Lineage conversion has recently attracted increasing attention as a potential alternative to the directed differentiation of pluripotent cells to obtain cells of a given lineage. Different means allowing for cell identity switch have been reported. Lineage conversion relied initially on the discovery of specific transcription factors generally enriched and characteristic of the target cell, and their forced expression in cells of a different fate. This approach has been successful in various cases, from cells of the hematopoietic systems to neurons and cardiomyocytes. Furthermore, recent reports have suggested the possibility of establishing a general lineage conversion approach bypassing pluripotency. This requires a first phase of epigenetic erasure achieved by short overexpression of the factors used to reprogram cells to a pluripotent state (such as a combination of Sox2, Klf4, c-Myc and Oct4), followed by exposure to specific developmental cues. Here we present these different direct conversion methodologies and discuss their potential as alternatives to using induced pluripotent stem cells and differentiation protocols to generate cell populations of a given fate.
This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution
Access options
Subscribe to this journal
Receive 12 print issues and online access
$209.00 per year
only $17.42 per issue
Buy this article
- Purchase on Springer Link
- Instant access to full article PDF
Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout
References
Gurdon, J. B., Elsdale, T. R. & Fischberg, M. Sexually mature individuals of Xenopus laevis from the transplantation of single somatic nuclei. Nature 182, 64–65 (1958).
Gurdon, J. B. Transplanted nuclei and cell differentiation. Sci. Am. 219, 24–35 (1968).
Gurdon, J. B. Changes in somatic cell nuclei inserted into growing and maturing amphibian oocytes. J. Embryol. Exp. Morphol. 20, 401–414 (1968).
Takahashi, K. & Yamanaka, S. Induction of pluripotent stem cells from mouse embryonic and adult fibroblast cultures by defined factors. Cell 126, 663–676 (2006).
Takahashi, K. et al. Induction of pluripotent stem cells from adult human fibroblasts by defined factors. Cell 131, 861–872 (2007).
Nakagawa, M. et al. Generation of induced pluripotent stem cells without Myc from mouse and human fibroblasts. Nat. Biotechnol. 26, 101–106 (2008).
Yamanaka, S. Strategies and new developments in the generation of patient-specific pluripotent stem cells. Cell Stem Cell 1, 39–49 (2007).
Yamanaka, S. Pluripotency and nuclear reprogramming. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B Biol. Sci. 363, 2079–2087 (2008).
French, S. W., Hoyer, K. K., Shen, R. R. & Teitell, M. A. Transdifferentiation and nuclear reprogramming in hematopoietic development and neoplasia. Immunol. Rev. 187, 22–39 (2002).
Graf, T. Historical origins of transdifferentiation and reprogramming. Cell Stem Cell 9, 504–516 (2011).
Qiang, L. et al. Directed conversion of Alzheimer's disease patient skin fibroblasts into functional neurons. Cell 146, 359–371 (2011).
Pfisterer, U. et al. Efficient induction of functional neurons from adult human fibroblasts. Cell Cycle 10, 3311–3316 (2011).
Pfisterer, U. et al. Direct conversion of human fibroblasts to dopaminergic neurons. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 108, 10343–10348 (2011).
Son, E. Y. et al. Conversion of mouse and human fibroblasts into functional spinal motor neurons. Cell Stem Cell 9, 205–218 (2011).
Efe, J. A. et al. Conversion of mouse fibroblasts into cardiomyocytes using a direct reprogramming strategy. Nat. Cell Biol. 13, 215–222 (2011).
Marro, S. et al. Direct lineage conversion of terminally differentiated hepatocytes to functional neurons. Cell Stem Cell 9, 374–382 (2011).
Vierbuchen, T. et al. Direct conversion of fibroblasts to functional neurons by defined factors. Nature 463, 1035–1041 (2010).
Pang, Z. P. et al. Induction of human neuronal cells by defined transcription factors. Nature 476, 220–223 (2011).
