1 liter of TEN buffers containing 10 mM tris-HCl (pH 7.5), 1 mM EDTA, and 5 mM -mercaptoethanol and different concentrations of NaCl1.4, 1.2, 1.0, 0.8, and 0.6 M. The mixtures were dialyzed at 4C against 1 liter of TE buffer containing 10 mM tris-HCl (pH 7.5) and 1 mM EDTA overnight.

For nucleosome-binding assays, 2 g of full-length recombinant HA-tagged RACK7, expressed and purified from insect cell Sf9, was immobilized on HA beads first, which were then incubated with 5 g of nucleosomes in binding buffer [20 mM tris-HCl (pH 7.9), 150 mM NaCl, 0.05% NP-40, 1 mM MgCl2, and 5% glycerol] at 4C for 6 hours. After three washes with binding buffer, the bound proteins were separated on 15% SDS-PAGE followed by Coomassie blue staining.

All three of these lines (SJ-HGGx6c, SJ-HGGx42c, and SJ-HGGx39c) were established from pGBMs from the cerebral cortex. The cells were maintained under a neural stem cell condition. Briefly, the cells were cultured in Neurobasal:KnockOut DMEM/F-12 (1:2) with 0.5% B27 (minus vitamin A, Thermo Fisher Scientific), 0.5% StemPro Neural Supplement (Thermo Fisher Scientific), 0.5% N-2 (Thermo Fisher Scientific), recombinant human epidermal growth factor (EGF) and FGF-b (20 ng/ml; PeproTech), recombinant human PDGF-AA and PDGF-BB (10 ng/ml; PeproTech), 0.5 mM sodium pyruvate (Thermo Fisher Scientific), 0.5% nonessential amino acid (Thermo Fisher Scientific), 1% GlutaMAX (Thermo Fisher Scientific), and 0.0002% heparin sodium salt (STEMCELL). The culture surface was coated with 1% Geltrex LDEV (lactose dehydrogenase elevating virus) free, growth factor reduced, human embryonic stem cell (hESC) qualified (Thermo Fisher Scientific), which was modified from previous research (44, 45). The SJ-HGGx6c and SJ-HGGx42c were transduced with a lentiviral vector (vCL20SF2-luc2a-YFP) expressing luciferase and yellow fluorescent protein (YFP) (46).

RACK7 and QKI KO cells were generated by using the CRISPR-Cas9 system as described (15). Briefly, guide RNAs were cloned into vector PX335 (hSpCas9 + guide RNA; Addgene, 42335), and the single clones were established by dilution cloning. The KO efficiencies were confirmed by Western blotting. Guide RNA sequences used were as follows: RACK7, 5-GTGATGTGTCCTGCGGCGAG-3; QKI, 5-GGATCTTCAACCACCTCGAG-3.

CIITA, GFAP, and VIM KO cells were generated by using the lentivirus CRISPR-Cas9 system as described (47). Briefly, guide RNAs were cloned into lentiCRISPRv2 (Addgene, 49535), which were transfected cells together with the package plasmid pVSVG and psPAX2. These cells were then selected by puromycin for 10 days for other assays. Guide RNA sequences used were as follows: CIITA, 5-GTGACAGGTAGGACCCAGCA-3; GFAP, 5-GCTCGATGTAGCTGGCAAAG-3; VIM, 5-GGTAGTCACGTAGCTCCGGC-3.

H3.3WT knock-in cells were generated by using the CRISPR-Cas9 system as described (48). Briefly, guide RNA and donor plasmids were cloned into the vector, pX335 (hSpCas9 + guide RNA; Addgene, 42335) and pMD19-T (TaKaRa, 6013), and single clones were isolated by dilution cloning. The knock-in efficiencies were confirmed by PCR of the DNA fragment, followed by Sanger sequencing. Guide RNA sequence used was 5-TCTTCACCCTTCCAGTAGA-3

Immunoblotting analysis was done according to standard procedures, and images were acquired using Bio-Rad ChemiDoc Touch Imaging System. Antibodies used for immunoblotting analysis are listed in table S2.

A total of 2 105 cells in six-well plates with coverslips were used in the immunofluorescence assays. The cells were fixed with 3% paraformaldehyde solution at room temperature for 30 min and washed with phosphate-buffered saline (PBS) solution three times. Cells were permeabilized with 0.2% Triton X-100 in PBS for 5 min at room temperature. After three washes with PBS, cells were blocked with block buffer (1% bovine serum albumin in PBS) at room temperature for 30 min. The cells were then incubated with the first antibody at 4C overnight and second antibody at room temperature for 1 hour. Cells were washed three times with PBST buffer (0.1% Tween 20 in PBS), and images were acquired using fluorescence confocal (Leica) microscopy or Olympus fluorescence microscopy. The antibodies used are listed in table S2.

