RESUMO
In a conventional two-dimensional (2D) culture method, cells are attached to the bottom of the culture dish and grow into a monolayer. These 2D culture methods are easy to handle, cost-effective, reproducible, and adaptable to growing many different types of cells. However, monolayer 2D cell culture conditions are far from those of natural tissue, indicating the need for a threedimensional (3D) culture system. Various methods, such as hanging drop, scaffolds, hydrogels, microfluid systems, and bioreactor systems, have been utilized for 3D cell culture. Recently, external physical stimulation-based 3D cell culture platforms, such as acoustic and magnetic forces, were introduced. Acoustic waves can establish acoustic radiation force, which can induce suspended objects to gather in the pressure node region and aggregate to form clusters. Magnetic targeting consists of two components, a magnetically responsive carrier and a magnetic field gradient source. In a magnetic-based 3D cell culture platform, cells are aggregated by changing the magnetic force. Magnetic fields can manipulate cells through two different methods: positive magnetophoresis and negative magnetophoresis. Positive magnetophoresis is a way of imparting magnetic properties to cells by labeling them with magnetic nanoparticles. Negative magnetophoresis is a label-free principle-based method. 3D cell structures, such as spheroids, 3D network structures, and cell sheets, have been successfully fabricated using this acoustic and magnetic stimuli-based 3D cell culture platform. Additionally, fabricated 3D cell structures showed enhanced cell behavior, such as differentiation potential and tissue regeneration. Therefore, physical stimuli-based 3D cell culture platforms could be promising tools for tissue engineering.
RESUMO
The recent advances in human pluripotent stem cells (hPSCs) enable to precisely edit the desired bases in hPSCs to be used for the establishment of isogenic disease models and autologous ex vivo cell therapy. The knock-in approach based on the homologous directed repair with Cas9 endonuclease, causing DNA double-strand breaks (DSBs), produces not only insertion and deletion (indel) mutations but also deleterious large deletions. On the contrary, due to the lack of Cas9 endonuclease activity, base editors (BEs) such as adenine base editor (ABE) and cytosine base editor (CBE) allow precise base substitution by conjugated deaminase activity, free from DSB formation. Despite the limitation of BEs in transition substitution, precise base editing by BEs with no massive off-targets is suggested to be a prospective alternative in hPSCs for clinical applications. Considering the unique cellular characteristics of hPSCs, a few points should be considered. Herein, we describe an updated and optimized protocol for base editing in hPSCs. We also describe an improved methodology for CBE-based C to T substitutions, which are generally lower than A to G substitutions in hPSCs.