Stem Cell and Regenerative Therapy Market: Cell Therapy Segment to Dominate Global Market – BioSpace

Stem Cell and Regenerative Therapy Market: Effective Treatment Method for Damaged Cells in Number of Diseases

Request Brochure of Stem Cell and Regenerative Therapy Market Report - https://www.transparencymarketresearch.com/sample/sample.php?flag=B&rep_id=75161

Key Drivers and Restraints of Global Stem Cell and Regenerative Therapy Market

Request for Analysis of COVID-19 Impact on Stem Cell and Regenerative Therapy Market https://www.transparencymarketresearch.com/sample/sample.php?flag=covid19&rep_id=75161

Unclear Regulatory Guidelines Hampers Global Market

Cell Therapy Segment to Dominate Global Market

Purchase the Stem Cell and Regenerative Therapy Market Report - https://www.transparencymarketresearch.com/checkout.php?rep_id=75161&ltype=S

Oncology to be Highly Promising Segment

Hospitals to be Major End-user Segment

Request for Custom Research - https://www.transparencymarketresearch.com/sample/sample.php?flag=CR&rep_id=75161

North America to Lead Global Stem Cell and Regenerative Therapy Market

Key Manufacturers Operating in Global Stem Cell and Regenerative Therapy Market

Key manufacturers operating in the global market are:

About Us

Transparency Market Research is a global market intelligence company providing global business information reports and services. Our exclusive blend of quantitative forecasting and trends analysis provides forward-looking insight for several decision makers. Our experienced team of analysts, researchers, and consultants use proprietary data sources and various tools and techniques to gather and analyze information.

Our data repository is continuously updated and revised by a team of research experts so that it always reflects latest trends and information. With a broad research and analysis capability, Transparency Market Research employs rigorous primary and secondary research techniques in developing distinctive data sets and research material for business reports.

Contact Mr. Rohit Bhisey Transparency Market Research, 90 State Street, Suite 700, Albany, NY 12207 Tel: +1-518-618-1030 USA - Canada Toll Free: 866-552-3453 Website: https://www.transparencymarketresearch.com/

Here is the original post:
Stem Cell and Regenerative Therapy Market: Cell Therapy Segment to Dominate Global Market - BioSpace

First in the nation, FDA-approved Phase II mesenchymal stem cell therapy for Parkinson’s disease begins – Newswise

Newswise A Phase II clinical trial to assess mesenchymal adult stem cells as a disease-modifying therapy for Parkinson's disease has been launched at The University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston (UTHealth).

"Studies have shown mesenchymal stem cells can migrate to the sites of injury and respond to the environment by secreting several anti-inflammatory and growth factor molecules that can restore tissue equilibrium and disrupt neuronal death," said Mya C. Schiess, MD, professor in the Department of Neurology and director and founder of the movement disorder subspeciality clinic and fellowship program at McGovern Medical School at UTHealth. "The stem cells interact directly with the immune cells, leading to an anti-inlammatory state that allows a restorative process to take place."

Safety and tolerability results, assessed on a previous trial, were recently published in the journal Movement Disorders. The Phase I study showed that there were no serious adverse reactions related to the stem cell influsion and no immunological reactions to the cells, which come from the bone marrow of a healthy adult donor. The study enrolled 20 patients with mild to moderate disease, who were infused with one of four different dosages and monitored for a year. Additionally, researchers reported a reduction in preripheral inflammatory markers and a reduction in motor symptoms.

Parkinson's diease is the second most common neurodegenerative disease, affecting more than a million Americans. It is also the fastest-growning of the neurodegenerative diseases, with more than 60,000 new cases identified every year. It is predicted that by 2040, Parkinson's disease will affect 17.5 million people worldwide.

Research has shown that one of the forces playing a critical role in the diease's development and progression is a chronic neuroinflammatory process that damages the brain's microenvironment and alters its healthy equilibrium. Inflammatiion perpetuates the neurodegenration in the brain areas that control movement, causing the tremors, imbalance, loss of speech, slowness, and other motor impairments.

The randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled Phase II trial will investigate the safest and most effective number of repeat doses of stem cells to slow the progression of Parkinson's disease. The study will enroll 45 patients, ages 50 to 79, who will receive three infusions of either placebo or stem cell therapy at three-month intervals and will be followed for a year after the last infusion.

"Currently, there is no approved therapy that can delay the degenerative process in Parkinson's disease," Schiess said. "By investigating a treatment that can slow or stop the progression, we hope to improve the quality of life of those suffering from the disease. The ultimate goal is to use this treatment in individuals with a prodromal condition, meaning they are showing early signs of Parkinson's disease but are not yet clinically symptomatic. We hope to be able to potentially stop the diease's conversion or clinical manifestation in patients who are high-risk."

The Phase II trial, approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, is supported with funding from the Michael J. Fox Foundation, John S. Dunn Foundation, and John and Kyle Kirksey.

Other McGovern Medical School faculty co-authors on the paper included Jessika Suescun, MD, Christopher Adams, MD, and Sean Savitz, MD, in the Department of Neurology. Marie-Francoise Doursout, PhD, Department of Anesthesiology; Charles Green, PhD, Department of Pediatrics; and Jerome G. Saltarrelli, PhD, Department of Surgery. Timothy M. Ellmore, PhD, Department of Psychology at the City College of New York, N.Y., was senior author.

- For media inquiries: 713-500-3030

Visit link:
First in the nation, FDA-approved Phase II mesenchymal stem cell therapy for Parkinson's disease begins - Newswise

Cellino Biotech developing tech to help scale stem cell therapies – MedCity News

In response to emailed questions, Cellino Biotech CEO and Co-founder Dr. Nabiha Saklayen, talked about the formation of the company and its goal to make stem cell therapies more accessible for patients.

Why did you start this company?

I see a huge need to develop a technology platform to enable the manufacture of cell therapies at scale. We recently closed a $16 million seed financing round led by Khosla Ventures and The Engine at MIT, with participation from Humboldt Fund. Cellino is on a mission to make personalized, autologous cell therapies accessible for patients. Stem cell-derived regenerative medicines are poised to cure some of the most challenging diseases within this decade, including Parkinsons, diabetes, and heart disease. Patient-specific cells provide the safest, most effective cures for these indications. However, current autologous processes are not scalable due to extensive manual handling, high variability, and expensive facility overhead. Cellinos vision is to make personalized regenerative medicines viable at large scale for the first time.

How did you meet your co-founders?

Nabiha Saklayen.

I met my co-founder Marinna Madrid in my Ph.D. research group. We had worked together for many years and had a fantastic working relationship. I then met our third co-founder Matthias Wagner through a friend. Matthias had built and run three optical technology companies in the Boston area and was looking to work with a new team. I was thrilled when we decided to launch the startup together at our second meeting. Matthias built the first Cellino hardware systems in what I like to call Matthias garage. In parallel, I was doing hundreds of expert interviews with biologists in academia and industry, and it started to narrow down our potential applications very quickly. Marinna was doing our first experiments with iPSCs. We iterated rapidly on building new versions of the hardware based on the features that were important to industry experts, such as single-cell precision and automation. Its incredible to witness our swift progress as a team.

What specific need or pain point are you seeking to address in healthcare/life sciences?

In general, autologous therapies are safer for patients because they do not require immunosuppression. The next iteration of cell therapies would use patient-specific stem cells banked ahead of time. Anytime a patient needs new cells, such as blood cells, neurons, or skin cells, we would generate them from a stem cell bank.

Today, patient-specific stem cell generation is a manual and artisanal process. A highly skilled scientist sits at a bench, looks at cells by eye, and removes unwanted cells with a pipette tip. Many upcoming clinical trials are using manual processes to produce stem cells for about ten to twenty patients.

At Cellino, we are converging different disciplines to automate this complex process. We use an AI-based laser system comes to remove any unwanted cells. By making stem cells for every human in an automated, scalable way, we are working towards our mission at Cellino to democratize personalized regenerative medicine.

What does your technology do? How does it work?

Cellinos platform combines label-free imaging and high-speed laser editing with machine learning to automate cell reprogramming, expansion, and differentiation in a closed cassette format, enabling thousands of patient samples to be processed in parallel in a single facility.

In general, autologous, patient-specific stem cell-derived therapies do not require immunosuppression and are safer for patients. Today, patient-specific stem cells are made manually, by hand. To scale the stem cell generation process, Cellino converges different disciplines to automate this complex process. We train machine learning algorithms to characterize cells before our AI-based laser system removes any unwanted cells. By making stem cells for every human in an automated, scalable way, our mission at Cellino is to democratize personalized regenerative medicine. Thats why our vision statement is Every human. Every cell.

Whats your background in healthcare? How did you get to where you are today?

When I arrived at Harvard University for my Ph.D. in physics, I wanted to be closer to real-world applications. Biology is inherently complex and beautiful, and I was interested in developing new physics-based tools to engineer cells with precision. During my Ph.D., I invented new ways to edit cells with laser-based nanomaterials. I collaborated with many brilliant biology groups at Harvard, including the Rossi, Scadden, and Church labs. Working closely with them convinced me that lasers offer a superior solution to editing cells with high precision. That realization compelled me to launch Cellino.

Do you have clinical validation for your product?

Our immediate goal for the next year is to show that our platform can produce personalized, high-quality, R&D-grade stem cells for different patients, which has not been established in an automated manner in the regenerative medicine industry so far. There is significant patient-to-patient variability in manual cell processing, which we eliminate with our platform.

Photo: Urupong, Getty Images

See original here:
Cellino Biotech developing tech to help scale stem cell therapies - MedCity News

Stem cell treatment needed to fight the good fight – Victoria Lookout

LCol Laura Laycock on deployment.

LCol Laura Laycock

It was Oct. 7, 2019, and life was not just good, it was amazing.

My career in the Royal Canadian Air Force was going great. I loved my job and was getting promoted. Throughout my Canadian Armed Forces career of over 20years, I had represented Canada around the world with NORAD, NATO and the UN. I had married the most incredible man. We relocated to Ottawa, started to travel the world together, and were ready to start a family.

Then, on Oct. 8, 2019, everything changed.

I was diagnosed with Chronic Myeloid Leukemia(CML) after blood work for vertigo showed extremely elevated white blood cell counts. CML is a blood cancer where the bone marrow overproduces white blood cells, which eventually impairs the development of white and red blood cells and platelets. Its usually caused by a spontaneous mutation in DNA, which contains our genetic code.

LCol Laycock

Twenty years ago, researchers developed a new line of drugs that combat this overproduction of white blood cells. These targeted oral chemotherapy pills have been revolutionary in the fight against CML. Most people who take them do so for the rest of their lives and have good survival rates; however, a stem cell transplant remains the only actual cure. But its risky and not needed for most people.

Its now been about 17months since my diagnosis and my body has not tolerated this targeted chemotherapy. I fall into that small fraction of people who get debilitating or life-threatening side effects from this medication. My doctors are discussing other treatment options, one of which is a stem cell transplant, but my mixed ethnicity (European/Middle Eastern) has made it difficult to find a donor match.

My journey since my diagnosis has been to slow down and educate myself so that I can heal and advocate for my care; to appreciate every little moment of joy; and to do my best to overcome each challenge that arises. I have found strength in the extraordinary support Ive received from my family, my friends and my community, both old and new.

With the help of family and friends, I recently began a social media campaign to increase stem cell donor education and registration in Canada and around the world. Many people are unaware of the potentially lifesaving role they can play by registering to become stem cell donors. Stem cell transplants are vital treatment options for people with a range of medical conditions including spinal cord injuries, heart disease, diabetes, and some cancers.

The process to donate is simple. First, you register online with Canadian Blood Services or Hma-Qubec and do a mail-in cheek swab., and then you wait. It could be months or years before you are identified as a match. During this waiting period, you should update your contact information with the registry if it changes.

When you are matched, you will be contacted to continue with the donation process. This process is similar to giving blood, but it has its differences. The cells are usually collected intravenously from peripheral blood in a non-surgical procedure but, in rare cases, they are collected directly from the bone marrow in a surgical procedure. In either case, the risks associated with donating are minor.

In Canada, individuals aged17 to 35 can register to become stem cell donors (ages18 to 35 in Quebec). Both CBS and Hma-Qubec are part of an international network of donor registries from over 50countries. This network has a pool of over 38million donors but, unfortunately, matches are rare.

Your stem cells could potentially help others around the world, and throughout this process donor privacy is assured at all times.

LCol Laycock on her wedding day.

Stem cell matching relies on Human Leukocyte Antigen typing, which is highly influenced by ethnicity. This means that a patients best chance of finding a matching donor is from those who share similar ethnic backgrounds. Research conducted by Gragert et al.(2014) has shown that the likelihood of finding a match for certain ethnic groups can be as low as 16 percent and as high as 75 percent for others. This disparity highlights the need for more ethnically diverse stem cell donors in our registries.

