The predominant paradigm for the use of stem cells in bone disorders has been centered on the strategies for reconstructing segmental regions of the skeleton, lost to trauma or surgery, and in muscle diseases, to provide a normal population of cells to replace defective tissue. Although this tissue-engineering approach meets a huge clinical need as well as a potentially large market, one of the most seductive promises arising from the notion that musculoskeletal tissues emanate from a system of postnatal progenitors resides in the hope of providing a cure for severe, crippling genetic diseases. Tackling these diseases involves cell therapy and gene therapy strategies rather than tissue engineering. Although the target diseases in this area are usually rare, their social and human cost is huge. Whereas the targeted diseases may be rare themselves, their underlying mechanisms often include derangements in ubiquitous pleiotropic pathways. Therefore, wide windows for pharmacological intervention in several settings may be opened as a fallout of such studies.
There are three important ways in which postnatal stem cell research can contribute to the future cure of crippling diseases of the skeleton and of skeletal muscle. First, current progress in the definition of the anatomical identity, ontogeny, and phenotype of postnatal progenitors in these tissues provides the long-missing, fundamental awareness of which cell type and of how one wants to harvest, purify, grow, or deliver in view of a cell therapy approach. As we emerge from the “mesenchymal stem cell” paradigm, we realize through current experimental data that a system of tissue-specific, self-renewing progenitors exist, with a similar anatomy and surface phenotype, in the microvascular system of different tissues. In bone and skeletal muscle, the isolation of MCAM-expressing clonogenic subendothelial cells coincides with the isolation of enriched populations of skeletogenic and myogenic progenitors, respectively. Awareness of the nature of postnatal progenitors also provides a novel angle on their therapeutic use—to be centered on the mimicry of their in vivo physiological function in addition to their regenerative potential.
Second, stem cells provide model systems in which to seek the downstream effects of known mutations, which mediate the development of a disease phenotype. This process provides important clues for the subsequent design of novel types of drugs in ways that would even appear counterintuitive based on the mere awareness of the identity of the causative mutations. For example, the genomics of human transgenic stem cells created by permanent lentiviral transduction, with the causative gene of fibrous dysplasia (FD, OMIM#174800), has revealed multiple and at times unsuspected determinants of the development of organ lesions.
Third, stem cells provide the natural target for the correction of gene defects in self-renewing tissues. Tools are being developed that will allow us to tackle even the most challenging scenarios in gene therapy, such as the selective silencing in stem cells of dominant, gain-of-function mutations in ubiquitously expressed genes, such as the FD-causing gene. More than the direct translation of preclinical studies to gene therapy approaches in the clinic, it is the insight into the mechanisms and requirements that arise from “in-stem cell” experiments that represents the most important added value of this approach at the current time.
|
Pluripotent stem cells isolated from embryos (ES cells) or by the direct reprogramming of somatic cells (iPS cells) represent an inexhaustible source of precursor cells that can be differentiated into specific cell lineages. As with conventional organ transplants, cell-based therapies will face immunologic barriers. Genetically matched pluripotent embryonic stem cells generated via nuclear transfer (ntES cells) or parthenogenesis (pES cells) are a possible source of histocompatible cells and tissues. In a proof of principle experiment, we have shown that customized ntES cells can be used to repair a genetic immunodeficiency disorder in mice (Rideout et al., Cell, 2002). However, the generation of ES cells by nuclear transfer remains inefficient and to date has not been achieved with human cells. ES cells with defined histocompatibility loci can be generated at much higher efficiency by the direct parthenogenetic activation of the unfertilized oocyte (Kim et al., Science, 2007). Subsequently, cell lines can be genotyped and selected for major histocompatibility complex (MHC) identity to the oocyte donor. Cell lines with homozygous MHC haplotypes can also be identified, and tissues from such cells engraft in MHC heterozygous recipients. Compared with ES cell lines from fertilized embryos, pES cells display comparable in vitro hematopoietic activity, and blood derivatives can repopulate hematopoiesis in irradiated adult mouse recipients. These experiments establish murine models for generating histocompatible ES cell-derived tissue products and suggest the theoretical feasibility of ES cell banking to enable off-the-shelf cell therapies. We have generated human iPS cells by the direct reprogramming of human somatic cells, with retroviruses carrying OCT4, SOX2, MYC, and KLF4 (Park et al., Nature, 2008). Although this represents a platform for generating customized, patient-specific cells for research, nonviral methods must be established for making human iPS cells before such cells are available for human clinical applications. Strategies for generating patient-specific iPS cells and for their use in research and therapy will be discussed.
|
The treatment of multiple sclerosis (MS) has evolved over the past decade from temporizing measures involving getting over individual disease relapses to a more aggressive approach to stem the early inflammatory events that are thought to contribute to the ultimate demise of the neurons and axons that underlies the inexorable progression seen by most patients. However, even these anti-inflammatory measures, which have nurtured the development of more disease- and immune-specific therapies, have failed to stem the transition to progressive disease, probably because the cumulative injury inflicted to the central nervous system (CNS) is inadequately repaired. These results have led researchers to begin disease-specific therapy as early as possible, but recent evidence shows that starting treatment even after the first presentation of “possible” MS does not prevent the development of disease progression.
The recipe for the successful treatment for MS probably entails curtailing the development and recurrence of inflammatory CNS attacks by the immune system but at the same time promoting the protection, repair, and ultimate regeneration of the damaged CNS elements. This has led researchers to look at the possibility of combining a therapeutic approach that will both halt the autoimmune attack on the CNS (i.e., immunosuppression) and provide a source of potential repair through the introduction of stem cells. In fact, the use of bone marrow-derived stem cells was an essential component of aggressive immunosuppression using some of the current day chemoablative regimens, providing the necessary “rescue” treatment, without which continued viability was at risk due to a complete wipeout of the hematopoietic system. These regimens, in various forms, have been used for the past decade in the treatment of MS with varying results. More recent attempts, however, may be revealing that by completely staving off further CNS inflammatory attacks and by providing a healthy environment for the regrowth of the immune system, unfettered by continued disease-specific immunotherapy, there is a chance for CNS repair or regeneration in MS.
|