ChIP analyses of RACK7 were carried out using antibodies listed in table S2. Briefly, cells were cross-linked with 1% formaldehyde for 10 min at room temperature and stopped with 125 mM glycine. Cells were lysed with ChIP lysis buffer [50 mM Hepes (pH 7.5), 500 mM NaCl, 1 mM EDTA, 1% Triton, 0.1% Na-deoxycholate, 0.05% SDS, 1 mM PMSF, and 1 mM DTT]. Whole-cell lysate was sonicated with a Bioruptor sonicator (Diagenode). Chromatin samples were incubated with 2 g of RACK7 antibody overnight at 4C. The protein-DNA complexes were immobilized onto protein A/G beads (Invitrogen, 10 l per reaction). The bound fractions were washed three times with the lysis buffer and three times with radioimmunoprecipitation assay buffer (50 mM Hepes, 300 mM LiCl, 1 mM EDTA, 0.5% NP-40, 0.7% Na-deoxycholate), and once with 50 mM NaCl in tris-EDTA. Elution and reverse cross-linking were carried out in the elution buffer [50 mM tris-HCl (pH 8.0), 10 mM EDTA, and 1% SDS] at 65C for 6 hours. After RNase A and Proteinase K digestion, DNA was purified using the PCR Extraction Kit from Qiagen. Each ChIP-seq was repeated three times. Enrichment at specific loci was confirmed by ChIP-qPCR. The primers used in ChIP-qPCR are listed in table S3. The sequencing libraries for ChIP-seq were prepared from 2 to 5 ng of DNA using the KAPA HyperPrep Kits (KAPA, KK8504) according to the manufacturers instructions. Completed ChIP-seq libraries were qualified by Bioanalyzer 2100 (Agilent) and sequenced at the Base Pair Biotechnology Co. Ltd. The software used to collect and analyze the ChIP-seq data was Bowtie2.2.5. The ChIP-seq profiles were normalized to 1 million total tag numbers, and peaks were called by MACS2.1.1. Duplicated reads of ChIP-seq datasets were removed using the SAMtools.

The mRNA capture and sequencing were performed by the Base Pair Biotechnology Co. Ltd. For bioinformatics analysis, the mRNA sequencing reads were mapped to human reference genome (Ensembl, release 91) using the software Hisat2. Differentially expressed genes are calculated by the ballgown program (version 2.12.0) and DESeq program (version 1.32.0) with cutoffs as follows: FPKM (fragments per kilobase of transcript per million mapped reads) 0.5 (removal of genes with FPKM <0.5 in all samples), P < 0.05, and fold change 1.5. Two biological repeats for each cell line were used.

The heatmap analysis was performed by R, and column was normalized by Z score, defined as (FPKM mean FPKM)/SD. The sample order of the top 50 up-regulated genes is based on the sum of log2(fold change). Two biological repeats for each cell line were used.

Pearsons product-moment correlation of log2(fold change) RNA expression between KO and knock-in cells relative to their parental cells was analyzed by R command cor.test.

Total RNA was extracted using the Simply P total RNA extraction kit (Bioflux), and then complementary DNAs were synthesized by PrimeScript RT Reagent Kit with gDNA Eraser (TaKaRa). The PCR mixture was prepared on a 384-well plate using a FastStart Universal SYBR Green Master Mix according to the manufacturers instructions (Roche). They were run in duplicate on a LightCycler 480 II Real-Time PCR System (Roche). Expression level of each mRNA was normalized to ACTB. Primers for each mRNA were tested with melting curve and listed in table S4.

Cells were washed with PBS and blocked with Human BD FC Block (BD Biosciences) in staining buffer (BD Biosciences) for 10 min on ice. Cells were then incubated with APC Mouse Anti-Human HLA-DR antibody (BD Biosciences) for 30 min on ice protected from light. The cells were washed and resuspended in PBS for flow cytometry. The detailed antibodys information is listed in table S2.