Today, I am calling on my DND and CAF families to register as stem cell donors to help people, like me, who are fighting for our lives. If you arent able to register, please share this call with those who can. You, or someone you know, could be the match that saves a life a simple swab is all it takes to be a hero.

More here:
Stem cell treatment needed to fight the good fight - Victoria Lookout

Being bionic: the future of regenerative medicine – Toronto Star

Six decades ago, two researchers at the Ontario Cancer Institute at Princess Margaret Hospital made a startling discovery. James Till and Ernest McCulloch had found transplantable stem cells, special building block cells that have the ability to grow into any kind of human tissue.

Till and McCulloch were studying the effects of radiation at the time, but their work set off an explosion of research aimed at harnessing stem cells to treat all kinds of diseases and conditions. Subsequent breakthroughs in stem cell therapy have been used to treat more than 42,000 patients for hemophilia, restore sight to blind mice and even help a 78-year-old man regrow the end of a sliced-off fingertip. And researchers are still unlocking what might be possible.

The potential of regenerative medicine is astounding, says Michael May, president of the Centre for Commercialization of Regenerative Medicine (CCRM), a Toronto non-profit that helps bring new stem cell therapies and other regenerative medicine technologies to market. Researchers are harnessing stem cells to repair, replace or regenerate human cells, tissues and organs with the aim of improving treatments for conditions ranging from diabetes to blindness to heart failure and cancer.

More recent advances most notably Shinya Yamanakas Nobel Prize-winning 2012 discovery that regular adult tissue cells can be reprogrammed to become stem cells again, therefore endowing them with the ability to become any type of cell in the body have also ushered in a new wave of regenerative medicine research and what May calls a global race to bring newly possible cell therapies to market.

As president of CCRM, Mays job is to help move some of that research from the laboratory into the real world. Over the last decade, his organization has helped 11 companies come to market with regenerative medicine technologies, such as Montreals ExCellThera, which provides new therapeutic options for patients who suffer from myeloid leukemia and lack a traditional bone marrow donor.

While the last decade was defined by research and technological breakthroughs, May says the next decade will be all about lowering manufacturing costs and tackling patient access bottlenecks. Last November, CCRM announced that it would partner with McMaster Innovation Park in Hamilton to create Canadas first commercial-scale factory for making cells, which will be able to produce billions of cells enough to treat thousands of patients per week.

Weve just scratched the surface of whats possible in regenerative medicine, May says. He envisions a time when well eventually use these techniques not just to cure and fix human bodies, but also make them better. Now we can make cells, we can design them by genetically engineering them to do things that they naturally do, but that can be more than nature designed, says May. He says the editing of human traits in this way could eventually augment human abilities to such an extent that theyre unrecognizable.

Biomaterials are another technology that could transform regenerative medicine. Before joining CCRM, May himself helped found a Toronto biomaterials startup called Rimon Therapeutics, which developed a smart dressing for chronic wounds that used special polymers to support the bodys natural healing process. Similar advanced biomaterials could eventually be used in combination with cell therapies to not just fight aging and degeneration, but to also prevent it entirely, and even improve upon the human bodys natural baseline health.

Fifty years from now if theres some sort of blindness, well have a lens on the eye that will automatically focus and react or change as the eye ages, he says.

Nick Zarzycki is a freelancer who writes about technology for MaRS. Torstar, the parent company of the Toronto Star, has partnered with MaRS to highlight innovation in Canadian companies.

Disclaimer This content was produced as part of a partnership and therefore it may not meet the standards of impartial or independent journalism.

Report an error

About The Star

More:
Being bionic: the future of regenerative medicine - Toronto Star

Treating chronic myeloid leukemia (CML): By phase and more – Medical News Today

Treatment options for chronic myeloid leukemia often include targeted therapies. Treatment plans and their effectiveness may depend on the phase of the condition.

Chronic myeloid leukemia (CML) is a slow-growing type of blood cancer that can affect white and red blood cells and platelets. It occurs in about 15% of adults who receive a leukemia diagnosis.

CML has three phases: chronic, accelerated, and blast.

The different phases can have an impact on a persons overall prognosis and how a doctor and the person approach the treatment plan.

This article discusses common treatments for CML and the differences between the phases of the condition.

The chronic phase is the earliest stage of CML.

In this phase, the cancer grows and spreads most slowly, and people typically experience few or no symptoms.

Moreover, during this stage of CML, people have less than 10% blast cells, which are cancerous immature white blood cells.

Most people receive a diagnosis of CML in the chronic phase.

During the chronic phase, the first line of treatment is tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs). A doctor may try one or more TKIs, such as:

If a specific TKI is ineffective, a doctor may change a persons dose or use a different medication. On rare occasions, a doctor may recommend a bone marrow transplant.

During treatment, a doctor will need to check the progress regularly. To do this, they will need to draw blood and check for levels of BCR-ABL, a cancer-causing gene, every 36 months. A persons doctor should review the results of the tests with the person.

A 2017 long-term study found that the 10-year survival rate of people who received a diagnosis of chronic phase CML was about 83% when they took imatinib.

The American Cancer Society states that about 70% of people have a complete response to TKI treatments within the first year.

If the first treatment does not prove effective, a doctor may consider the following:

Treatment following a stem cell transplant can vary based on the response a persons body has to the transplant.

If the persons body does not reject the transplant, a doctor may try to have the immune system attack the cancer cells by either reducing the amount of immunosuppressors or introducing donor cells.

The second phase of CML is the accelerated phase, during which blast counts are higher, and symptoms are likely to develop.

In addition, during this stage, a person has increased cancer activity.

According to the American Cancer Society, a doctor will often diagnose the accelerated phase if one or more of the following occur:

A person with accelerated phase CML is also more likely to experience symptoms such as:

The American Cancer Society states treatment for the accelerated phase will be similar to that for the chronic phase. The main difference is that in the second phase of CML, long-term success with treatment is less likely.

Treatment options, which will depend on what doctors have already used, may include:

It is difficult to determine the life expectancy of a person who receives a diagnosis of CML in the accelerated phase.

The American Cancer Society indicates a person is less likely to have a long-term response to the treatment.

However, researchers are studying new therapies, which may help prolong the life expectancy of people with a diagnosis of accelerated CML.

The blast phase is the most advanced stage of CML.

People with a blast phase CML diagnosis have at least 20% blast cells in their blood. At this stage, the cancer has also spread beyond the blood into organs or other tissues.

Additionally, a person will likely experience fever, small appetite, and weight loss.

Treatment will vary between people depending on the cancer and the type of treatment a person has already undergone.

A cure for CML in the blast phase is unlikely. That is why doctors will possibly recommend medication and therapy to help a person feel better and relieve their symptoms.

According to the American Cancer Society, a doctor may recommend newer TKIs, such as bosutinib, dasatinib, or nilotinib. Chemotherapy drugs may be effective.

If treatment is successful, a doctor may recommend a stem cell transplant.

With newer therapies, the exact survival rate of people with a blast phase CML diagnosis is not clear.

People with blast phase CML are less likely to respond well to treatment and to recover from their condition than people with a chronic phase CML.

A 2018 study reports that people with CML whose cancer cells have the T315I mutation are less likely to respond to both older and newer TKIs.

As a result, doctors will likely recommend a different strategy, such as:

CML is a type of cancer. There are several potential therapies a doctor may recommend a person undergo to treat the cancer, slow its growth, or improve a persons quality of life.

Below, we describe some of the most common approaches.

Targeted therapies are medications that identify and attack cancer cells based on certain markers.

CML contains BCR-ABL, a gene that is not present in healthy cells. The gene causes the production of BCR-ABL protein, which is a type of tyrosine kinase. Targeted therapies for CML contain TKIs that stop the growth and reproduction of cancer cells with the protein.

According to the American Cancer Society, TKIs are a frequently used treatment option in the chronic phase of CML. However, doctors may also use them in later phases of the condition.

Interferon therapy is the most common treatment for CML.

It recreates interferons, a substance the immune system produces naturally. The therapy helps prevent the growth and division of cancer cells.

Chemotherapy, or chemo, which doctors use to treat many different types of cancer, slows or stops the growth and division of cancer cells.

It may cure the cancer, reduce the likelihood of it returning, or slow or stop its growth. It may also improve symptoms.

Chemotherapy used to be the primary treatment for CML. However, TKIs are now the first line of treatment.

Doctors will typically only recommend chemotherapy if a person does not respond well to TKIs or is undergoing a stem cell transplant.

Radiation therapy uses high doses of waves of energy to destroy cancer cells. The damaged cancer cells can no longer reproduce, and die as a result.

The National Cancer Institute states that it can take several weeks of treatment to damage cancer cells enough for them to start dying off. It could then take a few weeks or months for the cells to die off completely.

However, according to the American Cancer Society, radiation is not a common treatment for CML.

Doctors may use it to reduce the size of the spleen if the cancer has spread there, to treat bone pain resulting from bone damage. They may also use it during stem cell transplant throughout the body.

Surgery is not a typical treatment option for CML. That is because the cancer can spread throughout a persons bone marrow and other organs.

Doctors will typically only recommend surgery to remove the spleen if the cancer has affected it.

A stem cell transplant involves destroying cancer cells and some healthy cells in the bone marrow, where the leukemia starts.

Once the cancer is destroyed, a doctor replaces the cells with healthy bone marrow cells that a donor provided. Usually, doctors offer this treatment option to younger people who have a matched tissue donor.

While this is the only treatment that can cure CML, it has several associated risks, including infection and graft-versus-host disease.

A person with a diagnosed CML may wish to try alternative or complementary therapies to help alleviate symptoms. They should seek guidance from a doctor to find the most suitable therapies.

According to a 2016 study, traditional Chinese herbal medicine may be effective in managing CML when people use it in conjunction with Gleevec.

However, a person should speak with their doctor about this type of treatment before finding a licensed practitioner of traditional Chinese medicine.

Another study looked at several different herbs and fruits for the treatment of leukemia. Although the study indicates more research is necessary, it reports positive results when using herbs such as ginger, garlic, and carrots.

CML is a slow-growing type of leukemia that develops in the bone marrow.

Experts distinguish three phases of the condition: chronic, accelerated, and blast. Treatments across the three phases are often similar and involve using TKIs.

A person can work with their doctor to create the best treatment options for them. If the treatment is ineffective, a doctor may recommend other therapies to achieve remission or improve a persons quality of life.

Go here to see the original:
Treating chronic myeloid leukemia (CML): By phase and more - Medical News Today

Chemical conversion of human epidermal stem cells into intestinal goblet cells for modeling mucus-microbe interaction and therapy – Science Advances

RESULTS Direct conversion of hESC into GCs

hESC were cultured and expanded in the EpiLife medium. hESC displayed a cobblestone-like appearance (Fig. 1B, left). Immunostaining assays showed that cultured hESC expressed the epidermal stem cell markers cytokeratin 19 (CK19), CK14, CK5, 1-integrin, and proliferating marker Ki67 (fig. S1A). After differentiation induction with a high concentration of calcium, hESC flattened and expressed the differentiation markers transglutaminase 1 (TGase1) and loricrin (fig. S1B).

(A) Scheme of induction procedure. (B) Left: Microscope image of hESC. Scale bars, 100 m. Right: Morphological changes after chemical induction. Scale bars, 100 m (10) and 50 m (20). Arrow indicates the goblet-like cell. (C) Immunostaining of the MUC2 and E-cad in the induced cells. Nuclei were counterstained with 4,6-diamidino-2-phenylindole (DAPI). (D) Immunostaining of the MUC2 and 1-integrin in the hESC control without chemical induction. (E) Immunostaining of the UEA-1. Arrow indicates mucus granules. (F to H) Immunostaining of the AGR2, TFF3, and RELM. (I) Western blotting of the control hESC and the RCBB-induced cells. (J) Percentage of MUC2-positive (MUC2+) cells in the induced total DAPI-positive cells after 7 days of chemical induction (means SEM). (K) Percentages of UEA-1-positive (UEA-1+) cells in the induced total DAPI-positive (DAPI+) cells at the indicated times (means SEM). (L) Immunostaining of UEA-1 in the induced cells from day 0 to day 6. (M to P) Immunostaining of the enterocyte marker CYP3A4 and villin, Paneth cell marker LYZ, and enteroendocrine cell marker ChrA. Scale bars, 25 m (C to H and L to P).