Caiazzo, M. et al. Direct generation of functional dopaminergic neurons from mouse and human fibroblasts. Nature 476, 224–227 (2011).
Ieda, M. et al. Direct reprogramming of fibroblasts into functional cardiomyocytes by defined factors. Cell 142, 375–386 (2010).
Davis, R. L., Weintraub, H. & Lassar, A. B. Expression of a single transfected cDNA converts fibroblasts to myoblasts. Cell 51, 987–1000 (1987).
Li, W. C., Yu, W. Y., Quinlan, J. M., Burke, Z. D. & Tosh, D. The molecular basis of transdifferentiation. J. Cell Mol. Med. 9, 569–582 (2005).
Kim, J. et al. Direct reprogramming of mouse fibroblasts to neural progenitors. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 108, 7838–7843 (2011).
Thier, M. et al. Direct conversion of fibroblasts into stably expandable neural stem cells. Cell Stem Cell 10, 473–479 (2012).
Lassar, A. B., Paterson, B. M. & Weintraub, H. Transfection of a DNA locus that mediates the conversion of 10T1/2 fibroblasts to myoblasts. Cell 47, 649–656 (1986).
Gurdon, J. B. The transplantation of nuclei between two species of Xenopus. Dev. Biol. 5, 68–83 (1962).
Wilmut, I., Schnieke, A. E., McWhir, J., Kind, A. J. & Campbell, K. H. Viable offspring derived from fetal and adult mammalian cells. Nature 385, 810–813 (1997).
Fischberg, M., Gurdon, J. B. & Elsdale, T. R. Nuclear transfer in amphibia and the problem of the potentialities of the nuclei of differentiating tissues. Exp. Cell Res. 6, 161–178 (1959).
Gurdon, J. B. Nuclear transplantation and the control of gene activity in animal development. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B Biol. Sci. 176, 303–314 (1970).
Korn, L. J. & Gurdon, J. B. The reactivation of developmentally inert 5S genes in somatic nuclei injected into Xenopus oocytes. Nature 289, 461–465 (1981).
Blau, H. M., Chiu, C. P. & Webster, C. Cytoplasmic activation of human nuclear genes in stable heterocaryons. Cell 32, 1171–1180 (1983).
Blau, H. M. et al. Plasticity of the differentiated state. Science 230, 758–766 (1985).
Pavlath, G. K. & Blau, H. M. Expression of muscle genes in heterokaryons depends on gene dosage. J. Cell Biol. 102, 124–130 (1986).
Okita, K., Ichisaka, T. & Yamanaka, S. Generation of germline-competent induced pluripotent stem cells. Nature 448, 313–317 (2007).
Wernig, M. et al. In vitro reprogramming of fibroblasts into a pluripotent ES-cell-like state. Nature 448, 318–324 (2007).
Maherali, N. et al. Directly reprogrammed fibroblasts show global epigenetic remodeling and widespread tissue contribution. Cell Stem Cell 1, 55–70 (2007).
Zhao, X. Y. et al. iPS cells produce viable mice through tetraploid complementation. Nature 461, 86–90 (2009).
Gonzalez, F., Boue, S. & Izpisua Belmonte, J. C. Methods for making induced pluripotent stem cells: reprogramming a la carte. Nat. Rev. Genet. 12, 231–242 (2011).
Yoshida, Y. & Yamanaka, S. iPS cells: a source of cardiac regeneration. J. Mol. Cell Cardiol. 50, 327–332 (2011).
Nelson, T. J., Martinez-Fernandez, A. & Terzic, A. Induced pluripotent stem cells: developmental biology to regenerative medicine. Nat. Rev. Cardiol. 7, 700–710 (2010).
Rashid, S. T. & Vallier, L. Induced pluripotent stem cells — alchemist's tale or clinical reality? Expert Rev. Mol. Med. 12, 25 (2010).