FACSCalibur (BD) and CellQuest software were used to get 15,000 cells for each sample. Two fluorescence excitation wavelengths were used for each sample: one is to detect APC HLA-DR, and another is to detect YFP. SJ-HGGx6c (R6) contained a luciferase-YFP transgene. Other cells including R6WT H3.3, R6RACK7 KO, R6CIITA KO, R6WT H3.3 + CIITA KO, R6RACK7 KO + CIITA KO, R6QKI KO, R6WT H3.3 + QKI KO, R6RACK7 KO + QKI KO, R6GFAP KO, R6WT H3.3 + GFAP KO, R6RACK7 KO + GFAP KO, R6VIM KO, R6WT H3.3 + VIM KO and R6RACK7 KO + VIM KO, R6OCIAD2 KO, R6WT H3.3 + OCIAD2 KO, and R6RACK7 KO + OCIAD2 KO were all generated from SJ-HGGx6c by CRISPR-Cas9. All of them contained luciferase-YFP transgenes. YFP-positive cells were used to analyze the cell surface expression of HLA-DR. Data were analyzed by FlowJo software. The flow cytometry was performed at the Key Laboratory of Medical Molecular Virology, Ministry of Education and Public Health, School of Basic Medical Sciences, Fudan University.

A total of 8 104 or 2 104 cells were used in the migration and invasion assays, respectively. Cells were suspended in Neurobasal Medium containing EGF (200 g/ml), b-FGF (200 g/ml), PDGF-AA (100 g/ml), PDGF-BB (100 g/ml), and 0.0002% heparin sodium salt in PBS and then were plated in the upper chamber with Matrigel noncoated and coated membranes (24-well insert; pore size, 8 mm; BD Biosciences) for Transwell migration and invasion assays, respectively. The bottom chamber contained full medium. After 24 (migration assay) or 48 (invasion assay) hours, the bottom of the chamber insert was fixed and stained with crystal violet and counted microscopically. Each membrane was calculated three microscope fields, and the means were used for representation. All assays were performed in at least biological triplicates.

All the P values of real-time qPCR, migration, and invasion assays in the main figures and supplementary figures were calculated by two-tailed Students t test, and three biological repeats were used. The P values of the correlation analysis were Pearsons product-moment correlation analyzed by R.

DNA oligonucleotides used in this study were synthesized by Sangon Biotech (Shanghai) Co. Ltd. and are listed in tables S3 and S4.

All data generated are included in the figures, supplementary figures, and supplementary files. All sequencing datasets have been deposited in the National Center for Biotechnology Information (NCBI) Gene Expression Omnibus under accession numbers GSE138060 and GSE138077.

Acknowledgments: We thank L. Kasper, X. Zhu, and J. Zhang of St. Jude Childrens Research Hospital for help with pGBM cell culture. We thank J. Partridge from St. Jude Childrens Research Hospital for experimental help. We thank Y. Wang from School of Basic Medical Sciences, Fudan University for help with flow cytometry. Funding: This work was supported by grants to R.G. from the Ministry of Science and Technology of China (2016YFA0500700 and 2018YFA0108700) and the National Natural Science Foundation of China Program (31571318 and 31771450); to S.J.B., in part, from American Lebanese and Syrian Associated Charities (ALSAC); to Y.X. from the Ministry of Science and Technology of China (2016YFA0500700) and the National Natural Science Foundation of China (31830107 and 31821002); and to Z.L. from the National Natural Science Foundation of China (31630002 and 31470725) and the Shanghai Municipal Commission of Health and Family Planning (20144Y0103). Y.S. is an American Cancer Society Research professor and a recipient of the National Cancer Institute Outstanding Investigator Award (R35 CA210104). Author contributions: R.G. and Y.S. conceived and designed the project. S.J.B. provided critical discussions and advice for experimental design. R.G. and F.J. carried out in vitro binding, ChIP-seq, CRISPR, FACS, and MST assays. G.Y., W.X., F.J., and R.G. carried out the bioinformatics analysis. Z.L. carried out part of the biochemical assays supervised by Y.X. T.L., Y.Y., J.N.A., J.C., and Y.M. provided technical assistance and discussion. C.J. analyzed CIITA expression in pediatric HGGs. S.J.B. and C.H. established the three human patient pGBM cell lines. H.S., F.L., and Y.G.S. provided discussion of RACK7 function and experimental help. R.G., Y.S., and S.J.B. cowrote the manuscript with input from all authors. Competing interests: Y.S. is a cofounder/equity holder of Constellation Pharmaceuticals Inc. and Athelas Therapeutics Inc., an equity holder of Imago Biosciences, and a consultant for Active Motif. The other authors declare that they have no competing interests. Data and materials availability: ChIP-seq and RNA-seq data are deposited in NCBI (accession numbers GSE138060 and GSE138077). All data needed to evaluate the conclusions in the paper are present in the paper and/or the Supplementary Materials. Additional data related to this paper may be requested from the authors. Requests for patient-derived cell lines should be submitted to S. Baker at St. Jude Childrens Research Hospital and will be provided pending scientific review and a completed material transfer agreement.

Read more from the original source:
RACK7 recognizes H3.3G34R mutation to suppress expression of MHC class II complex components and their delivery pathway in pediatric glioblastoma -...