After plating in the collagen-coated plates or glass coverslips, hESC were induced by the chemical induction medium consisting of Dulbeccos modified Eagles medium (DMEM)/F12, 0.5% B27, 0.5% N2, 1% penicillin/streptomycin (P/S), 5 M Repsox, 3 M CHIR99021, bFGF (10 ng/ml), and BMP4 (10 ng/ml). The Repsox, CHIR99021, bFGF, and BMP4 were collectively named as RCBB (Fig. 1A). After 6 to 8 days of chemical induction, the cobblestone-like cell morphology was changed into small compact cells, with some cells displaying long, goblet-like morphology (Fig. 1B, right). These induced cells were immunopositive for the epithelial marker E-cadherin (E-cad) and GC marker MUC2 (Fig. 1C and fig. S2A). In contrast, the control hESC did not express the MUC2 (Fig. 1D). Western blotting confirmed the expression of MUC2 in the induced cells (Fig. 1I). The induced cells were also positive for the Ulex europaeus agglutinin-1 (UEA-1, detecting the GC product mucins), showing the presence of mucus granules in the cytoplasm (Fig. 1E, arrow). In addition, the induced cells expressed the GC products, such as anterior gradient protein 2 homolog (AGR2 or named as GOB4), intestinal trefoil factor 3 (TFF3), and resistin-like molecule (RELM) (Fig. 1, F to H). These results suggested that the induced cells are GCs, referred to as hESC-GCs. Quantification of MUC2-positive cells showed that 94.98 1.28% of cells were positive for MUC2 at day 7 after induction (Fig. 1J). We further calculated the induction efficiency from day 1 to day 6 by measuring the percentages of the UEA-1positive cells relative to the total 4,6-diamidino-2-phenylindole (DAPI)positive cells after chemical induction. A gradual increase in the number of hESC-GCs was observed during the chemical induction (Fig. 1, K and L). hESC-GCs were negative for markers of other types of intestinal cells, such as the enterocyte markers (CYP3A4 and villin), Paneth cell marker [lysozyme (LYZ)], and enteroendocrine cell marker [chromogranin A (ChrA)] (Fig. 1, M to P). Moreover, the epithelial columnar cell markers CK8/CK18 and CK19 and the epithelial marker, epithelial cell adhesion molecule (EpCAM), were expressed in the hESC-GCs (fig. S2, B to E). Zonula occludens-1 (ZO1) and occludin, the tight junction proteins, were detected around the hESC-GCs (fig. S2, F and G). Western blotting verified that hESC-GCs expressed the epithelial markers and did not express villin, ChrA, and LYZ (fig. S2M). hESC-GCs could proliferate in the induction medium, as evidenced by the Ki67 staining and cell counting kit-8 (CCK-8) assay (fig. S2, H and I).

hESC and hESC-GCs both expressed the transcription factor GATA6 (GATA-binding factor 6) and KLF4 (Kruppel-like factor 4) (fig. S2, J, L, and M), which may facilitate the direct conversion because GATA6 and KLF4 are necessary for GC differentiation (11, 12). GATA 6 expression is restricted to the distal colon epithelial cells (12, 13). However, hESC-GCs did not express GATA4 (fig. S2, K and M), which is generally expressed in the proximal intestine (13, 14). These results implied that hESC-GCs may be distal colon GCs.

As GCs secrete neutral and acidic mucins, we performed periodic acidSchiff (PAS) staining detecting both neutral and acidic mucins. hESC-GCs were positive for PAS staining (Fig. 2A, left). We further performed Alcian blue (AB) staining to detect acidic mucins specifically. Figure 2A (middle) shows that hESC-GCs were AB positive. AB-PAS staining proved to be positive for both AB and PAS staining (Fig. 2A, right). By contrast, control hESC were negative for PAS and AB staining (Fig. 2A, bottom). Transmission electron microscopy revealed that almost all hESC-GCs have an apical part distended with large rounded mucus globules of moderate electron density and a basal part containing the nucleus (Fig. 2B and fig. S3). There were few microvilli on the hESC-GCs. hESC-GCs were enriched with mitochondria and endoplasmic reticulum in the cytoplasm (fig. S3). The mucus secretion properties further supported the chemical conversion of hESC into GCs.

(A) PAS, AB, and AB-PAS staining of hESC-GCs and control hESC. (B) Transmission electron micrograph of hESC-GCs. Almost all the hESC-GCs have large rounded mucus globules (MG) of moderate electron density and a basal part containing the nucleus (N) [top (1500, 2 m) and bottom (3000, 1 m)]. (C) RT-qPCR analysis of relative mRNA expression levels of mucus-associated genes MUC2, RELM, FCGBP, ZG16, TFF3, and AGR2 and GC fate commitment and differentiation-associated genes ATHO1 and SPDEF in hESC-GCs and control hESC. Values are presented as means SEM (n = 3; ***P < 0.001, ****P < 0.0005 versus control group). (D) ALI culture, representative images of mucus secretion after 2 and 7 days of ALI culture in a six-well plate, respectively. Right: Tubes collecting the mucus. Photo credit: Andong Zhao, PLA General Hospital. (E and F) Representative images showing PAS and AB staining of hESC-GCs cultured in the ALI system. (G and H) Representative images of E-cad, MUC2, and CK18 in hESC-GCs cultured in the ALI system. Scale bars, 100 m (A), 50 m (E and F), and 25 m (G and H).

We then performed real-time quantitative polymerase chain reaction (RT-qPCR) analysis of GC-associated genes in hESC-GCs. hESC-GCs increased the mRNA expression of MUC2 and other GC products such as RELM, Fc- binding protein (FCGBP), and zymogen granule protein 16 (ZG16), AGR2, and TFF3, as compared to control hESC group (Fig. 2C). hESC-GCs also up-regulated the gene expression of the transcription factor ATOH1 (protein atonal homolog 1) and SPDEF (SAM pointed domain-containing Ets transcription factor), which are essential for the differentiation of intestinal secretory lineage cells (Fig. 2C). These results suggested that hESC-GCs acquire the key gene expression phenotypes of GCs.

To determine the effects of the small molecules and growth factors, we tested different combinations of them. Treatment with single Repsox (R), bFGF, and BMP4 failed to induce hESC into cells positive for PAS and AB staining (fig. S4, B to D). However, CHIR99021 (C) treatment could induce hESC into PAS- and AB-positive cells (fig. S4E). The addition of Repsox into CHIR99021 could accelerate the morphological changes of hESC into GCs (fig. S4F). bFGF and BMP4 were able to increase the morphological changes and efficiency of conversion (fig. S4, G and H). These data implied that CHIR99021, an inhibitor of glycogen synthase kinase 3 beta (GSK-3), may play a critical role in GC induction by activation of Wnt signaling. Accordingly, we tested whether another GSK-3 inhibitor could substitute CHIR99021 and found that Kenpaullone (K), another GSK-3 inhibitor, could also induce hESC into GCs (RKBB; fig. S5A). It is well known that Wnt activation or GSK-3 inhibition promotes the nuclear translocation of the downstream -catenin and transcriptional activation of the Wnt target genes. Immunostaining showed that CHIR99021, RCBB, or RCBMP4 treatment resulted in nuclear translocation of -catenin, not Repsox (fig. S6A).

Wnt activation is associated with the phosphorylation status of GSK-3 because GSK-3 can phosphorylate -catenin and promote the degradation of -catenin. Inhibitory phosphorylation of GSK-3 at Ser9 can inhibit the kinase activity of GSK-3. CHIR99021 is known to inhibit GSK-3 kinase activity by competing the adenosine 5-triphosphate (ATP)binding domains and blocking the transfer of the terminal phosphate from ATP to the protein substrate. As a result, CHIR99021 can block phosphorylation of every GSK-3targeted substrate including -catenin, which increases the stability and accumulation of -catenin in cytosol and nucleus. Nevertheless, we explored whether RCBB activates Wnt signaling via altering the inhibitory phosphorylation of GSK-3 at Ser9 (p-Ser9 GSK-3). Western blotting revealed that RCBB treatment did not increase the level of p-Ser9 GSK-3 (fig. S6, B and C), indicating that CHIR99021 inhibits activity of GSK-3 not by increasing the inhibitory phosphorylation levels of GSK-3. A decrease in the ratio of p-Ser9 GSK-3 versus GSK-3 was detected during the initial chemical induction (fig. S6, B and C). Mechanistically, CHIR99021 inhibits GSK-3 activity regardless of its phosphorylation status. Therefore, CHIR99021 can still activate the Wnt signaling. qPCR analysis showed that RCBB treatment led to an increase in the mRNA levels of Wnt/-catenin downstream genes T cell factor 1 (TCF1) and lymphoid enhancer factor (LEF1) and a slight decrease in the mRNA levels of TCF3, TCF4, GSK-3, and -catenin as compared to the control hESC (fig. S6D). A single CHIR99021 also up-regulated the TCF1 and LEF1 and slightly increased GSK-3 in the hESC after 3 days of treatment (fig. S6E). However, 3-day treatment with RCBB down-regulated the GSK-3 (fig. S6F), indicating that Repsox, bFGF, and BMP4 also partially affected the GSK-3. The other two inhibitors of transforming growth factor (TGF-) signaling, A83-01 and SB431542, could substitute Repsox for generating GCs (fig. S5, B and C).

Notch signaling inhibits GC differentiation in the intestine (15). We determined whether DAPT, an inhibitor of the Notch signaling pathway, could promote the conversion of hESC into GCs. When added into RCBB or RC, DAPT seemed to promote the morphological changes into long goblet-like shape (fig. S7).

hESC-GCs were seeded onto Transwell systems and grown to confluence, and then the medium was removed in the upper chamber of the Transwell, constituting the transition to air-liquid interface (ALI) culture condition. After 1 to 2 days in the ALI culture system, hESC-GCs began to secrete mucus (Fig. 2D). Within 7 days, cells in the six-well Transwell could secrete 50 to 100 l per well, as shown in Fig. 2D and movie S1. Cells on the Transwell membrane were strongly stained for PAS and AB (Fig. 2, E and F), indicating enrichment of mucins after ALI culture. Immunostaining assay showed that cells cultured in ALI retained expression of epithelial marker E-cad and GC marker MUC2 and CK18 (Fig. 2, F and G).

Massive secretion of MUC2 mucin by exocytosis is triggered by a wide array of bioactive factors, including cholinergic agonists, hormones, microbes, and microbial products, and inflammatory cytokines. We analyzed the responses of hESC-GCs to these mucin secretagogue signals.

As the cholinergic agonist can stimulate mucus secretion from GCs (4, 5), we treated hESC-GCs with 1 mM cholinergic agent carbachol (CCh) for 2 hours and found that CCh increased the MUC2 mRNA and protein expression levels as compared to the control group (Fig. 3, A and C). Moreover, CCh treatment led to increased secretion of mucin to the culture medium (Fig. 3B). These results suggested that hESC-GCs were able to respond to cholinergic agonists. Activation of Toll-like receptor 2 (TLR2) can stimulate mucus secretion (1). The synthetic Pam3CysSK4 (PCSK), a TLR2 ligand, has been reported to stimulate mucus secretion from GCs. After treatment with PCSK (20 g/ml), hESC-GCs for 2 hours increased the mucin secretion from hESC-GCs, which was reported in a previous study (Fig. 3, A, B, and D) (6). Lipopolysaccharide (LPS) from Gram-negative and Gram-positive bacteria, another TLR2 ligand, is known to induce mucus production (16). The addition of LPS to hESC-GCs for 24 hours increased the mRNA expression of MUC2, RELM, and FCGBP (Fig. 3E). T helper cell 2 (TH2) cytokine interleukin-13 (IL-13) was demonstrated to regulate mucin production (16, 17). In our study, IL-13 treatment for 1 and 3 days led to an increase in the mRNA expression of MUC2, FCGBP, and SPDEF and a decrease in the mRNA expression of RELM (Fig. 3F). The decrease in the RELM mRNA expression induced by IL-13 treatment contrasted with the increased RELM in LS174T cells after IL-13 treatment (16). Future works should be used to study why hESC-GCs reduced the RELM mRNA expression after IL-13 treatment.

(A and B) PAS assay for measuring MUC2 content in cell lysates and culture media after CCh and PCSK treatment, respectively. Values are presented as means SEM (n = 3; **P < 0.01, ****P < 0.0005 versus control group). (C and D) Relative MUC2 mRNA expression in hESC-GCs after CCh and PCSK treatment. Values are presented as means SEM (n = 3 versus control group). (E and F) Treatment with LPS for 24 hours or interleukin-13 (IL-13) for 1 and 3 days led to changes in the mRNA levels of MUC2, RELM, FCGBP, and SPDEF. Values are presented as means SEM (n = 3; *P < 0.05, **P < 0.01, ***P < 0.001, ****P < 0.0005, versus control group).