Kiskinis, E. & Eggan, K. Progress toward the clinical application of patient-specific pluripotent stem cells. J. Clin. Invest. 120, 51–59 (2010).
Sancho-Martinez, I., Nivet, E. & Izpisua Belmonte, J. C. The labyrinth of nuclear reprogramming. J. Mol. Cell Biol. 3, 327–329 (2011).
Panopoulos, A. D., Ruiz, S. & Izpisua Belmonte, J. C. iPSCs: induced back to controversy. Cell Stem Cell 8, 347–348 (2011).
Kulessa, H., Frampton, J. & Graf, T. GATA-1 reprograms avian myelomonocytic cell lines into eosinophils, thromboblasts, and erythroblasts. Genes Dev. 9, 1250–1262 (1995).
Laiosa, C. V., Stadtfeld, M., Xie, H., de Andres-Aguayo, L. & Graf, T. Reprogramming of committed T cell progenitors to macrophages and dendritic cells by C/EBP alpha and PU.1 transcription factors. Immunity 25, 731–744 (2006).
Nutt, S. L., Heavey, B., Rolink, A. G. & Busslinger, M. Commitment to the B-lymphoid lineage depends on the transcription factor Pax5. Nature 401, 556–562 (1999).
Szabo, E. et al. Direct conversion of human fibroblasts to multilineage blood progenitors. Nature 468, 521–526 (2010).
Papp, B. & Plath, K. Reprogramming to pluripotency: stepwise resetting of the epigenetic landscape. Cell Res. 21, 486–501 (2011).
Zhou, J. X. & Huang, S. Understanding gene circuits at cell-fate branch points for rational cell reprogramming. Trends Genet. 27, 55–62 (2011).
Zhou, Y., Kim, J., Yuan, X. & Braun, T. Epigenetic modifications of stem cells: a paradigm for the control of cardiac progenitor cells. Circ Res 109, 1067–1081 (2011).
Han, J. W. & Yoon, Y. S. Epigenetic landscape of pluripotent stem cells. Antioxid. Redox. Signal. 17, 205–223 (2012).
Bilic, J. & Izpisua Belmonte, J. C. Concise review: Induced pluripotent stem cells versus embryonic stem cells: close enough or yet too far apart? Stem Cells 30, 33–41 (2012).
Xu, J. et al. Pioneer factor interactions and unmethylated CpG dinucleotides mark silent tissue-specific enhancers in embryonic stem cells. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 104, 12377–12382 (2007).
Zaret, K. S. et al. Pioneer factors, genetic competence, and inductive signaling: programming liver and pancreas progenitors from the endoderm. Cold Spring Harb. Symp. Quant. Biol. 73, 119–126 (2008).
Xu, J. et al. Transcriptional competence and the active marking of tissue-specific enhancers by defined transcription factors in embryonic and induced pluripotent stem cells. Genes Dev. 23, 2824–2838 (2009).
Zaret, K. S. & Carroll, J. S. Pioneer transcription factors: establishing competence for gene expression. Genes Dev. 25, 2227–2241 (2011).
Schafer, B. W., Blakely, B. T., Darlington, G. J. & Blau, H. M. Effect of cell history on response to helix-loop-helix family of myogenic regulators. Nature 344, 454–458 (1990).
Thayer, M. J. & Weintraub, H. Activation and repression of myogenesis in somatic cell hybrids: evidence for trans-negative regulation of MyoD in primary fibroblasts. Cell 63, 23–32 (1990).
Weintraub, H. The MyoD family and myogenesis: redundancy, networks, and thresholds. Cell 75, 1241–1244 (1993).
Ruiz, S. et al. A high proliferation rate is required for cell reprogramming and maintenance of human embryonic stem cell identity. Curr. Biol. 21, 45–52 (2011).
Ben-David, U. & Benvenisty, N. The tumorigenicity of human embryonic and induced pluripotent stem cells. Nat. Rev. Cancer 11, 268–277 (2011).