GCs have been demonstrated to deliver antigen from the intestinal lumen to the antigen-presenting cells, the lamina propria dendritic cells, via GAPs (4, 5). We treated the cultured enhanced green fluorescent protein (EGFP)positive hESC-GCs with cell membraneimpermeable model antigen rhodamine B labeled dextran (RB-dextran) (10 kDa) for 2 hours. Fluorescent images showed that RB-dextran granules were present in the cytoplasm of EGFP-positive GCs and were close to the Hoechst 33342positive nucleus, indicating that hESC-GCs could take up the fluorescent antigen (Fig. 4A and fig. S8A). GCs in the small intestine and colon could form GAPs (fig. S8B) (4, 5). We transplanted EGFP-positive hESC-GCs into the intestine and colon of mice and found that EGFP-positive hESC-GCs could attach the small intestinal epithelia and take up the RB-dextran in vivo, evidenced by EGFP-positive epithelial cells containing a DAPI nucleus and dextran, which indicated the GAP formation (Fig. 4B and fig. S8C, white squares and red arrowheads). We also found that hESC-GCs could attach the colon epithelia and take up RB-dextran (fig. S8D). We further cocultured EGFP-positive hESC-GCs with dendritic cells and found that EGFP-positive hESC-GCs could take up more RB-dextran than dendritic cells (Fig. 4C). These results indicated that hESC-GCs may take up fluorescent antigens and possibly form GAPs.

(A) Fluorescent images of RB-dextran and EGFP in the hESC-GCs after incubation with RB-dextran. (B) Fluorescent images of RB-dextran and EGFP in the small intestines of mice receiving transplantation of EGFP-positive hESC-GCs and injection of RB-dextran. White squares and arrows indicating the GAP formation. (C) Fluorescent images of RB-dextran and EGFP in cocultured EGFP-positive hESC-GCs and EGFP-negative human dendritic cells. (D to F) RT-qPCR for the mRNA expression of mAChR4, EGFR, and MYD88 signaling components in the hESC-GCs and hESC. GAPDH, glyceraldehyde-3-phosphate dehydrogenase. (G and H) Western blotting of hESC-GCs and hESC-GCs infected with enteroinvasive (EIEC) E. coli (hESC-GCs EIEC). p-EGFR, phosphorylated EGFR. (I) Quantification of Western blotting analysis of hESC-GCs and hESC-GCs EIEC. The expression level of p-EGFR and mAChR4 in hESC-GCs EIEC was normalized to that of the control hESC-GCs. *P < 0.05. (J) Immunostaining of p-EGFR, mAChR4, and MYD88 in hESC-GCs and hESC-GCs EIEC. (K) RT-qPCR analysis of the mRNA expression of EGFR and mAChR4 in hESC-GCs EIEC and hESC-GCs (means SEM, n = 3). (L) RT-qPCR analysis of the mRNA expression of TLR2, TLR4, and TLR5 and MYD88 in hESC-GCs EIEC (means SEM, *P < 0.05 versus control hESC-GCs). Scale bars, 25 m (A to C and J).

Knoop et al. (5) has also demonstrated that acetylcholine can induce GAP formation by acting on muscarinic Ach receptor 4 (mAChR4) expressed by GCs and that activation of epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) can inhibit GAP formation. We found that both hESC and hESC-GCs expressed messenger RNAs for the mAChR4 and EGFR (Fig. 4, D and E). Immunocytochemistry analyses demonstrated the expression of mAChR4 on hESC and hESC-GCs, but many mAChR4 were in the cytoplasm, not on the cell membrane (Fig. 4J). Although bacterial infection did not significantly change the expression level of mAChR4 in hESC-GCs (Fig. 4, H, I, and K), more mAChR4 were located on the cell membrane (Fig. 4J). Activation of EGFR [phosphorylated EGFR (p-EGFR)] was detected in hESC-GCs, and bacterial infection led to an increased activation of EGFR (Fig. 4, G and I).

Because GC-intrinsic myeloid differentiation primary response (MYD88)dependent microbial sensing can activate EGFR and inhibit GAP formation (5), we evaluated the MYD88 signaling components in hESC-GCs and hESC. RT-qPCR showed that hESC-GCs and hESC expressed TLR1, TLR2, TLR3, TLR4, and TLR5, with hESC-GCs expressing slightly higher levels of TLR1, TLR4, and TLR5 (Fig. 4F). In addition, hESC-GC expressed the mRNAs of MYD88 and other MYD88 signaling components tnf receptor associated factor 6 (TRAF6), interleukin 1 receptor associated kinase 4 (IRAK4), nuclear factor B (NF-B), and interferon alpha 1 (IFNA1) (Fig. 4F). Immunostaining assays verified the presence of MYD88 in the cytoplasm of hESC-GCs and hESC (Fig. 4J and fig. S8E). Bacterial infection increased MYD88 in the hESC-GCs (Fig. 4J), which is consistent with the increased activation of EGFR. Moreover, bacterial infections increased the expression of RELM (Fig. 4J, right). Together, these above results indicated that hESC-GCs could deliver fluorescent antigens.

We compared the adherence of E. coli strains to HeLa cells (a conventional immortalized cell line used currently for this assay) and hESC-GCs. We performed the adherence assays using wild-type strains with enteropathogenic (EPEC), enteroinvasive (EIEC), enterohemorrhagic (EHEC), and enterotoxigenic (ETEC) E. coli. These strains adhered robustly to hESC-GCs cultured in monolayers, like HeLa cells (Fig. 5A). These visual observations suggested the adherence of E. coli to hESC-GCs.

(A) hESC-GCs and HeLa cultured in monolayers were incubated with the indicated E. coli strains, assessed by crystal violet staining. (B and C) Representative images of hESC-GCs cultured in cell mass and infected with the indicated E. coli strains. Clustered hESC-GCs formed circular mucus droplets [top (10) and bottom (20)]. High-power images (C). (D) hESC-GCs were cultured in the upper chamber of the Transwell system, and bacteria were added in the lower chamber. After 3 to 4 days, a viscoelastic, gel-like mucus layer was formed. Photo credit: Andong Zhao, PLA General Hospital. PAS, AB, crystal violet, and UEA-1 staining of the gel. (E) hESC-GCs cultured in HCM formed viscoelastic mucus. Left: Appearance of the thin, transparent gel after fixation of the mucus. Right: PAS, AB, AB-PAS, and UEA-1 staining of the gel. (F) hESC-GCs cultured in HCM and infected with EIEC formed viscoelastic mucus. Left: Appearance of the thick, opaque gel after fixation of the mucus. Right: PAS, AB, AB-PAS, and UEA-staining of the gel. The lower panels showed the costaining of AB, PAS, and crystal violet in the gel. Scale bars, 100 m (A to F).

When we cultured the hESC-GCs in cell mass and infected the cell mass with E. coli strains for 1 to 2 days, we observed an interesting phenomenon. The clustered hESC-GCs could secrete mucus and form many small, circular, bright mucus droplets surrounding the edge of the cell mass, and the droplet barriers could largely separate bacteria from the cell mass (Fig. 5B). The mucus droplets could retain their shapes for several days, and bacteria could not destroy the droplet barriers. We could only observe few bacteria in the droplets (Fig. 5C and movie S2). However, circular mucus droplets were not easily observed when hESC-GCs were cultured in monolayers with the presence of E. coli. The difference might indicate that enough number of hESC-GCs was required to secrete high levels of mucins and form mucus droplets. The mucus droplets may function as like the inner mucus layer in colon, which is impervious for bacteria and separates bacteria from the colon epithelia (18). This led to the hypothesis that intestinal GCs first secrete mucins to form mucus droplets, and then many layers of droplets constitute the inner mucus layers, which may explain the mechanisms of forming inner mucus layer in colon.

GCs can secrete mucins to form a mucus layer that provides the frontline host defense against endogenous and exogenous irritants and a good habitat for microbial colonization because oligosaccharides of MUC2 offer numerous microbial attachment sites and energy source (1). However, it is hard to study the microbial community residing in the mucus layer across the length of the intestinal tract, given the difficulty to sample this region in vivo, especially in humans. We developed cellular models to study the spatial organization of the gut microbial ecosystem. We cultured hESC-GCs in the upper chamber in the Transwell system. In the lower chamber, bacteria were added into the culture medium, and the upper chamber was filled with bacteria-free medium. After 3 to 4 days, a viscoelastic, gel-like mucus layer was formed in the lower chamber (Fig. 5D, fig. S9A, and movie S3). However, the mucus layer could not form without bacteria in the lower chamber (fig. S9B). Apparent microbial colonization was observed in the mucus layer, with much higher bacteria in the mucus layer than in the culture medium (fig. S9C). In particular, bacteria were trapped and fixed in the mucus layer right under the upper chamber (fig. S9C). After fixation with Carnoys solution, the mucin gel formed in the Transwell system was positive for AB and PAS staining, and the bacteria were positive for crystal violet staining (Fig. 5D). The mucus layer could be stained by the lectin UEA-1 (Fig. 5D). We developed another indirect culture system by culturing hESC-GCs on the 24-well plates and covering the cells with glass coverslips on the top. Bacteria were then added to the culture. Three to 4 days after coculture, a big, complex gel-like mucus layer was formed in the medium (fig. S9D). Likewise, the gel-like layers were colonized by bacteria and positive for PAS, AB, crystal violet staining, and UEA-1 immunofluorescent staining (fig. S9D). This phenomenon indicated that microbes could spontaneously stimulate the hESC-GCs to secrete mucins and form a gel-like mucus layer for bacterial colonization.

We then investigate whether hESC-GCs could secrete mucin to form gel-like mucus without the bacterial infection. We replaced the DMEM/F12-based medium with HCM (hepatocyte culture medium) and cultured the hESC-GCs in a Transwell system or 24-well or 6-well plates and found that hESC-GCs could secrete mucins to form viscoelastic, gel-like mucus for 2 to 3 days of culture. When the gel-like mucus was fixed with Carnoys solution, thin, transparent, gel-like networks were observed (Fig. 5E, left). The gel-like networks were positive for AB and PAS staining and UEA-1 immunostaining (Fig. 5E). When hESC-GCs were cultured in HCM and in the presence of E. coli, the formed gel-like mucus was thicker after fixation (Fig. 5F, left). The thick gel-like layers were positive for AB and PAS staining and UEA-1 staining (Fig. 5F). The gel-like networks were colonized by many bacteria, observed by crystal violet staining (Fig. 5F). These results suggest that hESC-GCs can spontaneously form gel-like mucus colonized by bacteria after bacterial infection, recapitulating the intestinal outer mucus layer.

We next tested the transplantation of the cultured hESC-GCs. We induced acute colonic mucus damage in immunodeficient NOD-SCID IL2rg/ (NSG) mice with colitis-inducing dextran sulfate sodium (DSS) for 5 days (Fig. 6A, right). Most of the mice developed acute colitis characterized by weight loss, bloody stool, diarrhea, and epithelial injury in the distal colon. At 7 and 10 days after DSS administration, we dissociated EGFP-positive hESC-GCs into small fragments (Fig. 6B), suspended them in a Matrigel-containing phosphate-buffered saline (PBS), and instilled them in recipient mice. After 3 hours of transplantation, EGFP-positive cells attached to the luminal surface (Fig. 6C). After 7 days of cell transplantation, recipient mice were euthanized, and the recipient colons showed varying degrees of recovery (Fig. 6A, right). Multiple EGFP-positive areas appeared as well-demarcated patches in the treated distal colons (Fig. 6D). The transplanted hESC-GCs were adapted to the colonic tissue, and mucin gel was observed around the hESC-GCs (Fig. 6D). The transplanted EGFP-positive cells were immunopositive for GC marker MUC2 (Fig. 6E). Hematoxylin and eosin (H&E) staining showed that transplantation of hESC-GCs promotes the repair of the mucus layer and intestinal epithelia in the acute colitis model (Fig. 6F). Notably, many transplanted EGFP-positive hESC-GCs adhered to the outer mucus layer and died or were removed out with feces soon. Only a small number of transplanted hESC-GCs could attach the ulcerated sites of colons. Therefore, increasing the survival and decreasing the removal of hESC-GCs through feces are important for transplantation therapy.

(A) The right panel displayed the recipient colon at 7 days after the initiation of DSS administration, and the left panel displayed the recipient colon at 7 days after cell transplantation (n = 10). (B) Representative fluorescent images of EGFP-positive hESC-GCs. (C) Representative fluorescent image of EGFP-positive hESC-GCs areas attaching the mucosal layer in the distal colon at 3 hours after transplantation. (D) Representative fluorescent images of EGFP-positive hESC-GC areas overlapping the damaged region after 7 days of transplantation. (E) Representative images showed that EGFP-positive transplanted area was immunopositive for MUC2. (F) H&E staining of distal colon sections in acute colitis mice and in colitis-induced mice transplanted with hESC-GCs after 7 days of cell transplantation. (G to I) H&E, AB-PAS, and UEA-1 staining of colon sections in acute colitisinduced mice treated with chemical culture media containing RCBB (Chemical, n = 8) and control basal media without RCBB (Control, n = 8) after 14 days of oral administration. Scale bars, 25 m (E), 100 m (G to I).

We further investigated whether oral administration of the chemical culture medium containing RCBB could promote the colon epithelial regeneration after acute damage. The administration of DSS for 7 days led acute damage to colon epithelia in the adult C57BL/6 mice, and then the drinking water was replaced with the chemical culture medium in the experimental group, and the control group was administered with the basal culture medium without the chemical compounds. After 14 days of oral administration, mice were euthanized, and histological analysis revealed that chemical culture medium enhanced the regeneration of colon epithelia in the experimental group, with thicker epithelial layers as compared to the control group (Fig. 6G). AB-PAS staining showed more GCs in the injured colon epithelial sites after oral administration of chemical culture media as compared to control media (Fig. 6H). Immunostaining analysis revealed that more UEA-1positive mucus granules were present in the injured epithelia of chemical culture medium group than those observed in the control group (Fig. 6I). These results suggest that chemical culture medium promotes the recovery of the injured intestinal epithelia.

We further investigated the effects of the chemical treatment on the differentiation of adult mouse intestinal organoids (or ISC) in vitro. Mouse small intestinal crypts were embedded in Matrigel and cultured in the presence of growth factors including EGF, Noggin, and R-spondin 1 (ENR). Under the ENR condition, intestinal organoids developed many crypt-villus structures (fig. S10A). After 4 days of culture in the ENR condition, passaged intestinal organoids were then cultured in the ENR condition plus the RCBB cocktail for another 4 days. We found that RCBB decreased the proliferation of crypt cells, as evidenced by decreased numbers of crypt buds and Ki67-positive cells and reduced size of organoids compared to those observed with ENR cultures (fig. S10, A and H). We then compared the differentiation of intestinal organoids cultured in different conditions. Intestinal organoids could spontaneously differentiate into alkaline phosphatasepositive and CYP3A4-positive enterocytes (fig. S10, B and D), PAS-positive and MUC2-positive GCs (fig. S10, C and E), LYZ-positive Paneth cells (fig. S10F), and ChrA-positive enteroendocrine cells (fig. S10G), which were consistent with previous reports (8, 19, 20). Intestinal organoids cultured in the ENR + RCBB condition also could differentiate into the four types of intestinal epithelial cells (fig. S10, B to G). However, RCBB increased the GC differentiation as compared to the ENR condition (fig. S10, C and E). These results suggest that RCBB may promote the differentiation of mouse intestinal organoids into intestinal epithelial cells, especially GCs.

The intestinal mucus layer secreted by GCs provides the first line of defense against injury caused by digested food, microbes, and microbial products. Moreover, GCs contribute to mucosal immune responses by secreting antimicrobial proteins, chemokines, and cytokines and forming GAPs (46). The dysfunction of GCs has been associated with multiple diseases, including inflammatory bowel disease and cystic fibrosis, indicating that GCs are not always innocent bystanders and can be active participants in disease pathogenesis (1, 21). However, it is challenging to independently investigate the functions of GCs because of the difficulty in isolating GCs from intestinal epithelial cells. Recent studies have reported to differentiate ISC or pluripotent stem cells into intestinal epithelial cells, including enterocytes, GCs, Paneth cells, and enteroendocrine cells (8, 9, 22). However, those differentiation procedures involve complex, long-time procedures, a combination of various growth factors, and a three-dimensional culture system. Moreover, only a small subset of GCs was obtained within the induced intestinal epithelial cell types. In our study, we have induced a homogeneous population of GCs from hESC with a simple, rapid method. The induction process requires 6 to 8 days of chemical induction, without three-dimensional culture systems. The two small molecules used are cost effective and easy to be synthesized. Compared to ISC or PSC, hESC is relatively easier to obtain from the skins.

Because the direct conversion of hESC into GCs was rapid, we investigated the molecular mechanisms by which hESC are induced into GCs. Wnt signaling is an important signaling pathway for regulating the GC differentiation in the intestine (23, 24). Inhibition of Wnt signaling in the intestine resulted in a remarkable reduction in the secretory cells including GCs, enteroendocrine cells, and Paneth cells (23). Activation of Wnt signaling could promote GC differentiation in the intestinal organoid development (25). In addition, activation of Wnt signaling with GSK-3 inhibitor 6-bromoindirubin-3-oxime (BIO) could induce differentiation of human ES into all four intestinal differentiated cell types including GCs (10). The transcription factor SPDEF, a critical regulator for GC differentiation, maturation, and function, was found a downstream target of Wnt signaling in the intestine (26). Consistent with these results, activation of Wnt signaling by CHIR99021 used in the study played a critical role in the GC induction from hESC (fig. S4). CHIR99021 is a GSK-3 inhibitor by competing the ATP-binding domain of GSK-3, which can inhibit the GSK-3mediated phosphorylation of every substrate (27). Activation of Wnt after chemical induction was observed, evidenced by increased accumulation and nuclear translocation of -catenin and up-regulation of Wnt signaling downstream genes (fig. S6, A and D). Inhibitory phosphorylation of GSK-3 can reduce the phosphorylation and degradation of -catenin, thereby activating the Wnt signaling (28). RCBB did not increase the inhibitory phosphorylation level of GSK-3 (p-Ser9 GSK-3) during the initial stage of chemical induction (fig. S6, B and C), suggesting that RCBB activated the Wnt signaling not by increasing the inhibitory phosphorylation of GSK-3. Wnt activation by RCBB treatment likely depended on the CHIR99021 blocking of the ATP-binding domain in GSK-3 and subsequent inhibition of its kinase activity (27, 29). Single CHIR99021 treatment increased the mRNA expression of GSK-3 slightly after 3 days of treatment (fig. S6E). It was possible that inhibition of GSK-3 kinase activity by single CHIR99021 would slightly stimulate the expression of GSK-3 in hESC and compensate the loss of GSK-3 activity. However, RCBB treatment would reduce the increase in the mRNA expression of GSK-3 observed in the treatment with single CHIR99021 (fig. S6F), indicating that Repsox, bFGF, and BMP4 also affected the mRNA expression of GSK-3.

TGF- signaling pathway is another important pathway involved in GC differentiation. TGF- signaling was found to restrict the GC differentiation in the conjunctiva by inhibiting the expression of SPDEF in a Smad3-dependent manner (30). In the intestine, depletion of either Smad3 or Smad4, the downstream mediators of TGF- signaling pathway, resulted in gastric and duodenal mucinous adenocarcinoma that were characterized by an abundance of GCs (31, 32). In the airway epithelia, activation of Smad signaling also restricted the GC differentiation (33). These results collectively suggested that TGF- signaling play a global role in restricting the GC differentiation (30). Therefore, the inhibitors of TGF- signaling, such as Repsox, SB431542, and A83-01, promoted the GC induction from hESC in the present study (fig. S5). bFGF has been used to induce definitive endoderm into the gut lineage cells (34). bFGF and BMP4 were shown to act synergistically with BIO and DAPT to enhance the differentiation of human ES into the intestinal epithelium including GCs (10). Notch signaling pathway suppresses the GC differentiation from ISC (15). The addition of the Notch pathway inhibitor DAPT could increase the maturation of hESC-GCs (fig. S7), but was dispensable for GC induction from hESC.

KLF4 is required for the terminal differentiation of GCs in the intestine (11). The expression of KLF4 is present both in the hESC and hESC-GCs (fig. S2M), which may, in part, explain why hESC can be easily converted into GCs. GCs have distinct functions in different segments of the intestine. GATA6 is required for normal maturation of GCs in the colon, whereas, in the small intestine, GATA6 does not play a role in commitment, differentiation, or maturation of GCs (1214). However, GATA4 is expressed in the proximal small intestines and absent in the distal colons (14). Consistent with these results, we found that hESC-GCs expressed GATA6 but not GATA4, indicating that hESC-GCs might be restricted to colons. However, more study will be needed to determine whether the induced hESC-GCs belong to small intestines or colons, such as comparing the global gene expression profiles of hESC-GCs with those of human GCs in the small intestines and colons.

hESC-GCs were functional because hESC-GCs could secrete mucins and respond to several mucin secretagogue signals. Cholinergic agent (CCh) has been widely used to induce secretion of GCs (4, 5), which was consistent with increased secretion in hESC-GCs after CCh treatment. Activation of TLR2 can stimulate mucus secretion in GCs (1, 21). The TLR2 ligand PCSK increased mucus secretion from hESC-GCs, in accordance with previous study (35). Bacterial infection is the major factor inducing GC secretion (1). Treatment with LPS resulted in increased mucus secretion from hESC-GCs. TH2-mediated immune responses also regulate the GC secretion. TH2 cytokines, IL-4, and IL-13, induced by nematode infection, could increase the mucus secretion and cause expulsion of parasites (17). Although IL-13 treatment induced the mRNA expression of MUC2, FCGBP, and SPDEF, IL-13 resulted in decrease in the mRNA of RELM, which was up-regulated in intestinal GCs after parasite infection and LS174T cells after IL-13 treatment (16, 17, 36). Why hESC-GCs down-regulate RELM in response to IL-13 remains to be studied in the future.

GCs can form GAPs and deliver luminal substances to antigen-presenting cells in the lamina propria, inducing adaptive immune responses (4, 5, 3739). The GAPs can be identified by using the ability of GCs to take up fluorescently labeled dextran (fig. S8B). After exposure to fluorescent RB-dextran in vitro, hESC-GCs actively took up the dextran into their cytoplasm (Fig. 4A). However, the in vitro uptake experiment did not demonstrate the GAP formation in vivo because of the in vitro culture environment. After transplantation of EGFP-positive hESC-GCs into the small intestine and colon, EGFP-positive hESC-GCs attached the small intestine and colon and transcellularly took up the fluorescent dextran, manifested by EGFP-positive epithelial cells containing a DAPI nucleus and dextran, indicating the GAP formation (Fig. 4B and fig. S8C, white squares and arrows). Because transplanted EGFP-positive hESC-GCs did not attach the underlying lamina propria dendritic cells and immunostaining for labeling the dendritic cells was not used, the direct delivery of dextran antigen to dendritic cells was not easily observed in the present study. Nonetheless, the results indicated the GAP formation by hESC-GCs to some extent. After coculturing EGFP-positive hESC-GCs and human dendritic cells, we observed that EGFP-positive hESC-GCs took up more dextran granules than human dendritic cells (Fig. 4C). Because of lack of the intestinal epithelial barrier, the cultured dendritic cells were directly incubated in dextran-containing medium, which resulted in difficulty in observing the delivering of dextran from hESC-GCs into dendritic cells. Newberry and colleagues (5, 3743) have demonstrated that acetylcholine induces GAP formation via mAChR4 expressed by intestinal GCs and that activation of EGFR in GCs can inhibit the GAP formation. hESC-GCs and hESC were found to express mAChR4 and EGFR, evidence by RT-qPCR, immunocytochemistry, and Western blotting (Fig. 4 and fig. S8). Cultured hESC-GCs had much lower levels of EGFR activation than hESC (Fig. 4, G and J, and fig. S8, E and F), which may possibly explain why hESC-GCs could take up many dextran antigens in the culture setting. Colon GCintrinsic MYD88-dependent microbial sensing can activate EGFR and inhibit GAP formation (5). We found the mRNA expressions of the MYD88 signaling components in hESC-GCs and hESC (Fig. 4F). Bacterial infection can activate the MYD88 signaling and subsequent activation of EGFR (5). Bacterial infection increased the activation of EGFR in hESC-GCs and hESC (Fig. 4, G, I, and G, and fig. S8, E, F, and H), consistent with the increased expression of MYD88 signaling components (Fig. 4, J and L). Although bacterial infection did not induce significant changes in the mAChR4 (Fig. 4, H, I, and K, and fig. S8, G and H), bacterial infection induced the translocation of mAChR4 onto the cell membrane (Fig. 4J). Therefore, these data supported that hESC-GCs may form GAPs. On the other hand, hESC can express EGFR and mAChR4 and MYD88 signaling components, indicating that hESC in the skin surface may also form GAPs involved in the adaptive immune responses.