Okita, K., Nakagawa, M., Hyenjong, H., Ichisaka, T. & Yamanaka, S. Generation of mouse induced pluripotent stem cells without viral vectors. Science 322, 949–953 (2008).
Miura, K. et al. Variation in the safety of induced pluripotent stem cell lines. Nat. Biotechnol. 27, 743–745 (2009).
Hong, H. et al. Suppression of induced pluripotent stem cell generation by the p53-p21 pathway. Nature 460, 1132–1135 (2009).
Okita, K. & Yamanaka, S. Induced pluripotent stem cells: opportunities and challenges. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B Biol. Sci. 366, 2198–2207 (2011).
Sun, N., Longaker, M. T. & Wu, J. C. Human iPS cell-based therapy: considerations before clinical applications. Cell Cycle 9, 880–885 (2010).
Menendez, S. et al. Increased dosage of tumor suppressors limits the tumorigenicity of iPS cells without affecting their pluripotency. Aging Cell 11, 41–50 (2012).
Tapia, N. & Scholer, H. R. p53 connects tumorigenesis and reprogramming to pluripotency. J. Exp. Med. 207, 2045–2048 (2010).
Graf, T. & Enver, T. Forcing cells to change lineages. Nature 462, 587–594 (2009).
Xie, H., Ye, M., Feng, R. & Graf, T. Stepwise reprogramming of B cells into macrophages. Cell 117, 663–676 (2004).
Feng, R. et al. PU.1 and C/EBPalpha/beta convert fibroblasts into macrophage-like cells. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 105, 6057–6062 (2008).
Zhou, Q., Brown, J., Kanarek, A., Rajagopal, J. & Melton, D. A. In vivo reprogramming of adult pancreatic exocrine cells to beta-cells. Nature 455, 627–632 (2008).
Qian, L. et al. In vivo reprogramming of murine cardiac fibroblasts into induced cardiomyocytes. Nature 485, 593–598 (2012).
Jayawardena, T. M. et al. MicroRNA-mediated in vitro and in vivo direct reprogramming of cardiac fibroblasts to cardiomyocytes. Circ. Res. 110, 1465–1473 (2012).
Song, K. et al. Heart repair by reprogramming non-myocytes with cardiac transcription factors. Nature 485, 599–604 (2012).
Sekiya, S. & Suzuki, A. Direct conversion of mouse fibroblasts to hepatocyte-like cells by defined factors. Nature 475, 390–393 (2011).
Choi, Y. J. et al. miR-34 miRNAs provide a barrier for somatic cell reprogramming. Nat. Cell Biol. 13, 1353–1360 (2011).
Judson, R. L., Babiarz, J. E., Venere, M. & Blelloch, R. Embryonic stem cell-specific microRNAs promote induced pluripotency. Nat. Biotechnol. 27, 459–461 (2009).
Kuo, C. H., Deng, J. H., Deng, Q. & Ying, S. Y. A novel role of miR-302/367 in reprogramming. Biochem. Biophys. Res. Commun. 417, 11–16 (2012).
Lin, S. L. et al. Regulation of somatic cell reprogramming through inducible mir-302 expression. Nucleic Acids Res. 39, 1054–1065 (2011).
Miyoshi, N. et al. Reprogramming of mouse and human cells to pluripotency using mature microRNAs. Cell Stem Cell 8, 633–638 (2011).
Onder, T. T. & Daley, G. Q. microRNAs become macro players in somatic cell reprogramming. Genome Med. 3, 40 (2011).
Pfaff, N. et al. miRNA screening reveals a new miRNA family stimulating iPS cell generation via regulation of Meox2. EMBO Rep. 12, 1153–1159 (2011).
Subramanyam, D. et al. Multiple targets of miR-302 and miR-372 promote reprogramming of human fibroblasts to induced pluripotent stem cells. Nat. Biotechnol. 29, 443–448 (2011).