The relationship between gut microbiota and the host maintains the intestinal homeostasis. A disturbance of this relationship can result in intestinal disorders such as inflammatory bowel diseases and metabolic syndromes. The mucosal layer plays a critical role in maintaining a beneficial relationship between microbes and the host. The advance in research of the interaction between host and microbes has been hampered by the lack of a suitable model system recapitulating the interactions at the mucosal layer. We found that EIEC, EPEC, EHEC, and ETEC E. coli strains could adhere to hESC-GCs in monolayers and damaged the cells (Fig. 5A). When cultured in cell mass, hESC-GCs could form circular mucus droplets surrounding the edge of cells, which largely separated bacteria from cell mass (Fig. 5, B and C, and movie S2). The inner mucus layer in the colon is impervious to bacteria and protects intestinal epithelia against the lumen microbiota (18). Accordingly, the mucus droplet barrier function is like that of the inner mucus layer. It is thus hypothesized that intestinal GCs may form the inner mucus layer in the manner of mucus droplet barrier, in which many layers of droplet barriers constitute the inner mucus layer. Without the bacterial infection, hESC-GCs cultured in cell mass did not form the circular, mucus droplet barriers, supporting the idea that luminal microbiota are involved in the formation of mucus layers in the intestine (44, 45). Although the mechanism underlies the formation of circular droplets and the components in the droplets remain to be investigated, this cell-mucus droplet barrierbacteria model may be used to study how the mucus barrier can be destroyed, reconstructed, or enhanced in vitro by disturbing the bacteria and GCs.

In addition, we developed indirect coculture models of hESC-GCs and bacteria, in which mucus layers colonized by bacteria were spontaneously formed (Fig. 5D and fig. S9A). This in vitro coculture model had a membrane barrier to separate bacteria from hESC-GCs, which stimulates the separation between intestinal GCs and luminal microbiota. It will be a valuable alternative to study the fine-scale spatial organization of the gut microbial ecosystem. Moreover, the cellular model enables the study of severe gut microbiome perturbations such as antibiotic therapy or pathogen invasion, which cannot be performed in humans for obvious ethical reasons.

Without infection, it was hard for hESC-GCs cultured in DMEM/F12-based chemical induction media to form viscoelastic, gel-like mucus. However, hESC-GCs cultured in HCM could easily form viscoelastic, transparent, gel-like mucus in the absence of bacterial infection (Fig. 5E). This phenomenon implied that the culture setting had some effects on the secretory properties of hESC-GCs. HCM may possibly recapitulate the gut microenvironment better. Bacterial infection induced thick, more viscoelastic, gel-like mucus (Fig. 5F), indicating that bacterial infection could enhance the mucus secretion by hESC-GCs.

The transplantation experiments showed that some of transplanted hESC-GCs attached the denuded regions of recipient colonic epithelia, secreted mucus, and improved the repair of damaged mucus barrier to some extent. However, most of the transplanted hESC-GCs adhered to the outer mucus layer and died or were removed with feces soon. Only small number of transplanted hESC-GCs could attach the ulcerated sites of colons. Therefore, increasing the survival and decreasing the removal of hESC-GCs through feces are important for transplantation therapy. Moreover, the transplantation method used in our study could not precisely deliver hESC-GCs into the targeted lesion site. Injection of hESC-GCs under the view of the endoscope may facilitate the precise delivery of hESC-GCs to the lesion site, which will enhance the beneficial effects of hESC-GCs on recovery of colon epithelia.

We further conducted preliminary experiments to explore whether small molecules and growth factors directly could improve the recovery of colon mucus layer in the colitis model. Oral administration of chemical induction media improved the repair of the lesioned colon epithelia as compared to the control (Fig. 6G). In addition, more GCs were regenerated in the repaired colon epithelial sites. It is possible that these chemical factors may modulate the proliferation and differentiation of resident ISC into intestinal epithelial cells including GCs and subsequently contribute to the improvement of GC regeneration. Given that colon epithelia can self-heal, it is necessary to determine the relative contribution of the chemical factors to the GC regeneration in the future. Thus, an alternative colitis model (IL-10/ knockout mice) that has abnormal functions of GCs or reduced numbers of GCs may be used, instead of the DSS-induced colitis model (4). Despite IL-10/ mice used, much attention should be paid to precise evaluation of the effects of chemical recipes on GC regeneration when considering the genetic deficits on the GC differentiation, maturation, and function. In addition, further works are required to investigate which concentrations of the chemical compounds and how to deliver them provide the best effects on the regeneration of colon epithelia.

Because the chemical cocktails could promote the colon epithelial regeneration, we further examined the effects of RCBB on the intestinal ISC. We cultured adult small intestinal organoids in the ENR condition (8) and added RCBB into the ENR condition. RCBB was found to slightly inhibit proliferation of intestinal organoids and promote GC differentiation into four types of intestinal cells, especially GCs. Notably, the efficiency of RCBB-induced GC differentiation from intestinal organoids was lower than that observed during the reprogramming of hESC by RCBB (fig. S10, C and E). The differences in the effects of RCBB on hESC and ISC may be attributed to their different tissue origins. ISC have the intrinsic potential to differentiate into enterocytes, Paneth cells, and enteroendocrine cells in vivo and in vitro. By contrast, hESC derived from skin do not have the inherent potential to undergo the intestinal differentiations. Therefore, specific differentiation of ISC into GCs requires the inhibition of other cell fate commitments simultaneously, which is hard to achieve. For example, Notch signaling suppresses the secretory cell differentiation of ISC by directing enterocyte differentiation (46, 47). Thus, it is necessary to inhibit Notch signaling for efficiently inducing secretory cell differentiation from ISC (19, 46, 47). Without inhibition of Notch signaling, therefore, RCBB may not promote GC differentiation from ISC with high efficiency. However, DAPT-mediated inhibition of Notch signaling is dispensable for reprogramming of hESC into GCs by RCBB, although DAPT could slightly promote the reprogramming into GCs (fig. S7). This difference may partly contribute to the differences in the reprogramming efficiency.

In addition to the gastrointestinal tract, many organs throughout the body maintain epithelial homeostasis by forming a mucosal barrier that acts as a lubricant and helps to preserve a near-sterile epithelium. Upper and lower respiratory tract, genitourinary system, and ocular surface all have mucosal barriers secreted by GCs. Our methods of generating gut GCs provide proof of principle that a purified population of intestinal GCs can be chemically induced, and it is possible to produce other organ-specific GCs with similar methods.

In summary, we developed an efficient and rapid method to chemically induce hESC into GCs. hESC-GCs could secrete mucus, respond to mucin secretagogue signals, and deliver fluorescence antigen. In addition, several E. coli strains can adhere to hESC-GCs, and hESC-GC cell mass can form a mucus droplet barrier against bacterial infection. We established indirect coculture models of bacteria and hESC-GCs for recapitulating and researching the mucus-microbe interaction. Moreover, our study revealed that transplantation of hESC-GCs and chemical compounds could provide beneficial effects on improving intestinal mucus layer, which will be helpful in the therapy of intestinal diseases.

hESC were obtained from the Otwo Biotech Inc., which isolated hESC from the newborn foreskin. hESC were grown on plates coated with collagen IV (ColIV, Sigma-Aldrich) in EpiLife medium (Invitrogen, #MEPI500CA) supplemented with 0.06 mM Ca2+, 1% Human Keratinocyte Growth Supplement (Invitrogen, #S0015), and 1% P/S (Invitrogen). Cultures were routinely maintained at 37C in a humidified atmosphere of 5% CO2 and 95% air.

hESC were plated on collagen I (Corning)coated 6-well plates (Corning), 24-well plates (Corning), or glass coverslips (15 mm). Cells were cultured in EpiLife medium until 70 to 80% confluence. The culture medium was replaced by the chemical induction medium consisting of DMEM/F12 (Invitrogen, #10565018), 0.5% N2 (Gibco, #17502048), 0.5% B27 (Gibco, #17504044), and 1% P/S, supplemented with 5 M Repsox (MedChem Express, #HY-13012), 3 M CHIR99021 (MedChem Express, #HY-10182), bFGF (10 ng/ml; PeproTech, #100-18B-50), and BMP4 (10 ng/ml; PeproTech, #120-05ET-10). The control group was treated with the basal medium containing 1% dimethyl sulfoxide in the absence of small molecules and growth factors. The chemical induction medium was refreshed every 2 days. After 6 to 8 days of induction, hESC were induced into GCs, and the induced GCs were maintained and passaged in the chemical induction medium for the following use. Other small molecules used in the study included 3 M Kenpaullone (MedChem Express, #HY-12302), 5 M A83-01 (MedChem Express, #HY-10432), and 5 M SB431542 (Selleck, #S1067), and 5 M DAPT (MedChem Express, HY-13027).

For immunocytochemical staining, cells plated on glass coverslips were fixed with 4% paraformaldehyde or Carnoys solution (60% ethanol, 30% chloroform, and 10% glacial acetic acid) at room temperature. Cells were washed three times with PBS with Tween 20 (PBST) and incubated in blocking buffer (5% goat serum, 1% bovine serum albumin, and 0.5% Triton X-100) for 30 min at room temperature. Cells were then incubated with primary antibodies at 4C overnight and washed three times with PBST and then incubated with appropriate fluorescent probeconjugated secondary antibodies for 1 hour at room temperature. Cell nuclei were counterstained with DAPI. Images were captured with a fluorescence microscope (Olympus) or Leica Sp8 confocal microscope. The following primary antibodies were used: mouse anti-MUC2 (1:50; Santa Cruz Biotechnology), rabbit anti-MUC2 (1:100; Abcam), UEA-1 conjugated with fluorescein isothiocyanate (1:500; Sigma-Aldrich), mouse anti-TFF3 (1:100; Santa Cruz Biotechnology), rabbit anti-AGR2 (1:200; Abcam), rabbit anti-RELM (1:200; Bioss), mouse anti-CYP3A4 (1:100; Santa Cruz Biotechnology), mouse anti-villin (1:100; Santa Cruz Biotechnology), mouse anti-ChrA (1:100; Santa Cruz Biotechnology), mouse antiE-cad (1:200; Cell Signaling Technology), rabbit antiE-cad (1:200; Invitrogen), rabbit anti-CK18 (1:200; Abcam), mouse anti-CK18 (1:100; Santa Cruz Biotechnology), mouse anti-CK8 (1:200; Abcam), anti-rabbit ZO1 (1:200; Abcam), anti-rabbit occludin 1 (1:200; Abcam), anti-rabbit 1-integrin, rabbit anti-CK19 (1:500; Abcam), mouse anti-CK14 (1:500; Abcam), rabbit anti-CK5 (1:500; Abcam), rabbit goat anti-KLF4 (1:200; R&D Systems), mouse anti-KLF4 (1:100; Santa Cruz Biotechnology) goat anti-GATA6 (1:200; R&D Systems), rabbit anti-GATA6 (1:200; Cell Signaling Technology), mouse anti-GATA4 (1:100; Santa Cruz Biotechnology), mouse anti-MYD88 (1:100; Santa Cruz Biotechnology), rabbit antip-EGFR (1:200; Abcam), rabbit anti-mAchR4 (1:200; Abcam), and anti-rabbit -catenin (1:200; Abcam).

The chemical induction efficiency was calculated. Briefly, 10 randomly selected visual fields were used to count cell numbers. The total number of MUC2-positive and UEA-1-positive cells was determined, and the chemical induction efficiency was calculated as the percentages of MUC2-positive cells and UEA-1-positive cells among the total DAPI-positive cells. The data are presented as the means SEM from triplicate samples.

Total RNA was extracted from indicated cell samples by using TRIzol (Invitrogen) as instructed. RNA was reverse-transcribed by using the PrimeScript RT reagent kit with a genomic DNA eraser (Takara, #RR047A). Quantitative real-time PCR involved the use of TB Green Premix Ex Taq II (Takara) in a QuantStudio Real-Time PCR system (Applied Biosystems). The relative expression levels were normalized to that of the internal control (glyceraldehyde-3-phosphate dehydrogenase). All primer sequences are in table S1.

Cells in culture were washed with PBS and lysed in radioimmunoprecipitation assay buffer, and protein concentration in the sample lysate was determined with the bicinchoninic acid (BCA) protein assay. Total lysates were separated on a 10% SDSpolyacrylamide gel electrophoresis gel electrophoresis. After transferring to a polyvinylidene difluoride membrane (Millipore), nonspecific binding was blocked with 5% milk in tris-buffered salineTween for 1 hour at room temperature. The epitope of interest was probed with the appropriate primary antibody at 4C overnight. Membranes were then incubated with appropriate secondary antibodies conjugated with horseradish peroxidase (Santa Cruz Biotechnology). Electrochemiluminescence was performed on the ChemiImager 5500 imaging system according to the manufacturers instructions (Alpha Innotech Co.). The following primary antibodies were used: rabbit anti-MUC2, rabbit antip-EGFR, rabbit anti-mAchR4, mouse anti-MYD88, rabbit anti-CK19, mouse anti CK8, rabbit anti-CK18, mouse anti-CYP3A4, mouse anti-villin, mouse anti-ChrA, rabbit anti-LYZ, rabbit anti-HNF4, rabbit anti-GATA6, mouse anti-GATA4, mouse anti-KLF4, rabbit antiGSK-3 (Cell Signaling Technology), rabbit antiphosphoGSK-3 (Ser9), and rabbit anti-actin. -Actin expression was used as the internal control. The relative intensity was determined by the ratio of the specific marker to -actin, as measured by densitometry.

Cells were fixed in 4% paraformaldehyde or Carnoys solution for 10 min and stained with a PAS staining kit (Sigma-Aldrich), AB (Sigma-Aldrich), and AB-PAS staining kit (Solarbio) according to the manufacturers instructions.

Cell samples were fixed with 2.5% glutaraldehyde in PBS and postfixed with 1.0% osmium tetroxide in the same buffer, followed by dehydration with a graded series of ethanol. Next, cells were treated with propyleneoxide and then embedded in epoxy resin and sectioned. The ultrathin sections were contrasted with ethanolic uranyl acetate and lead citrate and observed under a transmission electron microscope (JEOL JEM-1210, Japan).

hESC-GCs were treated with 1 mM cholinergic agent CCh (Sigma-Aldrich) or PCSK (20 g/ml) (Santa Cruz Biotechnology) for 2 hours, followed by analysis of PAS assay of mucin contents in cell lysates and culture media and RT-qPCR analysis of MUC2 mRNA expression levels. hESC-GCs were treated with LPS (50 g/ml) (Sigma-Aldrich) for 24 hours or IL-13 (50 ng/ml) (PeproTech) for 1 and 3 days before RT-qPCR analysis of gene expression changes.

hESC-GCs treated with CCh or PCSK were disrupted in PBS using sonication (Sonics VCX105, USA) to obtain soluble proteins. Protein concentration was measured with a BCA protein assay kit. All proteins from different groups were diluted to the same concentration. The method to measure the mucus glycoprotein was previously described (48, 49). Briefly, cellular soluble fractions and culture media from different groups were first incubated with 0.1% periodic acid (Sigma-Aldrich) for 2 hours at room temperature, followed by the addition of the Schiff reagent (Sigma-Aldrich) and further incubation for 30 min at room temperature. The optical density value of the resulting solutions was taken at 550-nm wavelength as a measure of the amount of PAS-positive contents. Data were expressed as the fold change relative to the mean value of the control group.

hESC-GCs were seeded onto the Transwell system coated with collagen I and grown to confluence in the chemical induction medium. Once confluent, the culture medium in the upper chamber was removed, establishing the transition to an ALI culture condition. After 1 week of ALI culture, the mucus secreted in the upper chamber was collected and measured.

hESC before chemical induction and hESC-GCs were transduced with pLenti-CMV-EGFP-3FLAG vectors to express EGFP. As a result, hESC-GCs were labeled with fluorescent EGFP. For modeling antigen deliver in vitro, EGFP-positive hESC-GCs were cultured in the upper chamber of the Transwell. RB-dextran (10 kDa; Sigma-Aldrich) as a model antigen was added onto the upper chamber at 0.1 mg/ml. After incubation of 2 hours before imaging, Hoechst 33342 was added for nuclear staining. Confocal z-stacks were taken to analyze the distribution of the RB-dextran using the Leica TCS SP-8 microscope. In addition, EGFP-positive hESC-GCs were cocultured with human dendritic cells (obtained from ScienCell) on the collagen Icoated glass coverslips. After incubation with RB-dextran and Hoechst 33342, cells were imaged by the Leica TCS SP-8 microscope.

For modeling antigen delivery in vivo, adult C57BL/6 mice were administered 3% DSS for 5 days to induce colitis. Before 2 days of transplantation, mice were intraperitoneally injected with cyclosporin A (50 mg/kg) to suppress immune rejection. After 2 days of transplantation of EGFP-positive hESC-GCs into the small intestine and colon, lysine-fixable RB-dextran (2 mg/ml; Invitrogen, D1817) was injected into the desired small intestine and colon [100 l for each intestinal area with a 28G insulin syringe, which was described previously (50)]. The normal mice without DSS treatment and cell transplantation were also injected with RB-dextran into the desired segments of the small intestine and colon. After incubation of 30 min, mice were euthanized, and the regions where dextran was injected were collected. The following tissue processing method was according to the previous method with some modifications (50). The collected segments were fixed in 10% formalin solution at room temperature for 30 min and further fixed by Carnoys solution for 4 hours. The segments were followed by incubation in methanol for 2 30 min, in ethanol for 2 20 min, in xylene for 2 25 min, and in liquid paraffin for 2 30 min before paraffin embedding. After paraffin embedding, 6-m intestinal sections were incubated with DAPI to stain the nuclei. The section slides were imaged by the Leica TCS SP-8 microscope.

hESC-GCs and hESC were cultured in a 60-mm petri dish and coverslips. The experimental hESC-GCs and hESC were infected with EIEC E. coli, and the control hESC-GCs and hESC were not infected, respectively. Followed 1 day of injection, all the cell groups were performed for RT-qPCR, Western blotting, and immunostaining analyses of the EGFR, mAchR4, and MYD88 signaling components.

Bacterial adherence assays were performed according to the previous studies (51). Briefly, HeLa cells and hESC-GCs were cultured on collagen-coated coverslips in 24-well plates in monolayers. After washes with antibiotic-free medium, cells were incubated with 0.5 ml of the indicated E. coli straincontaining media (109 colony-forming units/ml) for 1 hour in a 37C, 5% CO2 incubator. Then, the bacteria-containing media were removed and washed three times with fresh media to remove nonadherent bacteria and cultured in bacteria-free media for 3 hours. The cells were then washed five times with ice-cold PBS to remove nonadherent bacteria further and fixed in cold methanol and stained in 2.5% crystal violet.

hESC-GCs were cultured on the collagen-coated coverslips in cell mass and infected with the indicated E. coli strains, respectively. After 1 to 2 days of culture, circular, bright mucus droplets were imaged and videoed.

hESC-GCs were cultured in the upper chamber of the 12-well Transwell plates or 6-well Transwell plates (Corning). In the lower chamber of Transwell, E. coli or Staphylococcus was added. After 3 to 4 days, the mucus layers were formed and collected for PAS, AB, and crystal violet staining. In another indirect coculture system, hESC-GCs were seeded on the collagen-coated 24-well plates and covered with glass coverslips. Bacteria were added to the culture medium. After 3 to 4 days, the mucus layers were formed and collected for analysis.

hESC-GCs were cultured in HCM (Lonza, CC-3198) supplemented with RCBB. Within 2 to 3 days, the culture medium was changed into viscoelastic, gel-like mucus. The gel-like mucus was collected and fixed by Carnoys solution. After fixation, the thin gel was performed for PAS, AB, AB-PAS, and UEA-1 staining. In addition, hESC-GCs cultured in HCM were infected with the indicated E. coli strain. After 1 to 2 days of infection, the culture medium was changed into more viscoelastic, gel-like mucus containing many bacteria. After fixation with Carnoys solution, the thick gel was analyzed by the PAS, AB, AB-PAS, UEA-1, and crystal violet staining.

All animal experimental procedures in this study were performed in accordance with the recommendations of the National Institutes of Health Guidelines for the Care and Use of Laboratory Animals and approved by the Animal Experimentation Ethics Committee of the Fourth Medical Center of PLA General Hospital. Female NSG mice (the immunodeficient strain) aged 8 weeks old and female C57BL/6J mice aged 8 weeks old were purchased from the SPF (Beijing) Biotechnology Co., Ltd. Transplantation of hESC-GCs was performed as described on days 7 and 10 following the initiation of DSS-induced colonic injury (52, 53). Acute colitis was induced by feeding adult female NSG mice and C57BL/6J mice with 3.0% DSS (molecular weight, 40,000) dissolved in drinking water for 5 days.

For transplantation of EGFP-positive hESC-GCs into the distal colon of the NSG mice, EGFP-positive hESC-GCs were released from the collagen-coated plates and mechanically dissociated into small sheets of epithelial tissue. Cell fragments of 500 to 1000 EGFP-positive hESC-GCs were resuspended in 200 l of diluted Matrigel (1:20) in PBS, which were anally instilled into the colonic lumen of each recipient mouse by using a syringe and a thin, flexible catheter 4 cm in length and 2 mm in diameter (n = 10 per group). After infusion, the anal verge was glued for 12 hours to prevent luminal contents from being excreted immediately. After the procedure, mice were maintained as usual. Mice were euthanized and analyzed after 7 days of transplantation.

For chemical treatment, the above chemical induction medium containing RCBB was orally administered into the C57BL/6J mice with colitis (n = 8 per group). The control group was administered with the basal medium without RCBB (n = 8 per group). After 14 days of administration, both groups were euthanized, and colon samples were collected for histological and immunohistochemical analyses.

For transplantation experiments, whole distal colons of recipients and their fluorescence were imaged using a fluorescence microscope equipped with the phase-contrast setting. In some experiments, engrafted cells were imaged with a fluorescent stereomicroscope system. For experiments of chemical treatment, whole colons were collected for analysis. For histology and immunohistochemistry, colon tissues were fixed with Carnoys solution for 4 hours, and then samples were incubated in 2 30 min in methanol, 2 20 min in ethanol, 2 25 min in xylene, and 2 30 min in liquid paraffin before paraffin embedding. Colon sections (4 to 6 m) were subjected to conventional H&E stain, PAS, AB, AB-PAS staining, and immunohistochemistry for MUC2 and UEA-1.

We then investigated the effects of the RCBB chemical cocktail on the proliferation and differentiation of mouse ISC. Proximal small intestinal crypts were isolated from adult C57BL/6J mice as previously described (8). Isolated crypts were embedded in Matrigel (growth factor reduced, Corning). The basal DMEM/F12 medium supplemented with 1% N2, 1% B27, 1 mM N-acetylcysteine (MedChem Express), and 1% P/S was added, containing the ENR growth factors including EGF (50 ng/ml; PeproTech), Noggin (100 ng/ml; PeproTech), and R-spondin 1 (500 ng/ml; PeproTech). To investigate the effects of the RCBB cocktail on the crypts, passaged intestinal crypts were first cultured under ENR condition for 4 days and then replaced with ENR + RCBB. After 4 days of chemical induction, crypts were fixed, and fixed cells were used for alkaline phosphatase assay and PAS staining and immunostained for the intestinal cell markers CYP3A4, LYZ, and ChrA and the proliferation marker Ki67. The images were taken by a light microscope and a confocal microscope.

All quantified data were statistically analyzed and are presented as means SEM. Statistical significance of differences between groups was determined by Students t test. *P < 0.05 was considered significant.

Acknowledgments: Funding: This study was supported, in part, by the National Nature Science Foundation of China (81830064 and 81721092), the National Key Research and Development Plan (2017YFC1103304), the CAMS Innovation Fund for Medical Sciences (CIFMS, 2019-I2M-5-059), and the Military Medical Research and Development Projects (AWS17J005, 2019-126). Author contributions: A.Z., H.Q., and X.F. conceived the idea. A.Z., H.Q., and X.F. designed the experiments and interpreted the data. A.Z., H.Q., M.S., M.T., J.M., and K.M. performed the experiments. A.Z., H.Q., and X.F. wrote the manuscript. Competing interests: The authors declare that they have no competing interests. Data and materials availability: 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.

More here:
Chemical conversion of human epidermal stem cells into intestinal goblet cells for modeling mucus-microbe interaction and therapy - Science Advances

Andres Isaias Combining Innovation and Excellence – Influencive

Andres Isaias is a fearless Miami-born and Guayaquil, Ecuador-bred entrepreneur who is becoming known for spearheading innovation and building growth-oriented businesses in a multitude of industries.

He is currently the President of RESTEM, LLC, a biotechnology outfit using its stem cell therapeutics in a clinical study with COVID-19 patients, and the force behind ANDIAN, an ultra-high-end residential development group founded in 2020.

While he began his career reviving struggling businesses, he is entering 2021 with an eye on the future of both innovative medicine and the booming Miami real estate market.

Since 2012, Andres Isaias has led RESTEM, LLC, a cutting-edge biotechnology company that has created patented technology for stem cell extraction and proliferation. RESTEM is dedicated to the discovery and development of cell-based therapeutics that aid in the treatment of human degenerative diseases such as autoimmune disorders, and other severe illnesses.

RESTEMs core focus is on helping improve the quality of life for individuals struggling with illness. The unique properties of its patented cell technology, which includes cGMP stem cells, make it an ideal donor to clinical studies, which RESTEM has been proud to participate in, emerging as a major contributor to cell-based therapy treatments.

In May 2020, RESTEM received approval from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration for a 60-patient study using umbilical cord mesenchymal stem cells in order to look at whether this may be a safe and effective treatment for patients hospitalized with severe cases of COVID-19.