Yang, C. S., Li, Z. & Rana, T. M. microRNAs modulate iPS cell generation. RNA 17, 1451–1460 (2011).
Anokye-Danso, F. et al. Highly efficient miRNA-mediated reprogramming of mouse and human somatic cells to pluripotency. Cell Stem Cell 8, 376–388 (2011).
Yoo, A. S. et al. MicroRNA-mediated conversion of human fibroblasts to neurons. Nature 476, 228–231 (2011).
Ambasudhan, R. et al. Direct reprogramming of adult human fibroblasts to functional neurons under defined conditions. Cell Stem Cell 9, 113–118 (2011).
Jopling, C., Boue, S. & Izpisua Belmonte, J. C. Dedifferentiation, transdifferentiation and reprogramming: three routes to regeneration. Nat. Rev. Mol. Cell Biol. 12, 79–89 (2011).
Jopling, C. et al. Zebrafish heart regeneration occurs by cardiomyocyte dedifferentiation and proliferation. Nature 464, 606–609 (2010).
Poss, K. D. Advances in understanding tissue regenerative capacity and mechanisms in animals. Nat. Rev. Genet. 11, 710–722 (2010).
Sugimoto, K., Gordon, S. P. & Meyerowitz, E. M. Regeneration in plants and animals: dedifferentiation, transdifferentiation, or just differentiation? Trends Cell Biol. 21, 212–218 (2011).
Vierbuchen, T. & Wernig, M. Direct lineage conversions: unnatural but useful? Nat. Biotechnol. 29, 892–907 (2011).
Foshay, K. M. et al. Embryonic stem cells induce pluripotency in somatic cell fusion through biphasic reprogramming. Mol. Cell 46, 159–170 (2012).
Han, D. W. et al. Direct reprogramming of fibroblasts into neural stem cells by defined factors. Cell Stem Cell 10, 465–472 (2012).
Lujan, E., Chanda, S., Ahlenius, H., Sudhof, T. C. & Wernig, M. Direct conversion of mouse fibroblasts to self-renewing, tripotent neural precursor cells. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 109, 2527–2532 (2012).
Ring, K. L. et al. Direct reprogramming of mouse and human fibroblasts into multipotent neural stem cells with a single factor. Cell Stem Cell 11, 100–109 (2012).
Giorgetti, A. et al. Cord blood-derived neuronal cells by ectopic expression of Sox2 and c-Myc. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA (2012).
Acknowledgements
We would like to thank Emmanuel Nivet for critical discussions on the manuscript. We also thank May Schwarz and Ilir Dubova for administrative support. We apologize to all our colleagues whose work could not be discussed due to space limitations. S.H.B was supported by Creative Research Initiative Program (Research Center for Chromatin Dynamics, 2009-0081563). Work in the laboratory of JCIB was supported by grants from Fundacion Cellex, the G. Harold and Leila Y. Mathers Charitable Foundation, Sanofi, the California Institute of Regenerative Medicine and MINECO.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Competing interests
The authors declare no competing financial interests.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Sancho-Martinez, I., Baek, S. & Izpisua Belmonte, J. Lineage conversion methodologies meet the reprogramming toolbox. Nat Cell Biol 14, 892–899 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1038/ncb2567
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/ncb2567
This article is cited by
-
Engineered Extracellular Vesicle-Based Therapies for Valvular Heart Disease
Cellular and Molecular Bioengineering (2023)
-
RNA-seq reveals tight junction-relevant erythropoietic fate induced by OCT4 in human hair follicle mesenchymal stem cells
Stem Cell Research & Therapy (2020)
-
Stem-cell-ubiquitous genes spatiotemporally coordinate division through regulation of stem-cell-specific gene networks
Nature Communications (2019)
-
A computational systems approach identifies synergistic specification genes that facilitate lineage conversion to prostate tissue
Nature Communications (2017)
-
Cellular reprogramming for clinical cartilage repair
Cell Biology and Toxicology (2017)