The randomized, placebo-controlled, and blinded study, the first of its kind in the U.S., is a collaborative effort between multiple institutions including RESTEM, Florida International University Herbert Wertheim College of Medicine, Baptist Health South Florida, and Sanford Health.

In 2020, Andres Isaias started ANDIAN, an ultra-high-end residential development company. ANDIAN recently sold the third-highest priced per-square-foot single-family home in the history of South Beach, Florida.

Andres Isaias launched his professional career in 2006, at a then-defunct insurance company called Rocafuerte Seguros in Guayaquil, Ecuador. During his time at the company, Isaias spearheaded the rebranding and relaunch of Rocafuerte Seguros, transforming it into a top-5 national insurance company that provided life and general insurance in the private and public sector.

Rocafuerte Seguros became known for creating and providing innovative insurance solutions that were customized according to the characteristics and needs of each client. The companys Life and Medical Assistance plans include additional services such as discounts in pharmacies, ambulance services, and agreements with Ecuadors hospitals and clinics. Rocafuerte Seguros technical department, together with its international advisors, performed risk inspections to obtain general recommendations to better ensure and assist its clients.

The Rocafuerte Seguros customer service system was among the most agile and capable in Ecuadors insurance market, with a comprehensive after-sales service that solves any customer need that may arise. The company was backed by leading international reinsurance companies, along with having total autonomy to process claims, policy issues, and billing. Rocafuerte Seguros always sought to generate trust and protection for its policyholders, especially Ecuadors underserved populations.

In 2011, Andres Isaias founded ENREMA, LLC to operate and manage a natural gas production project in the counties of Morgan, Fentress, and Pickett in Tennessee. When the price of gas fell, ENREMA shifted its focus from the production of gas to oil, performing experiments with liquid nitrogen to ultimately exponentially increase its oil production.

In August 2013, ENREMA discovered a new oil field in Fentress County, Tennessee where the company proceeded to drill 13 wells. In November 2014, ENREMA acquired 710 wells, positioning ENREMA as the biggest operator in Tennessee both by well and acreage count. ENREMA is presently the largest privately-held oil and gas operator in the state of Tennessee.

By 2018, ENREMA became the top oil producer in the state of Tennessee, by then acquiring and drilling over 800 oil and gas wells, which are carefully monitored to ensure a safe and environmentally friendly business practice. ENREMA is headquartered in Miami, Florida, and has operational offices in Sunbright, Tennessee.

As a teenager, Andres won the Guayaquil Junior Karting championship, following in the footsteps of his father, who was once a Pan-American and National Karting champion. Andres also played squash in Ecuador, where he was a ranked player.

As a boarding school student at Portsmouth Abbey School in Rhode Island, Andres was part of the schools squash team and placed in the top 16 in New Englands high school squash championship.

After graduating high school, Andres Isaias attended Tulane University in New Orleans, Louisiana, graduating in 2005 with a dual bachelors degree a Bachelor of Science with a Finance and Management double major, and a Bachelor of Engineering Science, with a minor in Math. Andres also spent a semester abroad studying at the Universidad Complutense in Madrid, Spain.

Andres is an avid technical certified diver and has participated in over 1,500 dives, including dives over 350 feet deep. He is also certified in cave-diving and has participated in cave dives of over 5,000 feet of penetration.

Whether spearheading the relaunch of a defunct company, discovering and enhancing the production of natural resources, developing new stem-cell technologies to help heal disease or building homes for the future of Miami, Andres Isaias has shown the people of Ecuador and the United States that he is able to shape and impact the future with his tireless work, vision, and drive.

Today, Andres lives in Miami Beach where he loves to spend his days with his daughter, Dylan.

Read more about Isaias family: Isaias Dassum Health Fund, Isaias Brother: Roberto and William Isaias

Published April 17th, 2021

See original here:
Andres Isaias Combining Innovation and Excellence - Influencive

A Massive New Gene Editing Project Is Out to Crush Alzheimer’s – Singularity Hub

When it comes to Alzheimers versus science, science is on the losing side.

Alzheimers is cruel in the most insidious way. The disorder creeps up in some aging brains, gradually eating away at their ability to think and reason, whittling down their grasp on memories and reality. As the worlds population ages, Alzheimers is rearing its ugly head at a shocking rate. And despite decades of research, we have no treatmentnot to mention a cure.

Too much of a downer? The National Institutes of Health (NIH) agrees. In one of the most ambitious projects in biology, the NIH is corralling Alzheimers and stem cell researchers to come together in the largest genome editing project ever conceived.

The idea is simple: decades of research have found certain genes that seem to increase the chance of Alzheimers and other dementias. The numbers range over hundreds. Figuring out how each connects or influences anotherif at alltakes years of research in individual labs. What if scientists unite, tap into a shared resource, and collectively solve the case of why Alzheimers occurs in the first place?

The initiatives secret weapon is induced pluripotent stem cells, or iPSCs. Similar to most stem cells, they have the ability to transform into anythinga cellular Genie, if you will. iPSCs are reborn from regular adult cells, such as skin cells. When transformed into a brain cell, however, they carry the original genes of their donor, meaning that they harbor the original persons genetic legacyfor example, his or her chance of developing Alzheimers in the first place. What if we introduce Alzheimers-related genes into these reborn stem cells, and watch how they behave?

By studying these iPSCs, we might be able to follow clues that lead to the genetic causes of Alzheimers and other dementiaspaving the road for gene therapies to nip them in the bud.

The iPSC Neurodegenerative Disease Initiative (iNDI) is set to do just that. The project aims to stimulate, accelerate, and support research that will lead to the development of improved treatments and preventions for these diseases, the NIH said. All resulting datasets will be openly shared online, for anyone to mine and interpret.

In plain language? Lets throw all of our new biotech superstarswith CRISPR at the forefrontinto a concerted effort against Alzheimers, to finally gain the upper hand. Its an Avengers, assemble moment towards one of our toughest foesone that seeks to destroy our own minds from within.

Alzheimers disease was first recognized in the early 1900s. Ever since, scientists have strived to find the cause that makes a brain waste away.

The most prominent idea today is the amyloid hypothesis. Imagine a horror movie inside a haunted house with ghosts that gradually intensify in their haunting. Thats the amyloid horrora protein that gradually but silently builds up inside a neuron, the house, eventually stripping it of its normal function and leading to the death of anything inside. Subsequent studies also found other toxic proteins that hang around outside the neuron house that gradually poison the molecular tenants within.

For decades scientists have thought that the best approach to beat these ghosts was an exorcismthat is, to get rid of these toxic proteins. Yet in trial after trial, they failed. The failure rate for Alzheimers treatmentso far, 100 percenthas led some to call treatment efforts a graveyard of dreams.

Its pretty obvious we need new ideas.

A few years ago, two hotshots strolled into town. One is CRISPR, the wunderkind genetic sharpshooter that can snip way, insert, or swap out a gene or two (or more). The other is iPSCs, induced pluripotent stem cells, which are reborn from adult cells through a chemical bath.

The two together can emulate Dementia 2.0 in a dish.

For example, using CRISPR, scientists can easily insert genes related to Alzheimers, or its protection, into an iPSCeither that from a healthy donor, or someone with a high risk of dementia, and observe what happens. A brain cell is like a humming metropolitan area, with proteins and other molecules whizzing around. Adding in a dose of pro-Alzheimers genes, for example, could block up traffic with gunk, leading scientists to figure out how those genes fit into the larger Alzheimers picture. For the movie buffs out there, its like adding into a cell a gene for Godzilla and another for King Kong. You know both could mess things up, but only by watching what happens in a cell can you know for sure.

Individual labs have tried the approach since iPSCs were invented, but theres a problem. Because iPSCs inherit the genetic baseline of a person, it makes it really difficult for scientists in different labs to evaluate whether a gene is causing Alzheimers, or if it was just a fluke because of the donors particular genetic makeup.

The new iNDI plan looks to standardize everything. Using CRISPR, theyll add in more than 100 genes linked to Alzheimers and related dementias into iPSCs from a wide variety of ethnically diverse healthy donors. The result is a huge genome engineering project, leading to an entire library of cloned cells that carry mutations that could lead to Alzheimers.

In other words, rather than studying cells from people with Alzheimers, lets try to give normal, healthy brain cells Alzheimers by injecting them with genes that could contribute to the disorder. If you view genes as software code, then its possible to insert code that potentially drives Alzheimers into those cells through gene editing. Execute the program, and youll be able to observe how the neurons behave.

The project comes in two phases. The first focuses on mass-engineering cells edited with CRISPR. The second is thoroughly analyzing these resulting cells: for example, their genetics, how their genes activate, what sorts of proteins they carry, how those proteins interact, and so on.

By engineering disease-causing mutations in a set of well-characterized, genetically diverse iPSCs, the project is designed to ensure reproducibility of data across laboratories and to explore the effect of natural variation in dementia, said Dr. Bill Skarnes, director of cellular engineering at the Jackson Laboratory, and a leader of the project.

iNDI is the kind of initiative thats only possible with our recent biotech boost. Engineering hundreds of cells related to Alzheimersand to share with scientists globallywas a pipe dream just two decades ago.

To be clear, the project doesnt just generate individual cells. It uses CRISPR to make cell lines, or entire lineages of cells with the Alzheimers gene that can pass on to the next generation. And thats their power: they can be shared with labs around the world, to further hone in on genes that could make the largest impact on the disorder. Phase two of iNDI is even more powerful, in that it digs into the inner workings of these cells to generate a cheat codea sheet of how their genes and proteins behave.

Together, the project does the hard work of building a universe of Alzheimers-related cells, each outfitted with a gene that could make an impact on dementia. These types of integrative analyses are likely to lead to interesting and actionable discoveries that no one approach would be able to learn in isolation, the authors wrote. It provides the best chance at truly understanding Alzheimers and related diseases, and promising treatment possibilities.

Image Credit: Gerd Altmann from Pixabay

See the original post here:
A Massive New Gene Editing Project Is Out to Crush Alzheimer's - Singularity Hub

Antibiotic Use Prior to Allogeneic Stem Cell Transplantation May Be Linked to Graft Vs Host Disease – Hematology Advisor

Patterns of graft-versus-host disease (GVHD) in patients who received antibiotics prior to undergoing allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) were examined in a retrospective analysis, which revealed a possible link between GVHD and pretransplant glycopeptide antibiotic therapy. Results of the analysis were recently published in the journal Hematology.

The study investigators noted that fecal microbial population may influence GVHD in patients who receive allogeneic HSCT and also that patients with hematologic malignancies are often treated for febrile neutropenia with antibiotics before allogeneic HSCT. The researchers undertook this analysis to examine any relationship between pretransplant antibiotic use and GVHD.

The analysis was conducted using data from patients with hematologic malignancies who received allogeneic HSCT at Chungnam National University Hospital in Daejeon, South Korea. Pretransplant antibiotic use was characterized by receipt of antibiotic therapy prior to conditioning chemotherapy.

A total of 131 patients were evaluated, with more than half (58%) having acute myeloid leukemia. Acute lymphoblastic leukemia, myelodysplastic syndrome, and chronic myeloid leukemia were also represented. GVHD prophylaxis had been given to all patients, with each receiving methotrexate in combination with either cyclosporine or tacrolimus and with or without antithymocyte globulin.

Pretransplant antibiotic therapy for febrile neutropenia or infection consisted of cefepime in 87.0% of the total patients, piperacillin/tazobactam in 66.4%, glycopeptide in 53.4%, and carbapenem in 38.9%.

Glycopeptide use prior to transplant showed a possible link to extensive chronic GVHD, occurring at a 5-year cumulative incidence of 51.1% in patients who received it, compared with 28.1% of those who did not (P =.026). Chronic GVHD of the lung also occurred more with glycopeptide use (34.8% at 5 years) than without it (15.8%; P =.028). Glycopeptide use was not linked to statistically significant impacts on overall survival, relapse-free survival, or GVHD-free survival.

Carbapenem and glycopeptide use showed nonsignificant trends of higher incidence of grade 3 to 4 acute GVHD. With chronic GVHD, severity was not linked to pretransplant use of any of the examined antibiotic agents.

The study investigators concluded that pretransplant glycopeptide treatment may be associated with extensive chronic GVHD and that lungs appeared especially susceptible. They indicated that in patients undergoing allogeneic HSCT who receive pretransplant glycopeptide, monitoring for extensive chronic GVHD is warranted.

Reference

Lee MW, Yeon SH, Heo BY, et al. Impact of pre-transplant use of antibiotics on the graft-versus-host disease in adult patients with hematological malignancies. Hematology. 2021;26(1):96-102. doi:10.1080/16078454.2021.1872957

See more here:
Antibiotic Use Prior to Allogeneic Stem Cell Transplantation May Be Linked to Graft Vs Host Disease - Hematology Advisor